Coverument Oriental STORY OF DHARMASASTRA ( ANCIENT AND MEBLEVAL RELIGIOUS AND GEVIL LAW + BY PANDURASG VAMAN KALE, A 1; OM, Apvoca rg, Hien Court, Bompay ; Vicr-PresinentT AND Fen co cd Rovas Asiatic Suckry, Bomps एता = भक "ROFHSSOR OF SANSKRIT, णात तम्मा, Bompay ; AUTHOR | or ५५ Base op SdkshRii Porrics’ Fic. i Vol. I aN at 9९, 187. G Ww ¢ ~~ Ct a €, LIBRARY | €. Ft i ५ he ae Se Po ५७० + ~ + | tye" Le? a a ; ४ be v 7 # a) at Bhandarkar Oricrtas Reséarch institute 7920 Copies can be had direct from the r -Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona(4), I Price Rs. 15 per copy, exclusive of Postage ध "hoes oh BT Y Ace. > ०1 ह {४ 3 3 Se ; 002 < „९६. Ane my od NS , (२ Printed by V. G. Paranjpe, M. A., LL. B., D. Litt., at t} Bhandarkar Institute Press, 198 (17) Sadashiv, Poona No. 2, and Published by, . S. K. Belvalkar, mu. a., ph. 9. at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona No. 1 * भै TABLE OF CONTENTS : s « ( List of Abbreviations Adeition.. ad ८८५; ६ Joins : Synopsis of contents ‘History of Di-armadastra General Index | Avocadis A - List of Appeutax 3 dist. 0 fuels ११ पकर ५ ॥ on Dharmagasirs LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS. A. Br. = Aitareya Brahmana, Anan. or = Anandasrama series, Poona. Anan. P | Ap. ` or Ap. Dh. 9 Ap. Gr. S. = Apastambagrhyasutra. A. 9. 8. = Asiatic Society of Bengal. Baud. or Bau. Dh. ऽ. or Baud. Dh. ऽ. = Baudhayana-dharmasutra ( Mysore edition ). ; = Apastamba-dharmasatra. Bau. Gr. S, = Baudhayanagrhyasatra (Mysore edition by Dr. Shama Sastri ). BBRAS, = Bombay Branch, Royal Asiatic Society. Bom. H. C, R. = Bombay High Court Reports Bom. L. R. = Bombay Law Reporter (edited by Messrs. Ratanlal and Dhirajlal ) B. I. or B. I. ऽ. = Bibliotheca Indica series, Calcutta. Br. Wpanisad or Br. Up. = Brhadaranyaka Upanisad. ए. S. 8 BSS. = Bombay Sanskrit series. Cat. f= Catalogue. Caturfvarga. = Caturvarga-cintamani of Hemadri ( B. I. series ). C. O} = Calcutta Oriental Series. D. Ch = Deccan College collection of Sanskrit mss. now lodged at the Bhandarkar Oriental Institute, Poona. Dh. = Dharmasttra. ९, Cj = Epigraphia Carnatica. ए, 1, | = Epigraphia Indica. © | ; Gan f Gautama-dharmasutra ( Anandasrama edition ). Gy. ६ = Grhya-satra. Hi D. A. 11 History of 00770 प्रि. A. S. 1.. = Max Miiller’s History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature. प्र. = Hiranyakesi-dharmasutra. H. O. 9. = Harvard Oriental series. Hp. cat. or Hp. Nepal cat. = Mahamahopadhyaya Haraprasad Sasyri’s catalogue of palmleaf and paper mss. belonging to Durbar Library, Nepal. 1. H. Q. = Indian Historical Quarterly. I. L. R. = India Law Reports series, Bom. standing for Bombay, Cal. for Calcutta, All. for Allahabad and Mad. for Madras series. Ind. Ant. or I. A = Indian Antiquary. 1. 0. cat. = Catalogue of the Sanskrit mss. at the India Office in London (ed. by Dr. Egveling ). JASB. = Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. JBBRAS = Journal of the Bombay Branch, Royal Asiatic Society. JBORS = Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society. TRAS = Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain. | Jivananda Sm. = Dharmasastra-sarneraha, published by Jivananda at Calcutta in 1876 ( two parts ) ~. २.1. A.=Law Reports, Indian Appeals, the number of the volume being inserted between 1.. R. and 1. ^. Mad. H. C. R. = Madras High Court Keports. M. Gr. S. or Manava Gr. $, = Minava-Grhyasutra. Mit. = Mitaksara on Yajnavalkya. Moo. 1. A. = Moore’s Indian Appeals. N. = Naradasmrti ( ed. by Dr. Jolly). P. Gr. ऽ. = Paraskaragrhyasutra. 7, S. series = Punjab Sanskrit series. Rg. = Reveda. R. प. S. = Recht und Sitte (by Dr. Jolly ) ऽ, 8. E. = Sacred Books of the East Series. S. B. H. = Sacred Books of the Hindus Series. Tai. = Taittiriya. List of Abbreviations ili Tai. ऽ, = Taittiriya-samhita. Tri. Cat. = Triennial Catalogue of Madras Government Sanskrit miss. Tri. ed. = Trivandrum edition. Vaj. 9. = Vajasaneya-Samhita. Vas. or Vas. Dh. S. = Vasisthadharmasatra ( B. S. series ). Vis. = Visvardpa. Visnu Dh. S. or Vi. = Visnudharmasitra (ed. by Dr. Jolly ). V.S. = Vedintasttra. | W. 8. = West and Biihler’s Digest of Hindu Law ( 3rd ed. ) Yay. = Yajnavalkyasmrti. AT. गृ. सू. OF आप. W. OF आप. श. सू. = आपस्तम्ब गृह्यसूच. आप. ध. सू. OF आ. ध. सू. = आपस्तम्बधमस्. ए. a. = देतरेयनाह्मण. काम. = कामन्दक्ीयनीतिसार को. = कोरिल्यःऽ अर्थज्ञाख्न ( Dr. Shamasastri’s edition ) गो. Or गो. ध. सू. = TAMIA. चतुवंग. = चतुवंगेचिन्तामणि. जीमूत. = stares. ताण्डन्य. = AWSTAGTA TAM. ते. आ. = तैत्तिरीयारण्यक. ते. ऋ = तेनिरीयब्ाद्मण- तै.सं t तैत्तिरीयसंहिता. . = निणयसिन्धु. . = पराशारमाधवीय (8. S. series ) qT. =F पाणिनि ऽ अष्टाध्यायी. पर. मी. सू = पृरमीमांसास्. परायर्ित्त्तम- = धायश्चित्तमयूख of नीलकण्ठ. बो. | = वोधायनग्रहयसत्र. बो. ४५ = बोधायनधर्मसूतर. मद. पा. = मदनपारिजात ( 2. 1. series ). मनु. | मदुरति, iv Fitstory of Dharmatastra fret. = निताश्चरा मेधा. = मेधातिथिऽ भाष्य on Agee या, OF याज्ञ. = याज्ञषल्क्यस्सति. बि. चि. = विवाद्चिन्तामणि of वाखस्पतिमिभ. वि. २. = विवाद्रत्नाकर ( 2.1, edition ). विश्व. = विभ्वरूप on याज्ञ. ( Tri. ed ) धीर. = वीरमिन्रोदय ( 011 व्यवहार ed. by Jivananda ). व्य. म. = व्यवहारमगरख of नीलकण्ड ( my edition ). व्य. मा. = व्यवहारमातृका of जीमूतवाहन. हातपथ OF शातपथना. = AAT ATA. सं. कौ, = संस्कारकोस्तुभ of अनन्तदेव. सरस्वती ० 01 | = सरस्वती विलास. स. षि स्घतिच. = स्पुतिचन्त्रिका (ed. by Mr. J. R. Gharpure ). ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS ( N, B. Errors in printing that oan be easily detected have been passed over ). Sec. 4 pp. 12-20 The Dharmasnira of Gautama. Mr. Batakrishna Ghose ( in I. H. ©. vol. [रा for 1927, p. 607 ff ) has an ex- haustive note on the mutual relations of Gautama, Baudha- yanaand Apastamba. He holds that Gautama is not the oldest extant author, that Ap. and Gautama stand in the same relation as Manu and Yajnavalkya, that Baudhayana- dharmasitra is not older than Apastambadharmasitra, that the reference to the views of some in Gautama I5. 30 may easily be to Ap. Dh. S. II. 7. 21. Some of the reasons on which he relies for these views have already been examined in the body of the work. That the extant sitra of Gautama has been in some places revised may be admitted ; but that Gautama as an author on dharma preceded Apastamba’s work cannot be denied. There is nothing of chronological value so far as Gautama is concerned in Apastamba’s re- jection of the view of Svetaketu that even a married man should continue Veda-study. That Apastamba says nothing about mixed castes is on a par with his silence as to niyoga and the secondary sons. Apastamba knew the lowest castes such as Candala and Paulkasa and Vaina ( Ap. Dh. 9. Il. 1.2.6). Asto beef-eating allowed by Apastamba, vide p. 45 of text and Satapatha Brahmana ( S. ए. ए. vol. 26 p. 11 where beef-eating is not allowed to a diksita ) Doctors of law were not agreed on many points of dharma and hence no certain chronological conclusion about indivi- dual authors can be drawn merely from their views on cer- tain points. It is not correct to say as Mr. Ghose does that Apastamba knows no fines for crimes. Apastamba does say that in case of dispute between litigants elders were to decide, that in case of doubt they were to decide by infer- ence or divine proof, that witnesses were to tell the truth and that if the witnesses were found to be false they were to be fined (II. rr. 29. 5-8 ). This shows that fines were not unheard of in Apastamba’s days and if he omits a de- tailed statement thetreason must be sought for elsewhere vi History of Dharmagastra than in his being prior to all dharmasitras, Fines for crimes are as old as the Taittiriya Sarhhita IL. 6. ro. 2. Sec. 9 p. 56 1. 18 read ‘note 41’ for ^ note 46.’ Sec. 10 Sec. II Sec. 13 Sec. 14 p. 60 1. 25-27. After the words ‘the sutra is in close relation to one of the oldest schools of the Yajurveda, viz. Katha’ the following should be added ‘ Vacaspati in his Sraddha- kalpa alias Pitrbhaktitarangini says that the satra of Visnu is meant for students of the Kathasakha, as Visnu is a sdtra- kara of that Sakha’; यच्व्चिं परिस्तीय पौष्ण भपयित्वा पुषा भा इति त्रिष्णस्मृतावुक्तं Achaia तस्य तत्छूञ्कारत्वात Vins. of पितुभक्ति० in the India Office, folio 17a (1. O. cat. p. 556 No. 1730 ) The sutra referred to is विष्णध्मसून्न 86. 9. p. 71 Vide Ind. Ant. vol. 25 for 1896 pp. 147-48 for an account of the ms. of the Iaritadharmasttra found by the late Pandit Vaman Sastrt Islampurkar. p. 84 1. 10 read ‘110° for ‘108’. The Arthasastra of Kautilya, There is a perennial stream of articles and works inspired by the Arthasastra. Some of them that appeared after this work was sent to the press and some that had appeared before but had been omitted through oversight are noticed — here. Dr. Stein has a note on the word ^ surunga’ occur- ring in the Arthasastra and its connection with the Greek word ‘svrinx’; (vide [. H. ©. vol. L. pp. 429-432) and nolds thatthe Arthasastra must be later than the 2nd century ४, c. Che same scholar contributes a note on ‘ Pandyakavata’ occurring in the Arthasastra TI, 11 (in I. H. Q. vol. IV p.778) and concludes from comparison with Brhat-sarhita and other works that the list of countries cannot be carlicr than 6th century A. D. lam glad to note that the veteran sqvant Dr. Jolly (in ‘Zeitschrift fiir Indologie and Iranistik’ for £927 pp. 216-221 ) approves of my view that the original mame was Kautilya and not Kautalya. In the Nidhanpur plate of Bhaskarvarman (1, 1. vol. 19 p. 245, at p. 248) donegs of Kautilya-gotra are mentioned. The verse in the second Act of the Malatimadhava of Bhavabhuti ( युणापिश्चाद्यन्यं 0 क्रान्तमथवा कुतोपत्यस्नेहः कुटिलनयनिष्णातमनसाम |) contains a hit at Additions and Corrections vii the name Kautilya and his teaching. Mr. E. H. Johnston contributes in the JRAS for 1929 pp. 77-102 an article on ‘two studies in the Arthasastra of Kautilya,’ wherein he examines the works of Asvaghosa, the Lankavatira and the Jatakamala and holds that the Arthasastra is not much (वा licr than Asvaghosa and not later than 250 4. 9. It is grati- fying to see that from the untenable position of rclegating the Arthasastra to the jrd century A. 9.) western scholars are receding to the first century of the Christian cra. Prof. Benoy Kumar Sarkar contributes an appreciative and lengthy review of Dr. Meyers work ‘Das altindische Buch vom Welt-&c’ in the Indian Historical Quarterly for 1928 pp. 348-383. Dr. Meyer bas brought out another work ‘on Hindu Law-books and their relation with one another and with Kautilya’ ( tiber das Wesen der altindischen Rechts- schriften &c. ). ‘This work compels admiration for the author’s patience and industry, but is seriously marred throughout by wild generalisations, perverse and_ startling propositions unsupported by weighty evidence. He makes Gautama the latest of the Smrtis and Narada one of the carliest, places Narada several centuries before the Christian cra, regards the compiler of the Yajnavalkyasmrti as a stupid brihmana. He is blissfully ignorant of the references to Gautama occurring in the ‘Yantravartika, which I collect- ed in my paper on ‘the ‘Vantrayartika and the dharmasastra literature’ ( JBBRAS vol. Tnew series for 1925 pp. 66-67 ). He propounds the absurd theory that the Brahmanas were people like gypsies roving about in bands without any morals or principles of conduct, I can agree with some of his conclusions, viz. the non-existence of a Manavadhar- masitra, the non-existence of a floating mass of verses on which authors of dharmasastra could draw. Mr. Batakrishna Ghose submits Dr. Meyer’s work to a scholarly and tren- chant criticism in I. त. 0. for 1928 vol. IV. pp. 570-592. Prof. 0. 1२. Bhandarkar has recently published in a book- form his lectures on ‘some aspects of ancient Hindu polity.’ Vide I. H. Q. vol. V (1929 ) p. 780 for an article on ‘ salarivs and allowances in Kautilya °. viii History of Dharmasastra Sect. 15 pp. 105-107 Vaikhanasadharmaprasna. Dr. Eggers recently published ( Gottingen, 1929 ) his work ‘Das Dharmasitra der Vaikhanasa’, which is reviewed in JRAS for 1929 pp. 916-918. Sec, 29 pp. 129-131 Sumantu. For a dharmasitra of Sumantu, vide Madras Tri. cat. of Sanskrit mss. (1919-1922 ) pp. 5160-62. Sec. 31 p. 154 read ^ In other places’ for ‘ In another places’. Sec. 34 pp. 170-175 Yajnavalkyasmrti. Dr. Hans Losch writes amonograph on ‘Dic Yajiavalkyasmrti un Beitrag zur Quellen-kunde des Indischen Rechts’ ( Leipzig 1927). His conclusions may be briefly summarised as follows : ( 1 ) the text of Yajfiavalkya that we have and that is commented upon is not the original, but is enlarged with interpolations such as Vinayakasanti and Grahaganti ( which are borrowed from Agnipurana chap. 266 and 164 respectively by the compiler of Yaj. Smrti), the section on rajadharma (which is a versified copy of ideas contained in arthaSastra literature ), verses 60-205 of the third chapter ( of Yaj. ): (II) the 2nd book of Yaj. ( on vyavahara ) is a later addition correspond- ing to an older redaction of the Agnipurana ; ( III ) that the first and 3rd books of Y4j. are a recast of an ancicnt text which has been better preserved in the Garudapurana. I have shown in my history of Sanskrit Poetics that the Agnipurana was compiled about 900 A. ०. and in this book it has been shown that‘the Garudapurina must have been compiled about the samc time, that it summarises Parasara- smrti and that it presents a text of Yaj. which is interme- diate between that of Visvarapa and that of the Mitaksara. Dr. Locsh’s work adduces no proofs that would shake these conclusions. Iam pleasedto find that Mr. Chinta- harana Chakravarti holds ( JASB for 1928 vol. 24 p. ‘467 ) that the niti portion of Garudapurana belongs to the 9th or roth century. The indefatigable scholar Dr. Meyer appears to have criticized Dr. Losch in a monograph ( vide review of it by Mr. Batakrishna Ghose in I. H. Cy. for 1929 pp. 367-375). Mr. Batakrishna Ghose holdd that vyavahara did not originally form part of the Yajnawalkya Additions and Corrections ix smrti on the ground that otherwise it is very difficult to explain its absence in the Garudapurana. But this is quite unconvincing. We have no sure criterion for judging on what bases the eclectic puranas ( Agnipurana and Garuda- purana ) proceeded. But in the case of the Garudapurana the omission of the vyavahara section is easily explicable in several ways. The Garudapurana was concerncd more with purely religious matters and so omitted the rather secular chapter on vyavahara. One might ask, why did the Agnipurana omit the first and third kandas of Yajfia- valkya if they existed in its day. One may with equal logic argue that those two kandas did not exist in the Yajiiavalkya smrti when the Agnipurana was compiled. P. 181 The late Sir Ramakrishna Bhandarkar outdid even Western scholars in assigning Yajnavalkya to a date not earlier than the 6th century ^. ०, In his work ‘Vaishnavism and Saivism’ ( p. 148 ) the learned doyen of modern Sanskrit studies in Western India holds that the worship of Ganesa isa late one, as itis not mentioned in the Gupta inscrip- tions. The veteran scholar did not notice the points brought out in my book ( such as the mention of naksatras from Krttika ). He is willing to assign Amarasithha to the sth or 6th century a. p. (ibid. p. 45 ). The great Iexico- grapher mentions Vinayaka and his synonyms (such as ekadanta &c ), but the words Mita, Sammita that are given as the appellations of Vinayaka in Yaj. are conspicuous by their absence in Amara’s lexicon, Hence the conclusion is that Amara wrote centuries after Yajiavalkya and that Vinayaka worship had taken a complexion before Amara flourished that was very different from what it was in Yajn- avalkya’s day. | Mita and Sammita occur as names of Maruts in the Taitti- riya Samhita. P. 186 That गजच्छाया and व्यतीपात had nothing to do with ‘rasis’ follows from the following. ‘ant मधाश्रयोददयां कुखरस्छायसंक्ितः। भकेन्मधायां सस्थे च हाशिन्यकं करे स्थिते ॥ ( १५०९५ in छत्थरत्नाकर 7. 319 as from ब्रह्मपुराण ); भषणाभ्जिधनिषठाद्रानागवेषतमस्तके । यथमा राथिवारेण व्यतीयातः स उच्यते । quoted in परायभ्रिलतरूव of रष्नन्वन as from जहन्मह भ्र, ४, B x History of Dharmatasra Sec. 38 pp. 213-221 Katyayana. Mr. Narayana Chandra Bandopadhyaya has recently published (Calcutta 1927 ) about 800 verses of Katyayana on vyavahara culled from five nibandbas. ` In the Hindu Law Quarterly recently started in Bombay I am editing a reconstruction of Katyayana on vyavahara (reconstructed text from twenty nibandhass, references to the places whence verses are taken, translation, notes &c.). About 300 verses have been printed in the first two issues for January and April 1930. Sec. 38 p. 215 read ‘Manu’ for Bhrgw’ in 1. 11. Sec. 39 pp. 221-223 Angiras. In the and Act of the Malatimadhava (p. 104 of Bhandarkar’s edition ) we have a prose quotation from Angiras गीतश्ायमथोक्गिरसा यस्यां मनश्च्षुषोरनुबन्धस्तस्यासाचि- रिति". In the Apastambagrhya (.3. 19-21) this is cited without name as the view of some 'बन्धुज्ञीलक्षणसपन्नामरो ग। सुपषयच्छेत | अन्धुरीटक्षणसंपन्नः श्रुतवानरोग इति वरसंपत । यस्यां मनश्चक्षुषोर्निअजन्धस्त- स्थाख्चादिर्नतरवात्रियेतेत्येके'. It 15 not likely that Bhavabhiti who was a great scholar would commit a mistake and it is extre- mely probable that he had a sutra of Angiras before him. Sec. 44 pp. 226-227 Pitamaha. Dr. Karl Scriba collectcd together from several nibandhas about 200 verses of Pitémaha and published them with translation ( Die Fragmentec des Pita- maha, Leipzig, 1902) on the eight constituents of karana (i. e. the court of justice ), fifty chalas, twenty-two wrongs (in which king acted suo motu ), ordeals ( 162 verses ) and the four kinds of ascetics. Sec. 64 pp. 275-279 Dharesvara Bhojadeva. In the Madras Tri. Cat. of Sauskrit Mss. for 1919-1922 p. 4562 No 3078 there 15 ams of Bhujabalanibandha by Bhojaraja in 18 chapters on astrological matters in relation to vratas, marriage &c. In the Krtyaratnakara of Candesvara quotations from a Krtyasamuccaya of Bhapala or Bhupalasamuccaya are cited (at pp. 278, 289, 449, 461, 496 &c). It appears that this is entirely a different work from the Rajamartanda and the Bhujabalabhima. Sec. 68. p. 285. 1. 20 read ‘Misarumiéra’ for ‘Harinatha’, | Sec. 71, Adtitions and Corrections ri pp. 294-296 Kamadhenu. That Bhoja was not the author of the Kamadhenu follows from the following words of the छत्यरत्नाकर (. 156 ) “एतानि वाक्यानि अलबणतृतीयाच्रतबोधक- वाक्यमध्ये भूषालकामधेनुकल्यतरुषु लिखितानि. At p. 30 of the same work the grata is spoken of as equal in authority to the Raja ( राजतुल्ययोगक्षेम ). These references show that the Kamadhenu was not regarded by CandeSvara as the work of Bhupala (or Bhojadeva) ; other passages of the Krtya- ratnakara where Gopala, Kalpataru, and Bhupala are spoken ot in the same breath indicate that Gopala was as great an authority as the Kalpataru; and knowing as we do that Candesvara looked upon Kamadhenu, Kalpataru, Parijata, Prakasa and Halayudha as his best authorities, it follows that Gopala was the author of the Kamadhenu, Vide कृत्यरत्नाकर PP. 277, 443 ( गोपारश्रपालकल्पतरुषारिजातेषु तु ). Sec. 72 pp. 298-299 Halayudha. There isa Ms. of a work called Sec. 73 Sec. 74 Panditasarvasva in the Madars Tri. cat. of Sanskrit mss. for 1919-22 p. 5165. Inthe manuscript itself there is no reference to the author or his parentage. It is a large work and deals with वणीश्रमाचार, दैवतिथिनि ख्पण, उपवास, sta, AMAT, WTS, ज्योतिःरासर, विवाहादिसंस्कार, दान, पायश्चित्त, प्रतिष्ठा, खीधर्म, दिव्य, अभक्ष्यविचार, gre. From the style it seems more likely that it is not the work of Halayudha. In the Ekadasitattva (Jivananda vol. II p. 51) and Suddhi- tattva ( Jivananda vol II p. 327) Halayudha is said to be the author of Sasinvatsarapradipa. pp. 301-306 Bhavadevabhatta. There was another work of Bhavadevabhatta called Sam- bandha-viveka. This work is mentioned in the Sarhskdra- tattva ( Jivananda vol I p. 890) and in the Vivahatattva (vol. II p. 143 ). pp. 306-308 Prakasa. The Vivadaratnikara and other Ratnakaras of Candesvara generally refer to Prakasa only, but sometimes Candesvara speaks of Smrtimaharnavaprakaga e. g. on p. 326 of Krtyaratnakara we have ‘ जाबाटमत्स्यपुराणवाक्यपरामशान्निराधि- ASSIS: साग्निभिश्चेतरपुतेरेकोष्टिष्टं कार्यमिति eaergrorawrsrarert इति xif History of Dharmasistra कल्पतरौ लिखितमन्येश्वालुमोदितं agg. This also shows that Smrtimaharnavaprakasa was a work referred to by the Kalpataru and so earlier than 1100 A. D. Sec. 87 pp. 354-359 Hemadri. In the Marathi Quarterly of the Bharata-itihasa-samsodhaka- mandala, vol. X part 2 p. 84, Mr. Y. K. Deshpande quotes from a work called Bhanuvijaya of the Mahanubhava sect passages wherein Hemadri is charged with having been won over by Turks (Mahomedans) and with having brought about the imprisonment of Bhanubhatta alias Bhaskara Kavisvara Vyasa (a Mahanubhava saint ) जरि करावा रणकन्दन | हेमाद्रि Tet लागले पण | दिह्टीभ्वरे देवोनि धन । मत्री पा TA केला ॥ भानगणीं असाहणेपणे । अहिता प्रेरिलै qual get ate भसे आंगवणे । हेमाद्रियेची बधाविले |’. But in the absence of other corroborative evidence hardly any reliance can be placed on this charge, as it might have been levelled at Hemadri in revenge for his imprisoning a leader of a dissenting sect like that of the Mahanubhavas. P. 359 In the Sivadigvijaya ( printed at Baroda in Sake 1817) at p. 442 Hemadapanta ( Hemadri ) is credited with having brought from Lanka ( Ceylon ) in Sake 1193 ( 1271-2 A. D.) the ‘Pisacca lipi’ ( Modi script ). P. 368 |. 16 Read ‘contemplate’ for ‘complete’. P. 398 foot note 969 Read ‘aaa gaa’ for (अलमत तनय. SYNOPSIS OF CONTENTS Sec. 1 Meaning of dharma : we Pp. I-4 Defies exact rendering in English - In the Rgveda, used as ad- jective or noun - means ^ upholder or supporter’ in some Rgvedic passages ~ in most Rgveda passages means ‘ religious ordinances or rites ° and in rare cases ^ fixed principles or rules of conduct’ ~ in Aitareya-brahmana dharma means ‘ whole body of religious duties’ in Chandogya-Upanisad dharma means ‘peculiar duties of asramas~’ dharma came to mean ^ duties and privileges of a person as a mem- ber of the Aryan community, as member of one of the varnas or as in a particular stage of life’ - the same meaning in Taittiriya Upa- nisad (I. 17 ), Bhagavadgita, Manusmrti and other smrtis - according to Medhatithi, dharma five-fold viz., varnadharma, 4Sramadharma, varnasramadharma, naimittikadharma, gunadharma - this meaning of dharma taken in this work - definitions of dharma according to Jaimini, Vaisesikasutra, Hlarita, Mahabharata and Buddhist works - subjects treated in this work, viz. sources of dharma, contents of works on dharma, their chronology. Sec. 2 Sources of dharma : ,.. PP. 4-7 According to Gautama, Apastamba, Vasistha, Manu, Yajiia- valkya -- principal sources were Veda, smrtis and custom - Vedas do not contain positive precepts on dharma, but give information incidentally - examples from Vedic literature suggesting dharmagastra rules. Sec. 3 When dharmasastra works were first composed ० pp. 8-10 It is difficult to say when composed - Nirukta (III. 4-5 ) exhibits controversies about inheritance and quotes a verse ( Sloka ) from some work on dharma - Bithler’s view about such verses -- Gautama and Baudhayana speak of dharmaégastra = Baudhayana and Apastamba mention numerous sages on dharma = Vartika of Katyayana and Jai- mini speak of dharmasastra - Patafijalion dharmasttrakaras - dharma- Sastra works existed prior to Yaska or at least before 600 8. €, and in 2nd centriry 8, c. dharmasatras had become authoritative - method of dealing with the whole dharmaSastra literatpre followed in this xiv History of Dharmatastra book, first dharmasatras, then carly metrical smrtis like those of Manu and Yajfiavalkya, later versified smrtis, then commentaries and digests, such as the Mitaksara - chronology of early writers very difficult to settle - Max Miller’s view that works in continuous loka metre followed stitra works not acceptable. See. 4 Dharmasitras : ee) pp. 10-12 Many of them formed part of the Kalpa and were studied in distinct satra-caranas ~ dharmasitras of Apastamba and Baudhayana presuppose erhysitras of their carana- no dharmastitras extant corresponding to the grauta and grhya siitras of Asvalayana, Sankha- yana and Manava-Tantravartika on what dharmasitra was studied in what particular Vedic Sakha - all dharmasatras gradually became authoritative in all schools = close connection between grhyasttras and dharmasutras on certain topics - scope of dharmastitras ~ grhya- siitras sometimes refer to dharmasitras = points of distinction be- tween dharmasttras and the other smrtis. Sec. § Dharmasatra of Gautama : ०० © pp. 12-20 Gautama’s is the oldest extant dharmasiitra - specially studied by followers of Simaveda - Gautama one of the nine subdivisions of the Ranayaniya school of Samaveda - Gautamadharmasttra points to close connection with Simaveda - Gautama refers to his own previous dicta - contents of 28 chapters of Gautamadharmasitra - the work is entirely in prose - Gautama’s language agrees more with Panini’s rules than Apastamba’s - explanation of this = Haradatta prefers Paninian rcadings of Gautama’s text - some siitras of Gautama quoted in the Mitaksara and other works not found in extant text - extent of literature known to Gautama - the only author named is Manu - the meaning of ‘acaryih’ whose views are cited by Gautama - earliest reference to Gautama on dharma is in Baudhayana- dharmasitra - Baudhayana (III. 10) borrows chap. 19 of Gautama - close correspondence between many other satras of Gautama and Baudhayana = Vasistha (4. 34 and 36) refers to views of Gautama -Vasistha’s 22nd chap. is borrowed from rgth of Gautama ~ many 5045 the same in Gautama and Vasistha - Gau- tama referred to by Manu asson of Utathya - Gautama referred to by Yajiavalkya, Bhavisyapurana, Kumarila, Sarhkaricirya, Medha- tithi = Gautama’s reference to Yavana = probable age between 600 - Synopeis of contents ओर 400 ४. ©. ~ Haradatta and Maskarin commented on Gautama - Asahaya also did so - sloka - Gautama and Vrddha ~ Gautama. Sec. 6 Baudhayana-dharmasatra : we 7}, 20-32 Baudhayana is a teacher of the Black Yajurveda ~ arrangement of Baudhayana kalpa according to Dr. Burnell and Dr. Caland - Baudhayanagrhya -presupposes the Baudhayanadharmasiatra - grhya (III.9.6) speaks of pravacanakara Kanva Bodhayana and satrakara Apa- stamba - tarpana in Baudhayana-dharmasitra (II. 5. 27 ) mentions Kanva Bodhayana, Apastamba and Hiranyakesin - contents of Baudhayana-dharmasttra - extant sitra has not come down intact - fourth prasna probably an interpolation - third prasna also not free from doubt = Baudhiayana III]. 10 taken from Gautama - Baudha- yana III. 6 agrees closely with Visnudharmasitra 48 - Dr. Jolly thinks both borrowed froma common source - probably Visnu borrows from Baudhayana - repetitions exist even in the first two prasnas - form and structure of Baudhayana - quotes numerous verses, even in the first two prasnas - language of Baudhayana often departs from Paninian standard - literature known to Baudha- yana - several authors on dharma together with their views mention- ed by Baudhayana - Asura Kapila said to be originator of agramas- Sabara, Kumiarila, Visvaripa and Medhatithi refer to Baudhayana dharmasutra - home of Baudhayana ~ Baudhayana is styled prava- canakira and Apastamba sitrakara - Bihler holds that Baudhayana was a southern teacher - age of Baudhayana dharmasitra - later than Gautama - Bithler’s reasons for placing Baudhayana a century or two earlier than Apastamba not convincing - divergences between Biudhayana and Apastamba = style of Baudhayana compared with that of Apastamba - Baudhayana to be placed between 500-200 B. ८.- numerous stitras of Baudhayana identical with those of Apastamba and Vasistha ~ Baudhayana mentions several appellations of Ganeéa, just as Manavagrhya does and mentions seven planets, Rahu and Ketu - Govindasvamin commented on Baudhayana. Sec. 7 Dharmasutra of Apastamba: ... Pp. 32-46 The Apastambakalpasutra of the Black Yajurveda divided into 30 prasnas, dharmasutra constituting 28th and 29th prasnas thereof - Apastamba is one of the five subdivisions of the Khandikeya school of Taittiriyasakha = Apastambagrhya and dharma sutras are composi- xvi History of Dharmatastra tions of same author - some sutras of the two are identical - Ap. grhya does not treat of some topics as they are dealt with in dharma sitra - contents of Ap. dharmasutra - form and structure of Ap. dharmasitra - Ap. is more archaic and un-Paninian than any other dharmasitra - many unfamiliar words in Ap. - several verses quoted in Ap. - literature known to Ap. - Ap. mentions six afigas of Veda and ten writers on dharma by name - Svetaketu and Ap. - Harita quoted frequently by Ap. - Ap. controverts several views - striking coincidences between Gautama and Ap. - Ap. quotes a verse from Purana and speaks of the view of Bhavisyatpurana - Apastamba and Manu - Apastamba presupposes many rules of the Mimarhsa and agrees closely with Jaimini’s sutras - age of Ap. Dh. S. - quoted by Sabara, Kumarila, Sarhkaracirya, Visvarapa and Medhatithi - home and personal history of Apastamba not known - Ap. is later than Gautama and probably Baudhayana - his age between 600-300 B. c.