बार्हस्पत्य सूत्र / अर्थशास्त्र (महर्षि बृहस्पति - प्राचीन दण्डनीति, राजधर्म एवं कूटनीति सटीक)

( 4 ) or in the mixed style. No doubt some sûtra literature along with gâthâ and other works, was extant even before the time of the compilation of the Brâhmanas because the Shatapatha Brâhmana (सूत्राण्यनुव्याख्यानानि का० १४ अ० ७ ब्रा० ३ कं० ११) alludes to it, but it is not sure whether it had come into vogue at times as early as those of Swâyambhava Manu and Brihaspati, the preceptor of Indra. IV. MANAVA DHARMA SHASTRA. Scholars like Max Muller and Buhler held that the Dharmashâstra of Manu was originally a composition in the mixed style of sûtrasand shlokas. Buhler tried his best to put forward this theory with such proofs as he could gather. One of his strongest proofs was a passage मानवं सूत्रमुदाहरन्ति which he found in Vâsishtha Dharm ashâstra. Now it is sure that the original work of Manu- had passed through the hands of several editors,as for example Bhrigu, Nârada etc., when it reached the compiler of Vâs. Dh. and that a carna of the Krishna Yajur Veda namely the Mânava had also come into existence. It is, thereforer, quite clear that a school of the Mânavas had come into existence even before the 3rd century B. C. The Arthashâstra of Kautîlya refers to a certain author of this very school. The views of the Mânavas represented in this Arthashâstra differ widely from the Smriti of Manu. It is, therefore, evident that the school consisted of authors who differed greatly. It was this great difference which troubled Buhler very much when he could find no reason as to why the teachings of the Sm- riti differed from the Mânava Grihya Sûtra. The whole of sûtra literature of the Mânava school came into existence after the Mânava carna had been established, and hence