of historical development for the fantastic fables of the Hindu tradition and for the hopeless uncertainty which characterised the earlier speculations of European scholars concerning the origin of the so-called Indian codes of law. Secondly, it fully agreed with many facts which the beginning exploration of Vedic literature had brought to light, and which, taken as a whole, forced on all serious students the conviction that the systematic cultivation of all the Indian Sâstras had begun in the Vedic schools. Subsequent events have shown that Professor Max Müller was right to rely on these two leading ideas, and that his fellow Sanskritists did well to follow him, instead of taking umbrage at the minor flaws. Slowly but steadily a great number of the missing links in the chain of evidence has been brought to light by subsequent investigations. We now know that the Sûtra works of other schools than the Âpastambîyas included or still include treatises on the sacred law. The Dharma-sûtra of the Baudhâyanîyas, the oldest Sûtra-karana of the Taittirîya Veda, has been recovered. Though the connexion between the several parts of the great body of Sûtras has been severed, it is yet possible to recognise that it once was closely joined to the Grihya-sûtra[1]. The recovery of the entire collection of Hiranyakesi-sûtras has proved that these too include a Dharma-sûtra, which in this instance has been borrowed from the earlier Âpastambîyas[2]. The mystery which surrounded the position of the Dharmasâstras of Gautama, Vishnu, and Vasishtha has been cleared up. To the assertion that they were composed by ancient Rishis for the welfare of mankind, we can at present oppose another tradition according to which they were at first studied and recognised as authoritative by particular schools only, adhering respectively to the Sâma-veda, Black Yagur-veda, and the Rig-veda[3]. Internal evidence confirming this tradition has been found in the case of Gautama's Dharmasâstra and of the Vishnu-smriti, or, more correctly,
- ↑ Sacred Books of the East, vol. xiv, p. xxxi.
- ↑ Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, p. xxiii.
- ↑ Sacred Books of the East, vol. ii, pp. xlv–xlviii; vol. vii, pp. x–xvi; vol. xiv, pp. xl–xlv.