- Ap. condemns niyoga, rejects secondary sons, does not admit paisaca and Prajapatya forms of marriage - divergence betwccn the views of Ap. and Gautama and other sitrakaras - Haradatta’s is the only commentary extant on Ap. - Apastamba smrti in verse. Sec. 8. Hiranyakesidbarmasitra : .. Pp. 46-50 Hiranyakesidharmasitra forms 26th and 27th prasnas of the Hiranyakesikalpa-Hiranyakesin’s can be hardly called an independent work, as it borrows hundreds of stitras word for word from Ap. -a few additions made to Ap. in Hiranyakesi Dh. S. - Hiranyakcsin’s readings are smoother and more classical than Apastamba’s - arrange- ment of sutras also is somewhat different in the two - com. of Maha- deva called Ujjvala on Hiranyakesgin is almost the same as Haradatta’s on Ap. ~ Buhler thinks Mahadeva borrows from Haradatta - Mahadeva’s com. in a few places contains more matter than Hara- ` datta’s and Mahadeva differs from Haradatta. Sec. 9 Vasistha-dharmasaira : i. Pp. 50-60 Different editions of Vasistha contain different numbers of chapters - Kumarila says it was specially studied by Rgvedins - ex- planation of this statement - nothing special in the V asisthadharma- sutra to connect it with Rpveda - contents of the Vasisthadharma- sutra - style of Vas. Dh. S. resembles Gautama’s - many ‘sutras ot Vas. identical with Gautama and Baudhayana - form of Vasistha Synopsts of contents XVii dharmasatra resembles Baudhayana dharmasitra - Medhatithi and Mitaksara quote from almost all chapters of extant Vasistha and so does Visvarupa - literature known to Vasistha - Vasistha prohibits learning language of Mlecchas - authors on dharmasastra named by Vasistha - Vasistha’s references to the views of Manu are made with reference to a work of Manu almost identical with the present Manu- smrti and do not compel us to formulate the existence of a Manava- dharmasiatra - Buhler wrong in taking Vas. Dh. ऽ. 4. 8 as a quota- tion from Manavadharmasutra - Only Vas. Dh. S. 12.16 and 19. 37 where Manu is quoted have no corresponding verses in the present Manusmrti - Over forty verses are entirely common to Vas. and present Manusmrti - conclusion that Vas. contains borrowings from the present Manusmrti or its prototype in verse - Vas. Dh. ऽ. 22 is same as Gautama 19 - Dr. Jolly’s view that Vas. Dh. S. 28.10-r5 and 18-22 are borrowed from Visnudharmasttra chap. 56 and 87 or its original the Kathakadharmasiatra is wrong - home of Vas. to the north of Narmada, according to Buhler - this is mere specula- tion - earliest reference to Vasistha asa writer on dharma is in Manu (8-140) - age of Vasistha - Vasistha’s views are ancient, praticularly about secondary sons, about Dattaka son, about niyoga and remarriage - he mentions only six forms of marriage - but in other matters differs from Gaut. or Baudh. viz. on adoption, on documents - Vas. Dh. ऽ. between 300-100 ए, €. ~ whether Vas. 18. 4 (Ramaka v. 1. Romaka) contains a reference to the Romans ~ Vrddha-Vasistha, an early compilation - there is a Brhad Vasistha and a Jyotir Vasistha - Yajiiasvamin commented upon Vas. Dh. S. Sec. 10 Visnudhbarmasatra : ०, pp. 60-70 Visnu Dh, ऽ, contains too chapters and yet sitra not extensive- several chap, ( 40, 42, 76) contain only one sitra and one verse - first chap. and 1251 two are entirely in verse, the rest in mixed prose and verse - Visnu Dh. S. closely connected with Kathasakha - Dr. Jolly says chap. 21, 67, 73 and 86 of Visnu closely correspond with Kathaka grhya - but Visnu Dh. ऽ. is not the work of the author of Kathaka grhya- contents of Visnu Dh. S. - Visnu resembles Vas. Dh. S. - its peculiar feature that it. professes to be re- vealed by God Visnu - its style, easy and diffuse - work contains old H, D.C, xviii History of Dharmatastra and new material - hundreds of siittras are prose renderings of hundreds of verses occurring in our Manu - hypothesis of a common origin or borrowing by both from a floating mass of verses untenable - extant Visnudharmasatra borrows from Manu - Visnu contains verses identical with the Bhagavadgita and Yajfavalkya smrti - Dr. Jolly’s view that Yajfiavalkya borrows his anatomical section from Visnu not correct - Visnu Dh. ऽ, contains long list of tirthas, the word Jaiva for Jupiter - those wanting in Yajnavalkya - extant Visnu Dh. S. later than Manusmrti and Yajnavalkyasmru - Visva- rupa does not quote a single sutra of Visnu by name, though he refers to Visnu (ch. 97) for orders of sarnnydsins - Mitiksara quotes hardly any verse from Visnu - Apararka and Smrticandrika quote Visnu profusely-verses were added at a late date to original sutra - literature known to Visnu Dh. S. - Visnu mentions the seven days of the week, recommends the practice of sati, speaks of pus- takas, of many good and evil omens ;among which the sight of yellow-robed Buddhist ascetics is included - it prohibits speech with Mlecchas and journeys to Mleccha countries, it dilates on worship of Vasudeva - though Visnu agrees in'some respects with Kathaka- yrhya, on some points it differs from it -- date of older kernel of Visnu may be 300 to 100 8.८. - additions made after 3rd century A.D. and before 7th century - some sutras agree closely with Narada - Brhad Visnu and Vrddha Visnu and Laghu Visnu - Nandapandita’s com. on the Visnu Dh. S. - probably Bharuci also commented on it. Sec. 1x The dharmasntra of Harita : «ss 72. 70-75 Baudhayana, Apastamba and Vasistha quote Hirita as an authority - Mr. Islampurkar secured a ms. of Hirita-dharmasitra at Nasik in 30 chapters - contents of that ms. - its relation to Maitra- yaniyasathita - it mentions ‘the Kagmirian word ‘‘Kaphella” -- quotations in commentaries and digests show that Harita dealt ex- haustively with the same topics that are found in other dharma- sutras ~ Kumarila mentions Harita as dharmasastrakara but does not assign him to any particular carana as he does Apastamba and others- notable doctrines of Hirita - mentions worship of Ganesa - Hirita’s verses on vyavahara quoted in nibandhas are later than the siitra - Laghu Harita and Vrddha Harita - latter in verse is later thar: Yajnia- valkya, Narada and Katyayana, | Synopsis of contents xix Sec. 12 The dharmasatra of Sankba-Likbita : ,,, 70. 75-79 From Tantravartika it appears that dharmasitra of Sankha- Likhita was studied by Vajasaneyins - Mahabharata (Santi 23) contains story of brothers Sankha and Likhita - Various compilations ascribed to Sankha alone or Likhita alone or to both - Restoration of Dharmasatra in Annals of Bhandarkar Institute (vol. VII, VIII) - Verse Sankhasmrti stricter than prose Sankha - Likhita - com. on dharmasatra mentioned in Kalpataru and Vivadaratnikara - doctrines of dharmasiitra similar to those of other dharmasttras - speaks of twelve secondary sons - allows niyoga - speaks of several ordeals - de- fines Aryavarta as between Sindhu - Sauvira and Kimpilya - Litera- ture known to Sankha Likhita - probable age between 300-100 ए, €. Sec. 13 Manavadharmasatra ; Did it exist ? ,,, pp. 79-85 MaxMiller and Weber responsible for the theory that the extant Manusmrti was a recast of an ancient Manavadharmasitra now lost - hardly any data for the sweeping generalisation of Max- Miller that all genuine dharmasastras are nothing but more medern texts of earlicr sitra works on kuladharma - one main plank of this theory that che continuous employment of the loka metre was un- known in the sutra period is now exploded - Bihler supports Max Miillcr’s theory by some additional arguments - Vasistha IV. 5-8 on which Buhler relies not properly understood by him - Vasistha ( 19-37 ) quotes a Manava loka which is not in the Anustubh metre and not found in extant Manu and Bihler thinks it is taken from Manavadharmasttra - Bihler’s reliance on a fragment of Uéanas which is corrupt is not worth consideration - Biihler relies on Kamandakiyanitisara (11. 3. and XI. 67) where Manavas are said to hold that there are three vidyas for a king and that Manu said that king’s council should consist of 12 ministers - These views not the same in extant Manu- Bihler’s conclusion not correct - Kamandaka is only paraphrasing Kautiliya - Bihler’s generalisation about Manava or Manavah without foundation - Kumiarila, Sankara, and Visvaripa all employ ‘Manava’ for Manusnnirti - Bihler relies on analogy of the complete set of Apastamba and Baudhayana sutras for holding that a Manavadharmasitra existed - Proper explanation of Vas. Db. 5. 1V. 5-8 ~ Bithler not right in saying that Vas, Dh. S. 11. 23, 12, 16, 23. 43 either contradict Manu or find no counterpart 2X History of Dharmatistra therein - analogy of Apastamba sitras of no use - excepting the three caranas of the Black Yajurveda, no carana of any Veda hasa dharmasatra attributed to the founder of that carana - an explanation suggested - existing materials not sufficient to establish theory that a Manavadharmasutra once existed. Sec. 14 Arthasastra of Kautilya : .. pp. 85-104 First translated by Dr. Shama Sastri and text published in 1909 - other editions - numerous works and articles inspired by the publication of Kautiliya Arthaéastra - Kautiliya is oldest extant work on ArthaSastra - scope of arthasastra and relation to dharma- é4stra ~ arthagastra an upaveda of Atharvaveda - purpose of this Sastra - rule in case of conflict between Dharmasastra and Artha- Sastra - Canakya, Kautilya and Visnugupta are namesof the same person - glowing tribute paid to Canakya or Visnugupta by Kama- ndakiyanitisara, Tantrakhyd4yiki, Dandin - Bina and Pancatantra on Kautilya as author of Arthasastra - Brhatkatha of Gunadhya contain- ed his story - Mudraraksasa connects his name with Kutila - contro- versy as to whether Kautiliya can be the work of a busy minister of Candragupta Maurya - Jolly, Winternitz and Keith hold that extant work is not by the minister of Candragupta - Megasthenes’ silence about Canakya explained - whether the Kautiliya is the product of a school or of an individual author - Kautilya’s views cited about 70 times in the work in the third person - explanation of this - Dr. Jolly wrong in his explanation of apadesa (in XV. 1) - Keith thinks that an author would not parade an uncomplimentary epithet like Kautilya (derived from kutila ) - Is the name Kautilya or Kautalya - works on gotra and pravara give various forms such as Kautali, Kautilya and Kautili - form, style and contents of the Kautiliya - a few verses interspersed in the work, generally at the end -in all 340 verses excluding mantras - some verses are certainly quotations - work abounds in numerous technical and rare words - deviations from Panini - summary of contents - section on judicial administra- tion interesting - greatest correspondence between Kautiliya and Yajfiavalkya - some striking examples - it is. Yajiiavalkya that borrows - reasons - Yajiiavalkya represents a far too advanced stage Synopsis of contents xxi of juristic principles than Kautilya - close agreement between Manu smrti and Kautilya also - but they differ on miyoga, as to nomencla- ture of vyavaharapadas, about heirship of mother and paternal grand- mother, on remarriage of widows, divorce, gambling - Kautiliya long anterior to the extant Manusmrti - Kautilya’s five references to Manavas explained - references to Svayambhuva and Pracetasa Manu contained in the Mahabharata suggest that there were two works in verse on dharma and politics attributed to these or perhaps one work containing both, subsequently recast as the extant Manusmrti - only two views ascribed to Manavas in Kautiliya not found in extant Manusmrti - in the dharmasthiya section the only other authors or schools cited are Barhaspatyas and AuSanasas - none of the dharmasatras of Gautama and others are anywhere quoted by name - views cited on the question as to whom a child belongs ( to the begetter or to him on whose wife it is begotten ) can be traced to Baudhayana, Gautama and Vasistha - views of Acaryas cited in the Kautiliya - Kautiliya later than Gautama and Apastamba but earlier than extant Manusmyti - date of Kautiliya - it is certainly not later than 2nd century A.D. and not earlier than 325 ए. c. - schools named by Kautilya and also individual authors - views of Acaryas ' are quoted over fifty times and Kautilya differs in each case ~ meaning of ‘Acaryas’ - literature known to Kautilya - Sanskrit official language and the work mentions gunas of composition - Kautiliya agrees with Kamasitra in several respects - Dr. Jolly and Prof. Keith opine that both works composed about same time - points of difference bet- ween the two works - countries and peoples mentioned by Kautilya -- silks from Cina and blankets from Nepal - corporations of Licchavis, Vyjikas and others mentioned - meaning of ‘rijaSabdopajivinah’ (in श) - best breeds of horses - Mlecchas sold or pledged children - references to Buddhists and Ajivakas - weights to be made from stones/of Magadha and Mekala - doubtful whether Kautilya knew extant; text of Mahabharata - most of the stories cited as illustrations by Kawtilya occur in the Mahabharata, but some divergence exists in the case of Janamejaya, Mandavya ~ Kautilya’s knowledge of drugs and of rasa ( mercury )- references to shrines of Siva, Skanda &c.- traditio\nal date of 300 8, c. more likely to be correct than 3rd cen- xrii History of Dharmaéastra Lf tury A. D. approved of by Dr. Jolly and Winternitz - two commen- taries on Kautiliya, Nayacandrika of Madhavayajvan and Pratipada- paficika of Bhastasyamin - sutras attributed to Canakya - several niti collections in verse ascribed to Canakya are later than Kautiliya. Sec. 15 Vaikhanasadharmasatra : ... Pp. 105-107 Vaikhanasa is one of the six ऽप caranas of the black Yajur- veda mentioned by Mahadeva in his Vaijayanti on Satyasadha Srautasatra - Vaikhanasa occurs in Gautama, Baudhayana, Vasistha (9. 10) and Manu ( 6. 21 ) ~ Vaikhanasadharmaprasna divided into three prasnas - contents of the work = its age later than Gautama and Baudhayana - names more mixed castes than even some of the verse smrtis - devotion to Narayana looms very large in the work - Dr. Caland’s view that Manusmrti borrows from Vaikhanasagrhya not correct. Sec. 16 Atri: ... Pp. 107-110 Atri named in Manu (III. 16 ) ~ Atreyadharmasastra in nine adhyayas - summary of contents = form of Atridharmasastra - several works styled Atri -smrti- summary of Atrisarmhita printed by Jivananda - Atri quoted as an authority on adoption - Laghu Atri and Vrddhatreyasmrti - Mahabharata ( AnuSisana 65.1) quotes a verse of Atri. Sec. 17 44114; : . Pp. IIO-116 USanas wrote on politics, as Kautiliya shows - Mahabharata ( Santi 56. 