Browse articles

Apastamba and Gautama

By Batakrishna Ghosh

Vol. 3 · No. 3September - 1927pp. 607-611English

Summary

Apastamba and Gautama are two prominent Dharmasastra authors whose relative chronology has been debated. Biihler argued Gautama is the oldest extant Dharmasastra, but this view is contested. Apastamba, likely pre-Paninian, probably lived around 500 BCE, given the linguistic state of Sanskrit and his association with Svetaketu, a teacher linked to the Satapatha Brihmana (dated before 600 BCE). Apastamba’s frequent references to Brihmanas suggest proximity to their era. Claims of Baudhayana’s priority over Apastamba lack convincing evidence, as Apastamba’s engagement with Vedic passages doesn’t prove posteriority. Similarly, alleged references to Apastamba in Gautama’s text are unconvincing. Apastamba’s strict moral code, including condemnation of Niyoga (a practice opposed by earlier sage Aupajaudhani), doesn’t necessarily indicate late origin, as Brhaspati (c. 600 CE) later condemned it. His non-mention of Prajapatya and Paidaca marriages may reflect their uncommon use in his time, not late composition. Stylistically, Apastamba’s loose, Brihmana-like prose contrasts with Gautama’s concise, systematic sitras. Apastamba omits topics like mixed castes and Ugra lineage, possibly reflecting earlier societal conditions. Key distinctions include Apastamba’s allowance of beef and buffalo meat in offerings, which Gautama excludes. These differences, alongside Apastamba’s lack of engagement with later complexities, suggest he predates Gautama. Direct evidence supports this: Apastamba’s vague style contrasts with Gautama’s precision, and Apastamba

Conclusion

This analysis challenges traditional chronologies by arguing that Apastamba likely predates Gautama, positioning him closer to the Brihmana period (c. 500 BCE) based on linguistic and contextual evidence. The absence of references to Paninian Sanskrit and Apastamba’s engagement with Svetaketu, a contemporary of the Satapatha Brihmana, support this earlier dating. The document critiques earlier assumptions about Baudhayana’s priority and Apastamba’s moral strictness as indicators of late composition, proposing instead that these reflect proximity to earlier Vedic discourse. These findings shift the scholarly understanding of Dharmasastra chronology, emphasizing the need for rigorous re-evaluation of textual relationships and historical context.

Original PDF

Inline viewer

Checking source PDF

The viewer will load here if the archive file is reachable.