DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.52452#0020
XVI
NARADA.
mentaries and Dharmanibandhas from Medhatithi’s Manu-
bhashya down to (Cagannatha’s Digest, translated by Cole-
brooke. The compiler of the N&rada-smrzti may have
incorporated a number of these dicta in his own com-
position. At the same time, it is far from improbable that
a work on law, called the Code of Manu in the version of
Narada, may have existed by the side of the celebrated
Code of Manu in the version of Bhrzgu, and that the
unknown compiler of the Narada-smrz'ti may have utilised
that work for his own composition, and enhanced the value
and authority of the latter by referring to, and arranging in
his own way, the reports current with regard to Manu and
Narada. The precise nature of the origin of such a work
as the Narada-sm/Tti must needs remain a matter for
speculation ; but it certainly was an established practice
with Sanskrit writers to graft their own compositions on
earlier works attributed to fabulous personages of the
heroic age of India, and indeed to fabricate an authority of
this kind for the productions of their own pen.
The probable date of the Code of Manu may be turned
Date of the 1° account for determining the date of the
Narada-smrzti. Narada-smzTti; just as the presumable date
of the latter work has been used in its turn for fixing the
chronological position of Manu. The composition of the
two works is separated, apparently, by a considerable
interval of time. If, therefore, the date of Manu has been
rightly placed between the second centuries B. C. and
A.D. by Professor Buhler1, it would seem to follow that
the Narada-smrzti can hardly belong to an earlier period
than the fourth or fifth century A. D. The same con-
clusion may be arrived at by other, and independent
considerations.
Thus the Narada-smzTti agrees on many important
Compared with points, especially in the law of evidence,
other Smotis, with the Dharmaj-astras or Smrztis of
Ya^zza valkya, Vishzzu, Brzhaspati, Katyayana, and Vyasa.
It may be a little older than the three last-named works,
1 Loc. cit. p. xcvii.
NARADA.
mentaries and Dharmanibandhas from Medhatithi’s Manu-
bhashya down to (Cagannatha’s Digest, translated by Cole-
brooke. The compiler of the N&rada-smrzti may have
incorporated a number of these dicta in his own com-
position. At the same time, it is far from improbable that
a work on law, called the Code of Manu in the version of
Narada, may have existed by the side of the celebrated
Code of Manu in the version of Bhrzgu, and that the
unknown compiler of the Narada-smrz'ti may have utilised
that work for his own composition, and enhanced the value
and authority of the latter by referring to, and arranging in
his own way, the reports current with regard to Manu and
Narada. The precise nature of the origin of such a work
as the Narada-sm/Tti must needs remain a matter for
speculation ; but it certainly was an established practice
with Sanskrit writers to graft their own compositions on
earlier works attributed to fabulous personages of the
heroic age of India, and indeed to fabricate an authority of
this kind for the productions of their own pen.
The probable date of the Code of Manu may be turned
Date of the 1° account for determining the date of the
Narada-smrzti. Narada-smzTti; just as the presumable date
of the latter work has been used in its turn for fixing the
chronological position of Manu. The composition of the
two works is separated, apparently, by a considerable
interval of time. If, therefore, the date of Manu has been
rightly placed between the second centuries B. C. and
A.D. by Professor Buhler1, it would seem to follow that
the Narada-smrzti can hardly belong to an earlier period
than the fourth or fifth century A. D. The same con-
clusion may be arrived at by other, and independent
considerations.
Thus the Narada-smzTti agrees on many important
Compared with points, especially in the law of evidence,
other Smotis, with the Dharmaj-astras or Smrztis of
Ya^zza valkya, Vishzzu, Brzhaspati, Katyayana, and Vyasa.
It may be a little older than the three last-named works,
1 Loc. cit. p. xcvii.