29-30 ) refers to work of Usanas on politics - Ntipraka- sika on Sukra as arranger of rajasastra - An Ausanasa ned asastra in verse - contents - peculiar views of Usanas about offspring त inter- caste marriages - several verses common 10 14705 and Manu -' names the views of numerows writers on dharma ~ Haradatta and ४ Smrti- candrika knew a work of Usanas dealing । । ५ with all branches of 47102117012- Usanas 5111111 in verse - verses of Usaras on y avahara - Sul*raniti- sara edited by Oppert. ° 1 11 PP. 6 es Ap. Dh. S. (I. 6. 19 ) shows that Kanva and Kanva weyare two istinct authors - verses of Kanva quoted in Smrticandrika. 2d Sec. 18 Kanva and Kanva : Synopsis of contents xxili Sec. 19 Kasyapa and Kasyapa : ... 07. 107-118 Baudhayana ( Dh. 9, I. 11.20 ) cites # verse in which Kasyapa’s view is contained ~ there was a dharmasttra of Kasyapa -a Kasyapa smrti in prose contained in Deccan College Mss. - contents thereof- Smrticandrika includes Kasyapa among 18 upasmrtis. Sec, 20 Gargya: we 7. 119 A sttra work of Gargya on dharma cxisted - Gargya and Vrddha Gargya - a Gargisamhita on astronomy and astrology - Jyotir Gargya and Brhad Gargya. Sec, 31 Cyavana : p. 119 Seems to have written a sutra work on dharma, Sec. 22 Jatukarnya : ... Pp. 119-120 A verse of Vrddha Yajhavalkya names Jatikarnya as a dharma Sastrakara ~ quotations in verse in Mitaksara and later works, Sec. 23 Devala: ..+ =p. 120 A dharmasatra of Devala existed once = Mitaksara and other works also contain quotations in verse on acara, vyavahara, sraddha - this latter a later compilation = Devalasmrti in 90 verses on purifi- cations is also a late work ~ jurist Devala flourished about the same time as Brhaspati and Katydyana. Sec. 24 Paithinast : we) Pp, 121-122 An ancient sitrakira, as Visvariipa quotes his 505 = Dr. Jolly thinks he belongs to Atharvaveda - Paithinasi on sati, inheri- tance, on absence of untouchability under certain circumstances. Sec. 25 ,Budha : ve Pe 123 A\ sitrakara cited by Hemadri, Apararka, Kalpataru and Jimat- aan - a brief compilation and not very early in age. + 770. 123-126 A‘n ancient teacher of arthasastra mentioned in Kautiliya - Mahabl (- (Santi 59. 80-85 ) credits him with compression of vast wo\rk of Bralima on trivarga and mentions several of his views- Kamasu # speaks of Brhaspati as writer on artha - peculiar views of Sec. 26 "rhaspati : xxiv History of Dharmatastra Brhaspati according to Kautiliya - Brhaspati also wrote a prose work on vyavahara and prayascitta = probably the authors of the two are different - 700 verses on vyavahara ascribed to Brhaspati are quoted in the Mitaksara - this is an independent work composed between 300-500 A. ०. ~ smaller compilations in verse ascribed to Brhaspati - Barhaspatya Arthaéastra edited by Dr. Thomas is a late work. Sec. 27 Bharadvaja aud Bharadvaja : ,.. pp. 126-128 A Srautasitra and grhya of Bharadvaja exist - ViSvarapa’s work establishes existence of a ऽता work on dharma of Bharad- vaja - there was smrti in verse also attributed to Bharadvaja - Kauti- liya shows that Bharadvaja was an ancient author on politics - some views of Bharadvaja - Mahabharata on Bharadvaja - verses on vyava- hara attributed to Bharadvaja - this probably different from work on politics. Sec. 28 Satatapa : ,., pp. 128-139 A satra work of Satatapa on dharma dealing with prayascitta, Sraddha and acara must have existed - verses of Satatapa quoted in Mitaksara and other later works - this is ae different from smyti work - several verse compilations ascribed to Satatapa - Vrddha Satatapa and Brhat Saratapa. Sec. 29 Sumantu: .., 00. 129-131 A sutra work on दत्वा and prayascitta ascribed to Sumantu existed - Yajiavalkya and Parasara do not enumcrate jsumantu among expounders of dharma - Sumantu mentioned in Mahabharata and Bhagavata - verses from Sumantu on dharma are cited by. Aparar- ka ~ this isa different work = numerous verses on vyavahara | quoted from Sumantu in Sarasvativilisa. | Sec. 30 The Smrtis ; « a we 070. IK31-135 Two senses of the word smrti, viz. all orthodox ancient non- Vedic works ( such as Panini’s grammar, Srauta sutras, Maha bharata Manu, &c.) and (a narrower sense) dharmasastra - अप, a segurce of dharma according to Gautama and others - number of smrt is went ° ® oe 1 € . on increasing - Yajnavalkya enumerates twenty writers of — smrtis, Paragara 19 ~ Tantravartika speaks of 18 dharmasamhitas - Catur- Synopsis of contents XXV vimnsatimata gives views of 24 writers -a smrti called Sat - trirhsan- mata- Paithinasi enumerates 36 and so docs Apararka = Vrddha Gautama enumerates 57 ~ Viramitrodaya enumerates 18 smytis, 18 upasmrtis and 21 more- total number of smrtis about 100 - these are products of widely separated ages ~ some entircly in prose, some entirely in verse, some are mixed - chronology of smrtis presents perplexing problems - two or thrce smrtis go under the same name, g. Harita, Atri, Satatapa = sectarian zealots fabricate certain 51111115 ~ the prefixes laghu, brhat and vrddha applied to smrtis - well-known verses are ascribed to different authors, as authors quote from memory. Sec. 31 The Manusmrti : ... 77. 135-158 Numerous editions - Manu as the father of mankind in the - Reveda and other Vedas - Manu and the deluge in Satapatha-brah- mana - Manu in the Nirukta- Manu quoted as law-giver in Gautama, Apastamba and Mahabharata - introduction to Naradasmrti and Manu - how the Manusmntti is narrated - four versions of Svayam- - bhuva ऽव according to Bhavisyapurana = almost impossible to say who composed extant Manusmrti - Biihler’s theory that our Manu is a recast of Manavadharmasatra shown above to be unsustainable - the Manavagrhya differs from Manusmrti in several particulars - ‘\ inayakaganti of Manavagrhya and tests for selecting a bride not containe . our Manu - Mahabhirata distinguishes between Svaya- mbhuva Manu and Pracetasa Manu, former promulgating dharma- Sistra - tgese two works combined in the present Manu - extant Manu ; 112 chapters and 2694 verses - its style- contents of Manu - [प - @pyent of literature known to Manusmrti - the author of the Manusnifat is not the first legislator - age of Manusmrti - external evidenceitt Medhatithi’s is first extant commentary - Visvaripa quotes का verses - Sankara, Kumarila and Sabara refer to Manu - पनि the present text of Manu before him - Asvaghoga_ in his प ¢ ध-1 quotes several verses from ‘Manavadharma’ some ot which ajAgsound in our Manu = Ramayana ( Kiskindha 18. 30-32 ) containj}ajanu VIII. 318 and 316 - Manu attained present form long be¥pur and century A. ०. = there are earlier and later strata in Manu -?Y satradictary statements as to Brahmana marrying a sadra woman,. gout appropriate forms of marriage, about niyoga, about D xxvi | Hietory of Dharmaésaatra flesh-eating - Buhler’s conclusion is that cosomological and philoso- phical portions in rst and 12th books, rules about mixed castes and duties of castes in roth book are later additions - all additions made before 3rd century a. p.- Manusmrti has not suffered several recasts - quotations cited as Vrddha Manu and Brhan-Manu are later than Manusmrti - extant Manu older than Yajnavalkya - Manu mentions Yavanas, Kambojas, Sakas, Pahlavas and Cinas - extant Manusmrti composed between 2nd century B. c. and 2nd century a. ०. - rela- tion of Mahabharata and Manu - conflict of views between Mandlik, Hopkins and Buhler - Hopkins holds that there was a mass of float- ing verses ascribed to mythical Manu on which both Manusmrti and Mahabharata drew - Buhler says that the floating mass of verses was not all attributed to Manu - Manu mentions stories and names that occur in the Mahabharata but these names go into Vedic antiquities - Manu never names the Mahabharata, while the latter often refers ९0 ` ‘rajadharmas or Sastra of Manu’ or to ‘what Manu said’ - Both Hopkins and Bihler hold that the AnuSasanaparva and Santiparva knew a Manusmrti, but earlier books, whenever they speak of Manu, refer to floating mass of popular verses - this conclusion not correct - final conclusion, viz., long before 4th century ४, 6. there wasa dharmasastra in verse attributed to Svayarhbhuva Manu, there was another work on rajadharma attributed to Pracetesa Manu, that pro- bably there was one work, then between 200 B. ८. and, 200 +, De Manusmyti was recast - extant Mahabharata later than extant Manu- smrti ~ influence of Manu spread to Cambodia and orherscountries beyond India- Manu had several commentators, Mcdhatitk Govinda- raja, Kullaka, Narayana Raghavananda, Nandana and 7? },gacandra - Asahaya commented on Manu Udayakara is anotl : cy menta- tor and so is Dharanidhara Narayana flourished ह n I100- iti ^ 1300 A. D. ~ Raghavananda later than 1400 a. 9. - ए [anu and Brhan-Manu - explanation as to how these originate + i The Bes 1 he Sec. 32 Ihe two Epics : _ cien 158-160 a Ramayana is relied upon as a source of dharire 14103 ‘igh less frequently than the Mahabharata Ayodhyakanda ais M* 4‘ yakanda contain disquisitions on politics - age of the epics a ¢fore r problem more appropriate for a separate treatise - table in ०.0 | ४ where dharmasastra topics occur in the Mahabharata and the ab : yana. aif Synopsie of contents Sec. 3 3 2 / Puranas ॥ aco PPe I 60- for Puranas as a class of literature mentioned in Taittiriya Aran- yaka, Chandogya Upanisad, Gautama Dh. S., Mahabhasya - extant puranas are recasts made of older matcrial - some of the extant Puranas like Vayu earlier than 6th century a. D. - Names of principal 18 Puranas - 18 Upapurinas - Matsyapurana contains much dharma- Sistra material - Agnipurana contains disquisition on rajadharma and chapters 253-258 contain almost the whole of the vyavahara section of Yajfiavalkya - Garudapurina borrows about 400 verses from acara and prayascitta sections of Yajfiavalkya - chronology of Puranas passed over - Divergence as to the names of the principal 18 puranas and as to the; extent - Puranas very valuable for study of social and religious questions as to mediaval and modern India - Padmapurana divides 18 Puranas into three groups of sattvika, rajasa, tamasa and divides eighteen smrtis also in the same way - table showing which dharmasistra topics are dealt with in which purana. Sec. 34 The Yajnavalkyasmrti : pp. 168-190 an Yajnavalkya, a name most illustrious among Vedic sages - stories about strained relations between Vaigampayana and Yajna- valkya - Yajfiavalkya and Janaka in the Satapathabrahmana - Yajia- valkya, a great philosopher in the Brhadaranyaka - Yajfiavalkya srirti claims that the Aranyaka and Yogasastra were composed by the a r of the smrti- slight variation in the number of verses contained in Yajiiavalkyasmrti according to Visvaripa, Mitaksara and Apajrirka - arrangement of verses different in Visvarapa and Mitaksafa, particularly in the prayaécittakanda - readings of the two commerptators also differ - Agnipurana affords excellent check for considegation of text of Yajiiavalkya - Readings of Agnipurana com- pared with those of Visvaripa and the Mitaksara - conclusion is that the Agrpipurana represents a text midway between Visvarapa and that of the Mitaksara - So Agnipurana represents a text of Yajnaval- kya ६ about 900 A. 2. - total number of verses on vyavahara in the Agnipurana is 315, out of which the first 31 are not taken from Wajiiavalkya - almost all of these 31 taken from Narada- Garuddpurina (chap. 93 ) expressly says that the dharma promul- gated एह Yajiiavalkya was imparted therein - Garuda (chap. 93-106 xxvi ntains dharmagastra material taken from व्रता and prayaScitta sec- tions of Yajfiavalkya - Garuda (93-102) deals with icra and 102-106 with prayascitta-Garudapurina omits rajadharma section-of Yajna- valkya ~ only a few verses of Yaj. are repeated word for word, while a summary only is given of several verses - comparison of the text of the Garudapurana with Visvaripa’s text and that of the Mitaksari ~ Garudapurana represents text intermediate between Visvarapa and Mitaksara - are there different strata in Yajiavalkya ? text mainly the same from 700 a. p. and little evidence to show that the text of Yajnavalkya as we have it contains several strata - comparison of Yajiiavalkyasmrti with Manusmrti - close agreement in phrascology between the two ~ Yajiiavalkya usually tries to com- press Manw’s dicta - Yaj. adds Vinayakasanti and Grahasanti and ordeals, while Manu omits first two and cursorily, "fers to two ordeals ~ Yaj. silent on origin of world which we have in Manu =. style of Yajiavalkya ~ contents of smrti - literature known to Yaj- havalkyasmrti ~ enumerates 19 authors on dharma - close agree- ment between Visnu Dh. S. and Yajfiavalkya and between Kautilya and Yaj.- Manu and फते]. differ on several points and Yaj. represents a more advanced state of thought than Manu = Manu allows brah- mana to marry sadra girl, Yaj. docs not - Manu condemp: niyoga, प}. does not ~ same case with gambling - Yj. takes Vayakasanti from Manavagrhya = Yajfhavalkyasnirti in intimate relatiy to white Yajurveda and literature appurtenant to it ~ Yijnavaya closely agrees with Paraskaragrhya ~ Dr. Jolly’s theory that Y gavalkva’s work goes back to a dharmasitra of White Yajurveda ; without foundation = date of Yajhavalkyasmrti ~ Visvaripa separted from the smrti by several cencurics — probable date of Yajnavalky between 100 ए. €, and 300 A. D. ~ Lankavatirasutra ( githas 814-811) refers to Yajnavalkyasmrti ~ Dr. Jolly thinks that Yaj. shows acqiaintance with Greek astrology ~ Dr. Jacobi’s theory that naming >£ week days after plancts fist introduced by Grecks and borrewed by Indians = these theories untenable ~ Yaj. does not menticn week days, but only the nine planets (in I. 296 ) - Yaj. does not mention the zodiacal signs ~ he arranges the naksatras from Kretika to Bharani (1. 268 ) as the Taittiriyabrahmana does ~ ‘susthe ithdaw’ ५ ४३}. explained by Visvaripa without reference to zodi from Vedic time 1 1८411 signs- rom Vedic times naksatras divided into auspicious and inausphicious- Yajnavalkya’s reference to nanakas - Yaj. regards sight of » ycllow- Synopsis of contents rxix robed people as an evil omen - Dr. Jolly’s date of 400 a. ०. for Yajiiavalkya is far too late - there is a Vrddha-Yaj., a Yooa-Y3j., and a Brhad-Yaj. - Yoga-Yajiiavalkya existed much earlier than’ 800 A. D. as Vacaspatimisra quotes a halt verse from Yoga-Yij. and Apararka quotes profuscly from him - mss. of Yoga-Yajijavalkya in Deccan College collection in 12 chapters and 495 vereses and of Brhad-Yogi-Yajnavalkya in 12 chapters and 920 verses - Yoga-Yaj- havalkyaand Brhad-Yogi-Yajnavalkya of the mss. are entirely differ- ent works - several commentaries on Yajnavalkva, viz. of Visvardpa, Vijfancsvara, Apararka and Salapani. Sec. 35 Pardsarasmrti : ... 