Skip to content
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

AI-assisted summary, not yet checked. Consult the original PDF before citing.

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.

Key passages

Chosen by AI from the article's text. Each one is checked word for word against the text before it is shown.

  • “Biihler (S.B.E. 2, intro.) declared that Gautama 15 the oldest Dharmasiitra now extant and Jolly in his “Recht und Sitte® has accepted this theory (9. 6). 1 differ on this peint and will try to show that excepting the dubious evidence of the Carapavyiiha there is nothing to prove that Gautama 15 older than Apastamba ; all probabili- ties on the contrary seem to indicate rather just the opposite—that Apastamba is older than Gautama,”
  • “At a glance it will appear that the relation between Ap. and 0૩16. 15 much the same 25 that between Manu and Yijiavalkya. The sitras of Ap. are loose and vague while those of Gaut. are pithy and compact. Ap.s style 15 distantly reminiscent of the rambling disquisitions of the Brihmanas ; Gaut. 15 the Sitra-work par excellence.”
  • “The fact that Ap, depends much more upon custom than any other Dharmasiitra is a proof of his early date. His last siitra speaks volumes in favour of his high antiquity, in which he frankly confesses that the remaining duties should be learnt from men and women of થો! castes.”

Works cited in this article

  1. Recht und Sitte
  2. Virttika to Panini 1૪, 3, 105
  3. Aitareya Br.
  4. Yijnavalkya
  5. Vasistha

Discussed in this article

Places

  • Madhu

Texts & works

Dynasties, sects & groups

  • Ugra

AI guide

Discuss this record

Ask about the article, its topics, issue context, selected passages, or reading strategy.

Start with the record

I can unpack the summary, turn it into study questions, explain a selected passage, or compare it with the other articles in this issue.

Original PDF

Inline viewer

Checking source PDF

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

Same author

More by Batakrishna Ghosh

All articles →
The Indian Historical Quarterly

Reviews

By Satkari Mookherjree, U. N. Ghoshal, Batakrishna Ghosh, Sri Ram Sharma, R. N. Sarkar

Dec-37
The Indian Historical Quarterly

Sanskrit Noun‑Inflexion

By Batakrishna Ghosh

March - 1936
The Indian Historical Quarterly

Reviews

By Ananda Kentish Coomaraswamy, Satkari Mookherjree, Mano Mohan Ghosh, Benoy Kumar Sarkar, U. N. Ghoshal, Dhirendra Chandra Ganguly, Chintaharan Chakravarti, Batakrishna Ghosh, Vidhushekhara Bhattacharya, Jagadish Narayan Sarkar

June - 1935
The Indian Historical Quarterly

Panini and the Rkpratisakhya

By Batakrishna Ghosh

December - 1934