[Advaita-l] Can the Shruti restate a Smriti?

[Jaishankar Narayanan]

Shri Gurubhyo Namah

Today I was reading a very interesting portion of the Bhashya of
Brhadaranyaka Upanishad 6.3.1. This is the Shrimantha Brahmanam of the
Upanishad where a karma called mantha is described for those desirous of
gaining wealth. Before doing the karma one has to fast for 12 days, a vrata
connected with Upasads. There the below bhashya says

उपसदः प्रसिद्धा ज्योतिष्टोमे, तत्र च स्तनोपचयापचयद्वारेण पयोभक्षणं
तद्व्रतम् ; अत्र च तत्कर्मानुपसंहारात् केवलमितिकर्तव्यताशून्यं
पयोभक्षणमात्रमुपादीयते ; ननु उपसदो व्रतमिति यदा विग्रहः, तदा
सर्वमितिकर्तव्यतारूपं ग्राह्यं भवति, तत् कस्मात् न परिगृह्यत इत्युच्यते —
स्मार्तत्वात्कर्मणः ; स्मार्तं हीदं मन्थकर्म । ननु श्रुतिविहितं सत् कथं
स्मार्तं भवितुमर्हति — स्मृत्यनुवादिनी हि श्रुतिरियम् ; श्रौतत्वे हि
प्रकृतिविकारभावः ; ततश्च प्राकृतधर्मग्राहित्वं विकारकर्मणः ; न तु इह
श्रौतत्वम् ; अत एव च आवसथ्याग्नौ एतत्कर्म विधीयते, सर्वा च आवृत्
स्मार्तैवेति ।

Swami Madhvananda's Translation:

A vow connected with the Upasads - These are well-known rites in connection
with the Jyotiṣṭoma sacrifice, in which the sacrificer has to drink cow’s
milk according to the yield of an increasing and decreasing number of teats
of the animals. But since those rites are not to be combined here, only the
drinking of milk, without any restriction as to details, is meant.

Objection: If the compound in ‘Upasad-vrata’ is expounded so as to mean
‘the vow that consists of the Upasads,’ then all the details of procedure
have to be observed. So why not observe them?

Reply: Because it is a ceremony according to the Smṛti. This ceremony of
Mantha is enjoined by the Smṛti (and not the Śruti).

Objection: How can a ceremony that is enjoined by the Śruti be one in
accordance with the Smṛti?

Reply: The Śruti here is merely repeating the Smṛti. Were it a Vedic
ceremony, it would be related to the Jyotiṣṭoma sacrifice as a part is to a
whole, and as such must conform to all the characteristics of the main
sacrifice. But it is not a Vedic ceremony. For this reason it is also to be
performed in the Āvasathya (household) fire[1]; and the entire procedure is
to be in accordance with the Smṛti.

So Bhashyakara says that Shruti is restating a Smriti here. How can Shruti
which is apaurusheya and predates the smriti, be restating a smriti?
Anandagiri says the below in this context:

न च पूर्वभाविन्याः
श्रुतेरुत्तरभाविस्मृत्यनुवादित्वासिद्धिस्तस्यास्त्रैकाल्यविषयत्वाभ्युपगमादिति
भावः ।

It cannot be impossible for the Shruti, which exists prior, to restate a
smriti, which was authored later, as the Shruti has as its object (or
scope) all three periods of time (past, present, and future).

Shruti also talks about ItihAsa and PurANa in Chandogya upanishad. Can we
use the above explanation there also?

with love and prayers,

Jaishankar

https://advaitasharada.sringeri.net/display/splitWindow/Brha/AB/BR_C06_S03_V01_B01/devanagari

I