190-196 Y4j. mentions Paragara, but the extant ParaSarasmrti is pro- bably a recast of an older smrti = Garudapurina ( chap. 107 ) gives a summary of 39 verses of ParaSarasmrti = from Kautilya it appcars there was a work of ParaSara on politics - extant Paragara in 12 cha- pters and 592 verses deals with acira and prayaécitta alone - PariSara, au ancient name ~ Parisara mentions 19 smrti writers ~ contents of the smrti — ParaSara has peculiar views = authors cited by Parasara — views of Manu frequently cited - several identical verses in Manu and Pardsara - age of PardSarasmrti between 100-500 A.D. - 2 धिता रवतत ऽपित in 12 chapters and 3000 verses ~ : tthereof - it isa late work - Vrddha Pardgara quoted by Apararka. Naradasmrti : we Pp. 196-207 between Narada and Manu - printed Narada contains 1028 verses - about {00 verses of Narada quoted in digests = Visvartipa’s and ithi’s quotations from Nirada agree with printed Narada - rina chap. 253 contains thirty verses of Naradasmrti defining igghteen titles from rnadana to prakirnaka in the same order - ixxii History of Dharmaticira Sec. 41 Kargnajini : ० Ps 223 Sec. 42Caturvimsatimata : ,. 7. 223-225 Embodies in 525 verses the opinions of 24 sages - contents ~ quoted by Mitaksari and Apararka, but not by Visvarapa and Medhatithi- probably compiled about 8th or 9th century A. D. - Bhajtoji commented upon it. Sec. 43 Daksa: ,.. Pp. 225-226 Mentioned by ४३]. ~ Visvariipa quotes him several times - Aparirka quotesa prose passage - contents of printed Daksasmrti in 220 verses. Sec. 44 Pitamaha : : ,.. 7. 226-227 Quotations from Pitamaha occur mostly on vyavahara, parti- cularly ordeals - he treats of nine ordeals - 50 chalas enumerated by Pitamaha in which king took action without a complaint - views peculiar to Pitimaha, viz. 18 lowest castes, eight constituents of hall of justice, &c.- mentions Brhaspati - flourished between 400-700 A. D. A Sec. 45 Pulastya : .., 7. 228 An expounder of dharma named in a verse of Vilha Yajna- valkya - Visvaripa, Mitiksara, Apararka cite manjverses 00 ` alnika and Sriddha - Danaratnakara citesa prose passage : Pulastya- composcd between 4th and 7th century A. D. Sec. 46 Pracetas: =, , p. 229 A dharmasastra writer mentioned by Parasara, thigh not by Yaj. - prose and verse quotations cited by Mitaksara 4d Apa- rarka - a few prose quotations in Haradatta on Gautama ail Smrti- candrika - Vrddha Pracetas and Brhat Pracetas. Sec. 47 Prajapati : ++ PP229-230 Prajapati cited as authority by Baudhayana Dh. S, ( 174. 15 ) and Vasistha ( III. 47 &c. )- they mean probably Manu 4: com- pilation in 198 verses ascribed to PrajApati - Mit. and Aparaga and others quote Prajapati on asauca, prayascitta, éraddha, ordeals and vyavahara, Synopeis of contents xrxiii Sec. 48 Marict : +6 pp. 230-231 Quoted on ahmika, agauca, Sraddha and vyavahira by Mutak- sara, Apararka and Smrticandrika - recommends writing as essential for sale, mortgage, gift and partition of immovables. Sec. 49 Yama : ... 70. 231-235 Yama quoted in Vas. Dh. 9. ( 18. 13-15 and 19. 48 ) - various printed compilations in verse ascribed to Yama — Brhad Yama in 5 chapters and 182 verses— Visvarapa and others quote about a hundred verses of Yama on all topics including vyavahara—some of these found in printed text - a few prose passages of Yama quoted by Aparirka - AnuSdsanaparva 104. 72-74 quotes gathas of Yama - some views of Yama on vyavahira set out - Brhad Yama, Laghu Yama and Svalpa Yama Sec. 50 Laugaksi : ... Pp. 235-236 Mitaksara quotes verses on Agauca and prayascitta, while Apararka quotes prose and verse passages on sathskaras, vaiSvadeva &c. Secs $ Visvamitra : | ws =p. 236 _ Named by Vrddha Yajfiavalkya - verses quoted on all topics except vyavahara. Sec. §2 Vyasa : ... 70. 236-238 Printed compilation ascribed to Vyasa in 250 verses ~ contents - about two hundred verses of Vyasa on vyavahara cited in Apararka, Smrticandrika and other works = his doctrines closely agree with those of Narada, Brhaspati and Katyayana - some of his views on vyavahara set out - flourished between 200-500 A. D. ~ Apararka cites many verses from Vy4sa on sarhskaras, Sriddha &c. - probably Vyasa the jurist is identical with the latter = Gadya-Vyisa, Vrddha- Vyasa and Brhad-Vyaisa, Mahavyasa and Laghu Vyasa. Sec. 53 Saf-tritsan-mata : ww. pp. 238-239 This was a compilation like Caturvirhsati-mata - quotations from it cited in Kalpataru, Mitaksara, Smrticandrika and Apararka - Visvardpa,and Medhatithi do not mention it- date between 700- 900 A. ee no verse quoted from this on vyavahara. rxxfv History of Dharnatasira Sec. 54 Samgraha or Smrtisamgraha : ... 7. 239-242 Quoted by Mitaksara, Apararka and Smrticandrika on sevaral topics of dharma—quotations on vyavahira are many and important for history of Hindu Law = views of Sarhgrahakara and Dharesvara coincide in many respects and were criticized by Mitaksara - date of Samhgraha between 8th and roth centuries. | Sec. $ $ Sanivarta : ,,, Pp. 242-244 Mentioned as dharmasastrakara by Yaj. ~ cited on all topics of dharma by Visvaripa, Medhatithi, Mitaksara - Apararka quotes about 200 verses ~ some of his views on vyavahara - contents of printed Sathvarta in 230 verses ~ Brhat Sathvarta and Svalpa Sathvarta. Sec. 56 Hartta: ,., Pe 244 Verses from Harita on vyavahara deserve special treatment - some of his views set out, e. g. definition of vyavahara, four aspects of vyavahara, importance of writing, defects of plaint and reply, pro- tection of long possession, when title by itself is decisive against long possession, five kinds of sureties, treatment of erring wives ~ his date between 400-700 A. D. Sec. §'7 Commentaries and Nibandhas : s+ 77. 246-247 ` DharmaéSiastra literature falls into three periods, the first from 600 B.C. to 100 A. ०. being the period of the dharmasutras and of the Manusmrti, the 2nd from 100 A. ०. to 800 A. D. of Yajnavalkya and other smrtis and third from 700 to 1800 of commentators and authors of digests ~ first part of this last period contains commen- taries ~ digests written from 11th century ~ no hard and: fast line between commentaries aud digests - these to be trea of in chronological order as far as possible. Sec. 58 Asahdya : + pph 247-251 Portion of his bhasya on Narada ( up to verse 21 0 abhyu- petyasusrisa ) published hy Dr. Jolly ~ Kalyanabhatta reWyised it- exact felationship of Kalyanabhatta’s revision to Original bot clear, but he took great liberties - Kalyanabhatta was encousfaged by „ . ॥1 Synopsia 6f contents । ९५५ KeSavabhatra ~ Vigvaripa on Yaj. (III. 263-264) mentions Asa- haya by name and quotes latter’s explanation of Gautama 22. 13. - Haralata of Aniruddha speaks of bhasya of Asahaya on Gautama - from a passage of Sarasvativilasa it appears that Asahaya commented on Manu also- Medhatithi on Manu 8. 156 quotes Asahiya - Mitaksara mentions the views of Asahaya - date of Asahaya be- tween 600-750 A, D.— a few views of Asahaya set out, viz. definition of daya, succession to Sulka of a woman, succession to a childless brahmana. Sec. 59 Bhartryajna : oe Pp. 251-252 An ancient Bhasyakara mentioned by Medhatithi (on Manu 8. 3) ~ his views cited by Trikandamandana - he wrote bhasya on Katyayana Srautasitra and Paraskara grhyasatra ~ probably he com- mented on Gautamadharmasutra - flourished about 800 A. 9. Sec. 60 Visvarapa : pp. 252-264 His commentary called Balakrida on Yaj. published at Trivan- drum - Mitiksara refers to it in introductory verscs and on Yj. (I. 80 and III. 24 ) ~ printed com. of Visvaripa on vyavahara por- tion of Yaj. is very meagre - literature referred to or quoted by Visvariipa - most of the quotations from Svayambhuva found in extant Manu, but not so those ascribed to Bhrgu ~ quotes prose passages of Brhaspati on vyavahara ~ quotes a verse of Visalaksa on politics and refers to arthagastras of Brhaspati and Uéganas - Kautilya not named, yet Vigvaripa scems to have had his work before him - Vigvariipa’s work saturated with doctrines of Parvamimamsa = quotes Sabara and Slokavartika - quotes his own karikas on Yaj. I. 7. and other places ~ his philosophical views identical with Sarhkaracirya’s- Dr. Jolly’s view that citations of Vigvaripa in the Smrticandriki on certain points not traced in the printed Balakrida examined and shown to be incorrect ~ some citations of Visvaripa’s views in Grhastharatnakara and Hemadri not found in printed text of Visva- 77108 - points in which Visvaripa and Mitiksara differ set out - Visvaripa must have flourished between 750 and 1000 A. D. = If Vigvardpa identical with Suresvara, pupil of Sankara, then he flou- rished between 800-850 = reasons for identity sct out ~ Mandana and rrrvi History of Dharmatistra Suresvara not identical ~ Bhavabhtiri and Umbeka identical, but not same as Suresvara ~ 2 digest called ViSvaripanibandha by another Visvarapa = a Visvaripasamuccaya mentioned by Raghunandana. Sec. 61 Bharuci : ... pp. 264-266 His views quoted by Mitaksara on Yaj. I. 81 and II. 124 - 8 Bharuci mentioned as an ancient teacher of ViSsistidvaita system by Ramanujacirya in his Vedarthasarhgraha ~ Bharuci the philosopher is probably identical with Bhiruci the jurist - from notices in the Sarasvativilasa Bharuci seems to have commented on the Visnu- dharmasttra - Bharuci and Mitiksara disagreed on numcrous points. Sec. 62 Srikara : ... pp. 266-268 Views of Srikara set out = first writer to propound the view that spiritual bencfit was the critcrion for judging of superior rights to succession ~ probably a Maithila - difficult to say whether he wrote a commentary or an independent digest - flourished be- twcen 800-1050 A. D. Sec. . ८1001110 : ०, = Pp. 266-275 Wrote an extensive commentary on Manu - printed bhasya corrupt in 8th, 9th and rath chapters - reference to king Madana having restored Medhatithi’s bhisya explained - Dr. Jolly says Medhatithi was a southerner - this is wrong = He wasa_ northerner and probably a Kashmirian - literature known to Medhatithi - smrtis quoted by him ~ mentions Asahaya, Bhartryajfia, Yajvan, Upadhyaya, Rju, Visnusvamin = Mcdhatithi saturated with Parva- mimamsi ~ his reference to Siriraka explained ~ Medhatithi and Sankaricdrya - peculiar views of Medhatithi set out = wrote Smrti- viveka from which he quotes verscs in his Manubhiasya ~ date of Medhatithi - flourished between 825-900 A. D. | Sec. 64 Dharesvara Bhojadeva : ... Pp. 275-279 Mitaksara (on Yaj. II. 135 and III 24) mentions: views of Dharegvara ~ Dharesvara is co be identified with king = deva of Dhara - works on numerous branches of knowledge attributed to Bhoja of Dhara such as on Poetics, Rajamrginka (on astr@nomy ) a.com. on Yogasatras - Suddhikaumudi of Govindananda / mentions Synopsis of contents rxxvif Rajamartanda of Bhoja on sradgha - Mitaksara and Dharesvara dis- agree on several points, €, g. on the question whether ownership was known from व alone, on the mcaning of ‘duhitarah’ in पवर. - on other points the two agree - Bhupalapaddhati or simply Bhapala or raja refers toa work of Bhojadeva - Bhujabalabhima of Bhoja- raja quoted in Tithitattva and Ahnikatattva of Raghunandana as dis- tinct from the Rajamartanda - Bhoja reigned from 1000 to 1055 A. D.- Dharmapradipa of Bhoja is the work of another Bhoja, who was son of Bharamalla and king of Asapura ~ it was written betwecn 1400 1600 A. D. Sec. 65 Devasvamin : ... pp. 279-281 Said by Smrticandrika to have composed a digest of smrtis ~ Narayana, commentator of Aévalayanagrhya, relies on bhasya of Devasvamin = he composed a digest on dcara, vyavahara and asauca - Smrticandrika quotes his views on the meaning of Yautaka, on the meaning of duhitarah in Y4j.,on Manu 9. 141-A Devasvamin commented on Pirvamimarsiasutras and on the Sarhkarsakinda - dificult to say whether he is identical with the writer on dharma- sastra - Devasvamin flourished about 1000-1050 A. D. Sec. 66 Jitendriya : ... 281-283 He is frequently quoted by Jimttavahana in his three works - Jitendriya held that the wives of a person whether scparated or joint succeeded to their deceased husband - no early writer other than Jimutavahana cites him = flourished between 1000-1050 A. D. Sec. 67 Balaka : -.. pp. 283-284 Mentioned by Jimatavahana, Salapani, Raghunardana = seve- ral views of Balaka sct out - flourished before 17100 A. D. Sec. 68 Balarnapa : ,,, Pp. 284-286 The opinions of Balarapa are cited in the Smrtisara and Vivada- candra - also in the Vivadacintamani - he wrote at least on vyava- hara and Kala - Balaka and Balarapa are probably identical - Bala- rlipa is certainly earlier than 1250 A. D. - Vivadacandra once speaks of ‘author of Balarapa’, suggesting thereby that Balarapa wasa work, rerviii History of Dharmatasira Sec. 69 Yogloka : ,., pp. 286-287 Known only from works of Jimatavahana and Raghunan- dana - Jimatavahana only rarely agrees with him and generally criticizes him and taunts him with being a logician merely ~ Brhad Yogloka and Svalpa Yogloka ~ Yogloka wrote at least on vyavahara and Kala - flourished between 950-1050. Sec. 70 Vijnanesvara : + pp. 287-293 The unique position of the Mitaksara on account of being es- teemed as of paramount authority by British Indian courts - the several names of the Mitiksara - quotes a host of smrti writers and six predecessors as authors of commentaries and digests - personal history of Vijfanesvara - profound student of puirvamimarhsa- date of Vijianesvara - between 1070-1100 ~ out of many commentators of the Mitiksara three famous = peculiar doctrines of the Mitaksara - seems to have been author of Asaucadagaka also = sevcral commen- taries on ASaucadasaka by Harihara, Kaghunatha and Bhattoji - Vijnanegvara not the author of Trithsat-Sloki ~ Narayana, a pupil of Vijnianesvara, wrote Vyavahara-siromani. Sec. 71 Kamadbenu : . Pp. 293-296 An ancient digest not yet discovered - quoted by Kalpataru, Haralata, and other works - Gopala, the author of Kamadhenu - Aufrecht’s view that Sambhu isthe author of Kamadhenu wrong - Sambhu is a nibandhakara on dharma cited by Smrticandrika and Hemadri - Mr. Jayasval wrongly ascribes Kamadhenu to Bhoja - probable date of Kamadhenu between 1000-1100 A. D. Sec. 72 Halayudha : ,,, ?7. 