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