296-301 A jurist quoted by Kalpataru, Smrtisdra and other works - he flourished between 1000-1100 a. D. - he was probably a Maithila ora Bengal writer - Halayudha, author of Abhidhanaratnamala, Kavirahasya and Mrtasaijivani (com. on chandab-sitra ), is dif- ferent - he hailed from the Deccan and flourished between 940-995 A. 2. ~ another Halayudha, author of Brahmanasarvasva - personal history of this Halayudha = judge of Laksmanasena, king of Bengal - Halayudha’s literary activity between 1175-1200 .A. D. = another Halayudha, author of Prakasa, commentary on the graddhakalpasatra of Katyayana - he flourished between 1150 and 1500. ०, Synopsis of contents xxxix Sec. 73 Bhavadevabhatta : ... Pp. 301-306 Author of Vyavahiaratilaka - also of Karmanusthanapaddhati or Dagakarmapaddhati - contents of latter - another work is Prayaé- cittaniripana - light on personal history of Bhavadeva in inscription at Bhuvanesvara - he was a great builder of temples and tanks - flourished between 1050-1150 A. D. - Bhavadeva and Pradipa - other authors on dharmaSastra named Bhavadeva. Sec. 74 Prakasa : -. Pp. 306-308 An ancient work on vyavahiara, dina, ériddha &c. - whether an independent digest is doubtful - was probably a commentary on Yajnavalkyasmrti composed between 1000-1100 A. 9. - Maharnava- prakasa, Smrtimaharnava or Maharnava quoted by Heméadri are all names for the same work - probably Prakasa and Smrtimaharnava- prakasa are identical. Sac. 75 Parijata: ... pp. 308-309 Several works on dharma end in Pirijata- an ancient work called Parijata quoted by Kalpataru - it dealt with at least vyavahara, dana - composed between 1000-1125 A. D. Sec. 76 Govindaraja vs PP. 309-315 Wrote com. on Manusmrti anda work called Smptimaifjari - personal history of Govindaraja - he is not to be identified with king Govindacandra of Benares - Kullika frequently criticizes Govinda- raja - contents of Smrtimafijari - date of Govindaraja between 1040-1140 A. D. Sec. 77 The Kalpataru of Laksmidhara : oe Pp. 315-318 An extensive work which exercised great influence over early Mithila and Bengal writers - personal history of Laksmidhara - work divided into fourteen kandas - their arrangement - contents of vyava- hara, rajadharma and dina kandas - date of Kalpataru between | I100-1150 A. D. - Candesvara borrowed extensively from Kalpataru. Sec. 78 Jimatavahana : ... pp. 318-327. He is first of the three great Bengal writers on dharmasastra - Only three works known, Kalaviveka, Vyavaharamatrka and Daya- xi History of Dharmatastri _ bhaga - these three parts of a projected digest called Dharmaratna - object and contents of Kalaviveka - works quoted in Kalaviveka - profound study of Parvamimarnsa displayed therein - contents of Vyavahara-miatrka - works quoted in it- Dayabhaga most famous of his works and of paramount authority in Bengal on Hindu Law - contents of Dayabhaga ~ doctrines peculiar to Dayabhaga - authors and works named in the Dayabhaga - personal history of Jimutava- hana - his date - divergent views - literary activity lies between 1090-1130 A. 9. - Did Jimitavahana know the Mitaksara ¢ Sec. 79 Apararka : spp. 328-334 Wrote a voluminous commentary on Y4jnavalkyasmrti - authors and works quoted by Apararka - studiously avoids naming his predecessors who were writers of digests ~ peculiar views of Apararka - evidence to show that Apararka knew the Mitiksara - date of Apararka - Simrticandrika criticizes Apararka - Apararka was a Silahara prince - inscriptions of Silaharas - commentary written about 1125 A. D. Sec. 80 2’radipa : s+ PP. 334-335 An independent work on vyavahara, Sraddha, suddhi and other topics - betwern 1100-1150 A, D. Sec. 81 Smptyarthasara of Sridhara : oe PP. 3357337 Contents of ~ personal history of Sridhara - authors and works rclied on as authorities - Sridhara probably composed another larger work - date between 1150-1200 A. D. Sec. 82 Aniruddha : ... PP. 337-340 An carly and eminent Bengal writer - wrote Haralata and Pi- trdayita alias Karmopadesinipaddhati - contents of Haralata and of Pitrdayita - authors and works named in them = personal history of Aniruddha - flourished in 3rd quarter of 12th century. Sec. 83 Ballalasena : vee PDP. 340- 341 Compiled at least four works, Acdrasagara, Adbhuthsagara, Danasigara, Pratisthasagara - subjects dealt with in Danatsigara - Adbhutasagara left incomplete and finished by his son 7 ksmana- sena - Danasagara valuable for checking the text of the Auranas - Synopsie of contents ‘xii literary activity in 3rd quarter of 12th century, as Danasigara was composed in sake rogr - Aniruddha was guru of Ballalasena. Sec. 84 Harihara : ' ,.. PP. 341-343 A writer on vyavahara- he flourished before 1300 a, 9, - Harihara composed commentary on Paraskaragrhyasitra - this _Ha- rihara flourished between 1150 and 1250 a. 9. = whether he was pupil of Vijnanesvara -a Harihara comments on Asaucadasaka - jurist Harihara probably identical with bhasyakara of Paraskara - several Hariharas known. Sec. 85 Smrticandrika of Devanuabbatta : ... PP. 3437347 An extensive digest - printed text deals with ‘samskara, Acira, vyavahiara, Sraddha and asauca - he wrote on prayascitta also - name variously written - profusely quotes Smrtikaras, 600 verses of Katyayana alone on vyavahara being quoted - authors and works named ~ author a southerner = contents ~ points in which Mitak- sara and Smrticandrika differ - date between 1150 and 1225 A. D.- several works named Smrticandrika. Sec. 86 Haradatta : ००, 7} 347-353 His fame high as a commentator ~ his Anakula on Apastamba- erhya, Anavila on Asvalayanagrhya, Mitaksara on Gautamadharma- sutra, Ujjvala on Apastambadharmasitra and a com. on the Apas- tambamantrapatha ~ explains grammatical peculiarities at great length = he was a southerner = a great devotce of Siva - tradition says Rudradatta and Haradatta are identical = Haradatta on widow’s right of succession - interesting information from Haradatta ~ date, a difficult problem = between 1100-1300 A. Haradatta, commen- taror of dharmasastra works, is identical with Haradatta, author of Padamanjari - Haradatticarya mentioned in Bhavisyottarapurana and Sivarahasya is probably the Haradatticarya cited in Sarvadarsanasarh- gtaha ~ Hariharataratamya and Caturvedatatparyasarngraha are works ascribed to Haradatta. Sec. 87 Hemadri : ० 7. 354-349 He and Madhava the two outstanding daksinatya writers on dharmagastra ~ his Caturvarggciasimeminig.a huge work of an ency- ४, D. F xifi History ef Dharmatastra clopedic character = projected to contain five sections = printed parts comprise vrata, dana, Sraddha and kala-Hemadri a profound student of Parvamimarsé - predecessors named by him ~ personal history of Hemadri- his connection with Yadavas of Devagiri- genealogy of the Yadavas - Caturvargacintdmani composed about 1270 A. D.- com. on Saunaka’s Pranavakalpa and a Sriddhakalpa according to Katyayana are attributed to him - Vopadeva, a friend and a protegee of Hemadri - references to Hemadn’s work in grants. Sec. 88 Kullakabhatta : ,.. 77. 359-363 A famous commentator of Manusmrti - he drew largely upon Medhatithi’s bhasya and Govindaraja- Sir William Jones on Kullaka - authors and works quoted by him - personal history - he -wrote Smrtiviveka, of which Agaucasagara, Sraddhasagara and Vi- vadasagara were parts - contents of Sraddhasagara - this is full of Parvamimamsa discussions - date of पापा uncertain - flourished between 1150-1300 A. D. Sec. 89 Sridatta Upadhyaya : wee PP. 363-365 One of the earliest nibandhakaras on dharmasastra from Mithila - contents of Aciradarga and authors quoted therein - his Candogah- nika - his Pitrbhakti - authors quoted in it - his’ Sriddhakalpa - his Samayapradipa - contents of the work - flourished between 1200- 1300 A. D., probably about 1275-1300 a. n. - another Sridattamisra, a Maithila writer, who flourished towards end of 14th century. Sec. 90 Candesvara : ,.„ pp. 366-372 Most prominent among Maithila nsbandhakaras - compiled ex- tensive digest called Smrtiratnakara in seven sections on dana, krtya vyavahara, suddhi, puja, vivada and grhastha - contents of Krtya- ratnakara, Grhastharatnakara, Danaratnakara, Vivadaratnakara and other ratnakaras- he alsc compiled Krtyacintamani, the Rajaniti- ratnakara, Danavakyavali and Sivavakyavali - contents of Rajaniti- ratnakara - he drew principally upon five viz, Kamadhenu, Kalpa- taru, Parijata, Prakasa and Halayudha - authors and works quoted - personal history of Candeévara - genealogy - he was minister of Harisithhadeva of Mithila and later of Bhavega and weighed himself against gold in 1314 A. ४, - literary activity between 1314-1370 A. D. Synopsis of contents xliif Sec. 91 Harinatha : ... PPo 372-374 Author cia digest called Smrtisdra - names numerous autho- rities - contents - flourished in first half of r4th century - several works styled Smrtisara. Sec. 92 Madhavacarya : ,, 7}, 374-381 The most eminent of daksinatya writers on dharmaéastra - two works on dharmaSastra deserve special notice, viz. Parasara Madha- viya and Kalanirnaya - authors and works quoted in them - contents of Kalanirnaya - family and personal history of Madhavacarya - his - brother Sdyana - Madhava founded Vijayanagar in 1335 A. 9. - pedigree of Vijayanagar kings - the two works were composed be- tween 1340-1360 a, D.- literary activity of Madhava Vidyaranya between 1330-1385 a. ए. - Madhava Vidyaranya different from Madhava mantrin who was governor of Banavase and Goa - several commentaries of Kalanirnaya., Sec. 93 Madanapala and Visvesvarabhatta : os 381-389 Four works attributed to Madanapala, a great patron of learn- ing like Bhoja, viz. Madanaparijata, Smrtimaharnava or Madanama- harnava, Tithinirnayasara and Smptikaumudi - Madanaparijata really composed by Visvesvarabhatta - contents of Madanaparijata - Maharnava ascribed to Mandhata, a son of Madanapala - principal topics of the work - Tithinirnayasira - Smrtikaumudi deals with dharmas of Sadras - contents - all the above four works probably composed by VisveSvarabhatta - Subodhini, com. on Mitaksara by VisveSvarabhatta is a leading authority in Benares school of Hindu Law - pedigree of Madanapala- other works on astronomy and medicine attributed to Madanapala ~ date of Madanapala, between 1300-1400 A. D. - Madanavinodanighantu composed in 1431 of Vi- krama era i. 6, 1375 A. D. Sec. 94 Madanaratna : + 0). 389-393 An extensive digest on dharmasastra, variously styled - seven uddyotas of it on samaya, dcara, vyavahara, prayascitta, dana, suddht, santi - contents of uddyotas on samaya, dana, and Santi - work composed under Madanasithhadeva, son of Saktisirnhadeva - pedigree of the family - Madanasishha called together four learned men, tliv History of Dharmaéastra Ratnakara, Gopinatha, Visvaniatha and Gangadhara, and entrusted composition of work to them - date of Madanaratna between 1350- 1500, probably about 1425-50. Sec. 95 Snlapani : vs PP» 393-396 His authority in Bengal is next only to Jimitavahana’s - Dipa- kaliki, commentary on Yajfiavalkya, his earliest work - holds archaic views on inheritance- his Smrtiviveka, of which fourteen parts ending in ‘ viveka’ arc known - Durgotsavavivcka is amongst his latest works - Sraddhaviveka is his most famous work = authors and works named by him - personal history little known - exact age uncertain - flourished between 1375-1460 A. D. Sec. 96 Rudradhara : w+ Pp. 396-398 A Maithila writer - wrote Sriddhaviveka, Suddhiviveka, Vra- tapaddhati and Varsakrtya, the first being the most famous of his works - flourished between 1425-1460 A. D. Sec. 97 Misarumisra : .-. pp. 398-399 Wrote Vivadacandra - contents - work composed under orders of queen Lachimadevi, wife of prince Candrasithha of Mithila - flourished about 1450 A. D. Sec. 98 Vacaspatunisra ; ... 77. 399-405 The foremost nibandhakira of Mithila - his Vivadacintamani of paramount authority on matters of Hindu Law in Mithila -a voluminous writer - several works of his styled Cintamani on acira, ahnika, krtya, tirtha, dvaita, niti, vivida, vyavahara, Suddhi, stidracara, Sriddha - works named by him -a group of his works ends in ‘ nirnaya’ viz. Tithinirnaya, Dvaitanirnaya, Mahadananir- naya, Vivadanirnaya, Suddhinirnaya, - he also contemplated writing seven works styled Maharnava on kytya, व्रताय, vivada, vyavahara, dana, suddhi and pitryajfia - other works of his- Sraddhakalpa or Pitrbhaktitarangini his last work - personal history of Vacaspati - connected with king Bhairava and his son Ramabhadra - genealogy of Kamesvara kings - Vacaspati flourished between 1425-1480 a. D. - philosopher Vicaspati different. Sec. 99 Nerstthaprasida : -.. Pp. 406-410 An encyclopxdic work - divided into 12 sections called ‘sara’- the author’s name variously given as Dalapati or Daladhiga - personal Synopeis of contents xlv history - writers and works named - contents of the work - flourish- ed between 1400-1510 A. D., probably about 1490 to 1510, Sec. 100 Prataparudradeva : ... 410-414 He was king of the Gajapati dynasty in Orissa and composed Sarasvativilasa - pedigree and history of family - purpose and con- tents of Sarasvativilasa -works quoted - composed between 1497-1539 A. D. ~ Foulke’s theory about date not acceptable = the Pratapamar- tanda or Praudhapratapamartanda of Prataparudradeva. Sec. 101 Govindananda : -. PP. 414-415 Author of Danakaumudi, Suddhikaumudi, Sriddhakaumudi and Varsakriyakaumudi anda com. called Arthakaumudi on the Suddhidipika of Srinivasa and a com. Tattvarthakaumudi on the Prayascittaviveka of Salapani- literary activity between 1500-1540 A. D. Sec. 102 Kaghunandana : ,,. PP. 416-419 Last great writer of Bengal on dharmasastra - wrote an encyclo- paedia called Smrtitattva in 28 sections - names over 300 authors and works - 28 tattvas enumerated ~ other works besides these 28- wrote also com. on Dayabhaga - personal history - authors and works quoted - flourished between 1500- 1575. Sec. 103 Nérayanabhatta : .., Pp. 419-421 The most famous member of the Bhatta family of Benares - personal history - born in 1513 A. D. - among his works are Antye- stipaddhati, Tristhalisetu, Prayogaratna, and com. on verses of Kalamadhava - literary activity between 1540-1570 A. D. - Narayana author of Dharmapravrtti different. Sec. 104 Togarananda : ,., PP. 421-423 An encyclopaedia on dharma, several parts of which were call- ed Saukhya - authors and works quoted - personal history of Todar- amalla - he died in 1589. Sec. 105 Nandapandita : ,.. 00. 423-432 A voluminous writer on dharmaégastra - author of com. on Paragarasmrti and on the Mitaksara of VijianeSsvara - his Sraddha- र History of Dharmatastra ` kalpalata - his Suddhicandrika, a com. on the Sadasiti - his work styled Smrtisindhu and a summary of it styled .Tattvamukta- vali - his Vaijayanti, a com. on Visnudharmasitra - his agreements and disagreements with Mitaksara - Dattaka-mimarhsa, his most famous work - it is regarded by British Indian courts and Privy Council as standard work on adoption - his views set out - personal history - he had various patrons - his thirteen works - Vaijayanti composed in 1623 A. D. Sec. 104 Kamalakarabhatta : vee PP. 432-437 Grandson of Nardyanabhatta - personal history - composed more than 22 works on several 5051795 - about a dozen works on dharmagastra, the Nirnayasindhu, Sudrakamalakara and Vivada- tandava being most famous - he meant all the works on dharma- SAstra to be parts of a digest called Dharmatattva - contents of Purta- kamalakara, Santiratna, Vivadatandava, Sadrakamalakara and Nirna- yasindhu ~ the last, one of his earliest works composed in 1612 A. D. and so his literary activity lies between 1610-1650 A. D. Sec. 107 Nilakanthabhatta : ... pp.438-440 Grandson of Nariyanabhatta and son of Sankarabhatta - perso- nal history - his work Bhagavantabhaskara divided into twelve maytkhas composed in honour of Bhagavantadeva, Bundella chief- tain-also wrote Vyavaharatattva-estimate of his qualities asa writer - his Vyavaharamayakha is of paramount authority on Hindu Law in Gujerat, Bombay Island and North Konkan - his literary activity ~ flourished between 1610-1650 - divergence of views between the cousins Kamalakara and Nilakantha.. Sec. 108 The Viramitrodays of Mitramiira : ves 00. 440-446 Viramitrodaya, a vast digest composed by Mitramigra on all topics of dharmasgastra - sections called prakdgas - contents of the printed prakasas on Laksana, ahnika, vyavahara, tirtha, puja, sarh- skara, rajaniti ~ highly controversial work = generally follows Vijna- neSvara, but at times severely criticizes him = a work of high autho- rity in Benares school of modern Hindu Law - Mitramigra also wrote a commentary on Yajnavalkyasmrti = personal history = account Synopsis of contents xlvii and pedigree of his patron Virasirhha ~ meaning of title ‘Viramitro- daya’ ~ his literary activity lay in the first half of the 17th century. Sec. 109 Anantadeva : ,,, PD. 447-453 Composed a vast digest called Smrtikaustubha on sarhskara, acdra, rajadharma, dana, utsarga, pratistha, tithi and sarhvatsara - Samskdrakaustubha is most popular work - contents of Sarnskara- kaustubha - portion of it on adoption called Dattakadidhiti - sum- mary of important views on adoption - contents of Abdadidhiti and Rajadharmakaustubha - pedigree of his patron’s family - Anantadeva wrote at command of Baz Bahadurcandra - Anantadeva was great~ grand-son of Ekanatha, a great Marathi poet and saint = his younger brother Jivadeva ~ literary activity between 1645~1695. Sec. 110 Nagojsibhatta : ... Pp. 453-456 His learning of an enclyclopaedic character - wrote standard works on grammar, dharmasastra, yoga, &c. - total number of works about 30 - wrote about ten works on dharmasistra - personal history ~ his patron Rama of the Bisen family ~ pedigrees of Bhatfoji Diksita and Nagoji’s connection with Bhattoji- literary activity between 1700-1750 A. D. Sec. 111 Balakrsna or Balambhatta : ,.. Pp. 456-462 Laksmivyakhyana or Balambhatti is a com. on the Mitaksara of Vijnanegvara - Balambhatti favours latitudinarian views about the ‘rights of women = estimate of Balambhatti according to judicial decisions - author of Balambhatti somewhat of an enigma - intro- ductory verses about the authoress Laksmidevi - real author Bala- krsna, son of Vaidyanatha Payagunda, who was a pupil of Nagoji- bhatta - Balakrsna also wrote Upakrtitattva, Dharmasastrasathgraha - Vaidyanatha, the commentator of Alarnkara works, different from Vaidyanatha, Payagunda, the father of Balambhatta - flourished ०६ tween 1730-1820 A. D. Sec. 110 Kasinatha Upadhyaya : ... pp. 463-465 Composed extensive work called Dharmasindhusara - leading work in Deccan now on religious matters ~ subjects of the work - zivili History of Dharmasastra "personal history - his other works - Dharmasindhu composed in 1790°91 ^. D. Sec. 113 Jagannatha Tarkapaicanana : ,.. pp. 465-466 Among digests compiled under the British the Vivadabhan- garnava of Jagnnatha is the most famous - Colcbrooke translated it in 1796 - topics treated of in it - Jagannatha died in 1806. Sec. 114 Conclusion : pp. 466-467 Motives actuating writers on dharmasastra- their contribu- tion to culture - their defects - their admirable and useful work. HISTORY OF DHARMASASTRA. 1. Meaning of Dharma. Dharma is one of those Sanskrit words that defy all attempts at an exact rendering in English or any other tonguc. That word has passed through several vicissitudes. In the hymns of the Reveda the word appears to be used either as an adjective or a noun (in the form dharman, generally neuter ) and occurs at least fifty-six times therein. It is very difhcult to say what the exact meaning of the word dharma was in the most ancient period of the vedic language. The word is clearly derived from root dy (to uphold, to support, to nourish). In a few passages, the word appears to be used in the sense of ‘ up- holder or supporter or sustainer’ as in Re. 1. 187.1' and X. 92.22. In these two passages and in Rg. X. 21.3) the word dharma is clearly masculine. In all other cases, the word is cither ~uviously in the neuter or presents a form which mav ४५. either masculine or neuter. In most cases the meaning of dharman is ‘ religious ordinances or rites’ asin Reg. J. 22. 18, V. 26. 6, भा. 43. 24, 1X. 64.1 &c. The refrain ‘ tani dharmani prathamanyasan’ occurs in Rg. I. 164, 43 and 50, X. 90. 16. Similarly we have the words ‘ prathama dharma’ (the primeval or first ordinances ) in Rg. III. 17. 1. and X. 56. 3 and the words ‘sanata dharmani (ancient ordinances ) occur in Rg. III. 3. 1. In some passages this sense of ^ religious rites’ would not suit the context, e. g. in IV. 53. 34, ४, 63. 75, VI. 70. (५, VIL. 89. 57. In these passages the meaning scems to be ‘fixed principles or rulesof conduct’. In the Vajasaneyasarhhita the above senses of the word dharman are found and in Il. 3 and V. 27 we have the words ‘ dhruvena dharmana’. In the same Samhita | = ee प स) त ` ष ए a ^> ~ ०७७ मक 1 पितु नु स्तो महो Alor areas | This occurs in शरङ्कयजर्वेद 34.7 9 इमम॑जस्पाममये' अकृण्वत धमौण॑ममिं विद्धस्य साध॑नम्‌ । सवे धर्माणं आसते जुहूमिं : सिश्चतीरिव । 4 आप्रा रजसि दिव्यानि पार्थिवा श्लोकं देवः रणते स्वाय धमणे | $ धर्मणा मिन्नावहणा विपश्विता बता रक्षेथे असुरस्य मायया । 6 areal वहैणस्य धर्मणा विष्कमिते अजरे मूरिरेतसा । 7 aftef य्व धमो' युयोपिम मा नस्तस्मादेनसो देव Ties: ah- + History of Dharmasistra the form ‘dharmah’ (from dharma ) becomes frequent, €. g. X. 29, XX. 9. The Atharvaveda contains many of those verses of the Reveda yin which the word dharman occurs, e. g. VI. 51. 3 ( acittya a tava dharma yuyopima ), VII, 5. 1 ( Yajiena yajhamayajanta ) 1.27. 5 (trint pada vicakrame). In Al. 9.17 the word ‘dharmah’ 8 to be used in the sense of ^ merit acquired by the performance religious rites’. In the Aitareya-brahmana, the word dharma seems to be used in an abstract sense”, viz. ‘ the whole body of re- uBIOUs duties’. In the Chandogya-upaniyad'? (2. 23) there is npr ess ving esi i won dm of dharma, one is (constituted by) sacrifice, study and charity (i. ५. the stage of house-holder ) ; the second ( 8 constituted by ) austerities (i. ८. the stage of being a hermit ); the third is the brabmacarin dwelling in the house of his teacher and himself stay with the family of his teacher till the last; all making, = ` + 10 the worlds of meritorious men; one who abides these 91181, “attains immortality. It will be scen that in this firmly in brabn र as ei en ee passage the word ‘ dhav. 0 ध व i” duties of the agramas. The foregoing brief 1 how the word dharma passed through several transitions of Meany and how ultimately its most prominent significance came to be ‘the privileges, duties and obligations of a man, his standard of conduct as a member of the Aryan community, as a member of one of the castes, as a person in a particular stage of life.’ It is in this sense that the word seems to be used in the well-known exhortation to the pupil con- rained in the ‘Taittirrya-upanigad (1. 71) ‘speak the truth, practise ( your own ) dharma &e? Trisin the same sense that the Bhaga- vadgita uses the word dharma 1) the oft-quoted verse ` svadbarme nidhanam sreyah.” The word iscmployed in this sense in the dharmagasira literature. ‘The Manusmrti ( 1. 2) tells us that the nie ~ eee oe ee ee ae ee ate ~ 8 ऋतं सत्यं aT UF अमो धर्मश्च कमं च । मूते भविष्यदुच्छिषटे वाय GRAIG बट ॥ 9 धम॑स्य गोक्ाजर्नति तमभ्युरछषटनेरवविदभिषेकष्यननेनयाच।मिभन्नयेत । ए. बा. णा. 17; The form dharman occurs vide also a similar passage at A. Br, VIII. 13. huvrihi compounds, e.g. in the Upanisads and in classical Sanskrit in Ba अनुच्छित्तिषमौ ५ the चुहृद्‌रण्यकोपनिषद्‌ and the ७०५८५ धर्मादनिच्‌ केवकात्‌ (षा. V, 4. 124). | 10 तयी quegear यज्ञोध्ययने दानमिति प्रथमस्तप एवेति द्वितीयो बहमचायोचार्थकुलवासी त॒तीयोत्यन्तमा्मानमाचायंकुलेवसाद्यन्‌ सर्वं एते पुण्यलोका भवन्ति बह्मसंस्थोमतत्वमेति । Vide वेद्‌न्तसूज III. 4. 18-80 ‘or a discussion of this passage. : 1, Meaning of Dharma 3 sages requested Manu to impart instruction in the dharmas of all the varnas. The Yajnyavalkya-smriti (I. 1) employs it in the same sense. In the Tantra-Vartika!! also we are told that all the dharma- siitras are concerned with imparting instruction in the dharmas of varuas and asramas. Medhatithi commenting on Manu ५१ that the expounders of smrtis dilate upon dharma as five-fold, ९.1 arnadbarina, asrama-dhaima, varnasrama-dbarma, naimitttkadbar na (such as prayascitta ) and gunadharma (the duty of a crowned king, whether Ksatriva or not, to protect )*. It is in this sense that the word dharma will be taken in this work. Numerous topics are comprehended under the title dharmasastra, but in this work prominence will be given to works on dcara and vyavabara ( law and administration of justice ) It would be interesting to recall a few other definitions of dharma. Jaimini®3 defines dharma as ‘a desirable goal or result that is indicated by injunctive (Vedic) passages.” The word dharma would mean such rites as are conducive to happiness and are enjoined by Vedic pas- ages. The Vaisesikastitra' defines dharma as ‘that from which results happiness and final beatitude.’ There are several other more or less one-sided definitions of dharma such as ‘ahithsa paramo dharmah’ ( AnuSasanaparva 115. 1. ), ‘anrsarhsyam paro dharmah’ (Vanaparva 373. 76), ‘acarah paramo dharmah ’( Manu I. 108 ). Harita defin- ed dharma as ‘ $rutipramanaka's* ( based on revelation ). In the Buddhist sacred books the word dharma has several senses. It often means the whole teaching of Buddha (S.B.E. Vol. X. ‰. रशणा). Another meaning of dharma peculiar to the Buddhist system is ‘an element of existence, i. €. of matter, mind and 01८6516." The present work will deal with the sources of dharma, their contents, their chronology and other kindred matters. As the == = = =, 14 ‹ सवधमंसूज्ाणां वणश्रमधमापद्शित्वात्‌ › ए. 297 12 हरदत्त ० गा. ध. सू 19. land गोवन्द्राज ० मनु 2.25 give the same fivefold classification. 13 चोदुनालक्षणोा्थो घमः \ प्‌. मी. सू. 1. 1.2. 14 अथातो धम ष्याख्यास्यामः | यतोभ्यद्यनिःश्रयससिदः स धमः । वेरेषिकसूच्र. 1 अथातो धम व्याख्यास्यामः । श्रुतिप्रमाणका धमः । श्रतिश्च दिवधा र्वादकी तान्खिकी च | quoted by PET on मनु, 2.1. 16 Vide Dr. Stcherbatsky’s monograph on ‘ the central conception of Buddh- ism’ (1923 ) p. 73. * ^~" ~ ~~ ~~ ~--- ~~ - ~ ~~ ~~~ 4 Flistory of Dharmasistra material is vast and the number of works is extremely large, only a few selected works and some important authors will be taken up for detailed treatment. More space will be devoted to comparatively early works. 2. Sources of Dharma. The Gautamadharmasttra’? says ‘the Veda is the source of dharma and the tradition and practice of those that know it (the Veda ).’ So Apastamba'® says ‘ the authority (for the dharmas ) is the consensus of those that know dharma and the Vedas.’ Vide also the Vasisthadharma-sitra’? CI. 4-6). The Manusmrti?e lays down five different sources of dharma ‘the whole Veda is ( the fore- most ) source of dharma and ( next ) the tradition and the practice of those that know it (the Veda ); and further the usages of virtuous men and self-satisfaction.’ Yajnhavalkya?! declares the sources ina similar strain ‘ the Veda, traditional lore, the usages of good men, what is agreeable to one’s self and desire born of due deliberation—- this is traditionally recognised as the source of dharma.’ These passages make it clear that the principal sources of dharma were con- ceived to be the Vedas, the Smrtis, and customs. The Vedas do not contain positive precepts (vidhis) on matters of dharma in a con- nected form ; but they contain incidental references to various topics that fall under the domain of dharmasastra as conceived in later times. Such information to be gathered from the Vedic Literature is not quite as meagre as is commonly supposed. In another place?? I have brought together about fifty Vedic passages that shed a flood of light on marriage, the forms of marriage, the different kinds of sons, adoption of a son, partition, inheritance, sraddha, stridhana. To take only a few examples. That brotherless maidens found it difficult to secure husbands is made clear by several Vedic passages. 17 वेदो धममरलमू । तदा च स्म्तिशीले । गो. ध. चू. 1. 1-9. 18 धम॑ज्ञसमयः प्रमाणं वेदश्च । आप. ध. सु, 1.1. 1. 2. 19 र तिस्म॒तिविहितो धमः । तदलामे शिष्टाचारः प्रमाणम्‌ । शिष्टः पृनरकामात्मा । 20 वेदैससिलो धममूलं स्मतिरलि TATA । आचारश्येव साभूनामात्मनस्तुष्टिरष च ॥ मनु- स्मावे Il. 6. ५ श्रतिः स्मनिः सद्‌; चारः स्वस्य च AT । सम्यकूसङकल्पजः कामो भर्ममूलमिदं स्मृतमु ॥ याज्ञ. 1. 7. 92 Vide JBBRAS. vol, XXVI (1922), pp. 57-82, न~ ~^ - ~~ Ly = = = CE 2. Sources of Dharma 5 ‘Like (a woman ) growing old in her parents’ house, - goray to thee as Bhaga from the scat common to all?3’. Vide also ति I 124. 73 IV. $, $ and Atharvaveda I. 17.1 and Nirukta III. 4-5) | These passages constitute the basis of the rules of the dharmasitras and the Yajfiavalkya-smrti against marrying a brotherless maiden?'. “his bar against marrying a brotherless maiden seems to have been ५ € to the fear that such. a girl might be an appointed daughter (putrike ti) and that a son born of such a girl would be affiliated to his motherxs, father. This custom of putrika is an ancient onc and is alluded ८ ` in the Rgveda, according to Yaska?’. Reveda X. 85 15 a very in- teresting hymn as regards marriage ; verses from it are used even to this day in the marriage ritual.7° It shows that in the remote Vedic age the marriage rite resembled in essence the Brahma form as des- cribed in the Dharmasttras and Manu.?* But the purchase ofa bride (i. e. what is called Asura marriage in later literature ) was not unknown in the Vedic age. A passage of the Maitriyaniyasamhita CI. 10. 11 ) is referred to in the Vasisthadharmastitra?®> in this con- nection, viz. ‘she who being purchased by the husband’. The Gandharva form is hinted at in the words?” ‘when 2 bride 15 fine- looking and well adorned, she seeks by herself her friend among men’. The importance of the aurasa son was felt even in the remote Vedic ages. ‘Another ( person ) born of another's loins, though very pleasing, should not be taken, should not be even thought of (as to be taken in adoption’ Y. The Taittiriya-saihita (VI. 3. 10. 5) propounds the well-known theory of the three ततऽ. The story 23 अमाजूरिव पित्रोः सच। सती संभानाद्‌ा सदृसस्स्वामिये भग॑म्‌ । ऋष्वेद्‌ 17. 17, 7. ४५ अरोगिणीं भ्रात्‌मतीमसमाना्षगःजज।म्‌ । याज्ञ, 1. 59; vide also मनु 111. 11. 25 Vide Rgveda 111. 31. 1, and Nirukta ITT. 4. 26 e. g. the verse aoe सं।भगत्वाय ( wae X. 85. 36). Vide जाप, ग.सू II. 4. 14, a7 गो. ध. सू IV. 4; ay, घ, सू. 1.11. £ जाप. ध्‌. सू TY. 5. 11. 17; मनु II]. 27. 28 वसिष्ठधर्मसूश्र {. 36-37; note भाप. ध. स. II. 6. 13. 11 where the word ‘purchase’ is tried to be explained away and also प मी सू VI. 1. 15. (क्रयस्य ध्ममान्न- त्वम्‌ › ४ भद्रा वधू्मधनि areal: सयं स। मित्रं वनुते जनेः चित्‌ । aE X. 27. 12. 30 नदि ममायाशणः स्रवो अन्योदर्यो मन॑स मन्तवा उ । waa VIL 5. 8. 31 जायमानो Fanaa जायते बरह्मचर्येण ऋषिभ्यो यज्ञेन देवेभ्यः भरजया पितुभ्यः | History of Dharmatistra of Sunahgepa fa the Aitareya-brahmana ( VII. 3 ) suggests that a son ॥ Yadopted even when there was an aurasa son. The Taittitiva-sdshihta (VIT. 1. 8. 1) tells the story of Atri who gave an f sory in adoption to Aurva. ‘The Ksetraja son of the Dharma- stitras ys often referred to in. the earliest Vedic literature. ‘ What ( sagfificer ) invites vou ( Asvins ) in his house to a bed 45 a widow doef a brother-in-law or a young damsel her lover. The Taittiri- yasfimbhita makes it clear that a father could distribute his wealth anong his sons during his own Jife time । Manu divided his property among his sons’ & ८.३; Another passage of the same Saiibita seems to suggest that the eldest son took the whole of the father’s wealth ‘therefore people establish their eldest son with wealth "+. Even in the Vedic ages the son excluded the daughter from inheritance ‘a son born of the body does not give the paternal wealth to ( his ) sister}. A passage of the Vatttiriva-sarhnhita is relicd upon by ancient and modern writers on dharmasastra for the exclusion of women in general from inheritance ‘therefore women being destitute of streneth take no portion and speak more weakly than even a low person3®, The Reveda culogises the stage of studenthood and the Satapathabrahmana speaks of the duties of the Brahmacarin such as not partaking of wine and offering every evening a 5411140 10 11147. The ॐ को वीं शयत्रा विधन॑व द्वरे मर्य न योषां BoA सधस्थ आ । Hag उ. 40. £. 33 मनुः पुत्रेभ्य दायं व्यभजत्‌ | न. सं IIJ.1 9 4. This 0288886 15 relied upon by aq. ध, a, 11. 6. 14. 11 and gy, घ, सू. If. 2. 2. 34 नस्भाञ्ज्य् पत्र धनन निरवसाययन्नि | त. स, Il. 5. 2. 7. This passage is referred to by ang, ध. सू IT. 6.14.12 and ay. ध, सू 1.2. 5. 35 “न जामये लान्वो' रिक्थम।रक" Hag LIT. 31. 2. Vide निर्क्त 11. 5 for explana- tions of this verse. ॐ तस्मात्कियो निगन्द्रिया अदायादीरापि पापत्वं उपास्तितरं वदन्ति । ते. सं. VI. 5. & 2. Here tha portion spoken of 18 really that of the soma beverage. Vide बो. ध, सू II. 2. 47 for reliance on this passage and also हरदत्त ( on आप. ध. सू. Ii. 6. 14. 1 ) and स्षरस्वर्त।विद्ासं (९९. 21 and 336). Vide also grqquygqy, IV. 4. 2.13 for a similar passage. 3 mead च॑रति वध्वः स देवानां भवत्येकमङ्गम्‌ । HIG >. 109. 5. The qaqenm, 4 ( XI, 5. 4, 18 ) reads ‘ तदहः । न बरह्मचारी सन्मध्वश्नीयात्‌,. Compare मनु IT- 177. Vide MATa, XI. 3. 3, 1 for samsdh. । 2, Sources of Dharma 7 Taittiriya-sarhhita (VI.2. 8. 5) relates} how Indra consigrred Yaits to wolves (or dogs) and how Prajapati prescribed a Prayascitts for him [he Satapathabrahmana speaks of the king and the learned Br-ahmana as the upholder of the sacred ordinances.39 The Taittiriyasamhita says ‘therefore the Suadra is not fit for sacriticet?.’ The Aitigreya Brahmana tells us that when a king or other worthy guest cor people offer a bull or a cowt!. The Satapatha-brahmana speaks ot ८५८ study 15 yazéa and the Taittiriya-aranyaka‘? enumerates प. five yajias, which area prominent feature of the Manusmrti. Thi ® Reveda eulogises the vifts of a cow, horses, gold and clothes# \nother passage of the Revedatt ( thow art like a prapa in a desert ) is relied upon by Sabara on Jaimini (I. 3. 2) and by Visvarapa on Yajnavalkya as ordaining the maintenance of prapas ( places where water is distributed to travellers). The Reveda condemns the selfish man who only caters for himself, The foregoing brict discussion will make it clear that the later rules contained in the dharmasutras and other works on dbarma- sdstra had their roots deep down in the most ancient Vedic tradition and that the authors of the dharmasulras Were quite justitied in look- inv up to the Vedas as a source of dharntia. But, as said above, tie Vedas do not profess to be formal treatises on dharma; they contain only disconnected statements on the vartous aspects of deurma ; We have to turn to the smrtis fora formal and connected treaunent of the topics of the dharmasdstra. 33 इन्द्रा यतीन्‌ BTR RA WAZ | मेध।{नि।ध ( on म्न XI 49 ) quotes this Vide ए a, 7. ‰४ ४५१ ताण्डुचमहाब;, 81.4, 13. 4. 17 and wqaqqe 11.9.38 ५५ पष च MATA हवं gl HAT yaaa । शतपथ V- 4.4. 9 40 तस्मच्छरद्र। यज्ञऽनवङ्कुपः । त. सं. VIL 1.1. i लंयभवाद्‌) मनुष्यराने आगनन्वास्मन्वाहप्यक्षाणं वा हृतं वा क्षदुन्त णवमस्मा एतन्क्ष- दन्ते यदुभि मथ्नान्य । ए. वा. 1.15. Compare वृरसिष्ठधमेसूनत्र 4 8. 42 प्रश्च वा एते महायज्ञाः सतान प्रतायन्ते सतति सन्तिषठन्ते देवयज्ञः पितृयज्ञो भूतयज्ञ मनुष्ययज्ञो बह्मयज्ञः । ते. आ. 2.10. 1. 13 उच्चा दिवि दृक्षिणावन्तो Heme saa: सह त सूर्येण । goa अम्रतत्वं भ॑जन्तं वासोदाः सोम प्र तिरन्त आय; ॥ wae X. 107. 2 14 धन्वन्निव प्रपा आ त्वमग्न इयक्षवे पूरवे प्रत राजन्‌ । ऋम्वेद्‌ >. « 1. © sae भवति केवलादी । ऋगवेद 2111. 6. Cod History of Dharmasastra When Dharmasastra works were first composed of Sunahgep son could !Mportant question is to find out when formal treatises वता began to be composed. It is not possible to give a definite only sore! to this question. The Nirukta (Ill. 4-5) shows that long sutras Pre Yaska heated controversies had raged on various questions of heritance, such as the exclusion of daughters by sons and the rights =f the appointed daughter (putrika). It is very likely that these dis- yasfeussions had found their way in formal works and were not merely confined to the meetings of the learned. The manner in) which Yaska writes suggests that he is referring to works in which certain Vedic verses had been cited in support of particular doctrines about inheritance!®. [८5 further a remarkable thing that in connection with the topic of inheritance Yaska quotes a verse, calls it a Sloka and distinguishes it froma [६.47 This makes it probable that works dealing with topics of dharma existed either composed in the sloka metre or containing Slokas. Scholars like Biihler would say that the verses Were part of the floating mass of mnemonic verses, the exist- ence of which he postulates without very convincing or cogent arguments in his Introduction to the Manusmrti (9. B. FE. vol. 25 Intro.xc). If works dealing with topics of dharma existed before Yaska, a high antiquity will have to be predicated tor them. The high antiquity of works on dharmasastra follows from other weighty con- siderations. It will be seen later on that the extant dbarmasitras of Gautama, Baudhayana and Apastamba certainly belong to the period between 600 to 300 B. C. Gautamat® speaks of dharmasastras and the word dharmasastra occurs in Baudhayana also (IV. 5.9). Baudha- yana speaks of a dharmapathaka (1. 1. 9.). Besides Gautama quotes in numerous places the views of others in the words ‘ ityeke’ (९. g. II. 15, II. 58, UN. 1, IV. 21, Vil. 23). He refers to Manu’? in one place and to ‘ Acaryas’ in several places ( III. 36, IV. 18 and 23) ree ee » (चको 46 अथेतां जाम्या रिक्थग्रःतिषेध उद्‌। हरन्ति ज्येष्ठं पुञिकाय। इत्येके | Vide 8.8. ४. Vol 25, LXI (footnote) for Buhler’s view refuting Roth’s opinion that the whole discussion in the Nirukta is an interpolation. 47 तदेतद्क्लोकाभ्यामभ्युक्तम्‌ | अब्गदङ्गात्सम्भवसि..-स जीव ass शतम्‌ ॥ अविरेषेण पुत्राणां दायो भवति धर्मतः । मिथुनानां विसर्गादो मनुः स्वायम्भुवोबवीत्‌ ॥ 48 गौ. ध, सू, 9.21 ‹ तस्य च व्यवहयरो वेदो धर्मशाखाण्यङ्गानि उपवेदाः प्राणम्‌ १ The words पुथभ्धर्मविदङ्षयः in गो. ध. सु. 28.47 appear to refer to students of मशाख. | 4 जी प्रथमान्यनिर्दश्यानि मनुः । गो. ध. सू. 1.7. 8. When Dharmaégastra works were first ८01208९८ Baudhayana mentions by name several writers on dharma, v.s for him. janghani, Katya, Kasyapa, Gautama, Maudgalya and Hanta. ghmana tamba also cites the views of numerous sages such as those 0 aihita Kanva, Kautsa, Harita and others. There is a Vartika which sp:areya of Dharmasatrase. Jaimini speaks of the duties of a Sidra as | 5 down in the dharmasastras'. Pataijali shows that in his days ५/१ sittras existed and that their authority was very high, being next t the commandments of Gods?.. He quotes verses and dogmas thats have their counterparts in the dharmastitras. The foregoing dis cussion establishes that works on the dharnisdastra existed prior to Yaska or at least prior to the period Goo-300 B.C. and 11 the 2nd century B.C. they had attained a position of supreme authority in regulating the conduct of men. [11 this book the whole of the extant literature on dharnu will be dealt with as follows :- -First come the dharmasutras, some of which like those of Apastamba, Hiranyal:esin and Baudhayana form part of a larger Satra collection, while there are others like those of Gautama and Vasistha which do not form part of a larger collec- tion ; some dharmasitras Vike that of Visnu are, in their extant form, comparatively Jater 1) date than other sutra works; some sutra works like those of Sankha-Likhita and Paithinasi are known only trom quotations. Then carly metrical smrtis like those of Manu and Yajnavalkya will be taken up for discussion; then later versified 51111115 like that of Narada; there are many smrti works like those of Brhaspati and Katyayana that are known only from quotations. The two epics, the Mahabharata and the Ramayana, and the Puranas also have played a great part in the development of the Dharma- sastra. The commentaries on the smrtis, such as those of Visvarupa, Medhatithi, Vijnanesvara, Apararka, Haradatta will be next passed 50 agit च तथा । Vide महाभाष्य vol. 1, p. 242, 91 sq धमंशखत्वात्‌ । ष्‌. मी. सु. ४.7. 6. 52 नेवभ्वर आज्ञ।पयति नापि ध्म॑सूजकाराः पटान्ते अपवाद्‌रत्सर्गा बाध्यन्तामिति । AI भाष्य vol. I, ए. 115 and vol. IT, p. 365. पतलि quotes आभ्राश्च सिक्ताः पितरश्च प्रीणिता$ (vol. {. ए. 14) for which vide आप, ध. q. 1. 7. 20.3 तयथान्ने फला निमिते छाया. गन्ध इृत्यनूत्पदेते. पतजजकि 5०४४ ‘aes न pase मासि न विक्रेतव्यम्‌ ' and लोमनखं स्पष्टा शाचं कतंन्यम्‌ ( vol. 1 p. 25). MLD, 2. 10 History of Dharmafistra ° [| [ in oe and then the digests on dharma such as the works of Hemadtri, Todaramalla, Nilakantha and others. 1145 very difficult to settle the chronology of the works on dhgtmagastra, particularly of the carlicr ones. The present writer Ades not subscribe to the view of Max Miller (H. A. 5. L. p. 68 ) and others that works in continuous Anustubh metre followed आप्य works’3. Our knowledge of the works of that period is so ‘meagre that such a generalisation is most unjustifiable. Some works in the continuous अज metre like the Manusmrti are certainly older than the Visnudharmasutra and probably as old as, if not older than, the Vasisthadharmasttra. One of the earliest extant dharmasttras, that of Baudhayana, contains long passages in the Sloka metre, many of which are quotations and even Apastamba has a considerable number of verses in the sloka metre. This renders it highly probable that works in the sloka metre existed before them. Besides a large literature on dharma existed in the days of Apastamba and Baudhayana which has not come down to us. In the absence of that literature it is futile to dogmatise on such a point. 4. The Dharmasutras. It seems that originally many, though not all, of the dbarma- satras formed part of the Kalpasutras and were studied in distinct sutracaranas. Some of the extant dharmasutras here and there show in unmistakable terms that they presuppose the Grhyasutra of the carava to which they belong. Compare Ap. Dh. 9.1. 1. 4. 16 with Ap. Gr. 9. 1. r2 and Ul. $; and Baud. Dh. S. I. 8. 20 with Baud. Gr. S. If. 11. 42 Cand other satras );1. The Dharmasttras belonging to all sutracaranas have not come down to us. There is no dharmastitra completing the Asvalayana Srauta and Grhya sitras; no Manavadharmasutra has yet come to light, though the 53 VideS. B. E vol. 11, 0. 1, but see Goldstticker’s Panini ( pp. 59, 60, 78) against Max Miller and Prof. D. R. Bhandarkar’s Carmichael lectures for 1918, pp. 105-107. 54 अपिमिदध्वा परिसिप्रह्य समिध अषद्ष्यात्‌ साय प्रातर्यथोपदेशम्‌ । आप. ध. a. 7.1. 4.16; अ्िमिद्वा प्रागमदमेरभ परिस्तृणाति । अप. ग, 1. 12 and हृष्ममदूया- aed BATRA | अष. गु. UL 9 ; शेषमुक्तमश्काष्येमे ( al. ध. सू. 11. 8. 20) refersto a, गु, II. 11. 42; Hq SBzA AMAIA याज्ञिकस्य वृक्षस्य दण्ड (बो ध. स I, 2.16) 7९618 ४० qj ग, II. 0. 66 and other places where पलाश is one of the याल्लिक trees. 4. The Dharmasiitras Manava Srauta and Grhya siitras are extant ; in the same w: the Sankhayana Srauta and Grhya satras, but no SankhayanGOver™- stra. It is only in the case of the Apastamba, Hiranyalet4 by Baudhayana Sitracaranas that we have a complete kalpa rains with its three components of Srauta, Grihya and Dharma siitras Tantravartika of Kumirila contains very interesting observations © this point. It tells us that Gautama ( dharmasiatra ) and sri d (grhyastitra)) were studicd by the Chandogas ( Samavedins ) Vasistha (dharmasutra ) by the Rgvedins, the dharmasatra of Sankha-Likhita by the followers of Vajasaneya-sarhhita and the stitras of Apastamba and Baudhayana by the followers of the Tait- tiriya Sakhass. The Tantravartika ( p. 179 ) establishes it as a sid- dhanta Con Jaimini [. 3. rr) that all the dharma and grbya sutras are authoritative for all Aryan people. From this it appears that although originally all stitracaranas might not have possessed dharmasttras composed by the founder of the caraya or ascribed to him, yet gradually certain dharmasutras were specially taken over or appropriated by certain carayas. As the dbarimasntras were mostly concerned with rules about the conduct of men as members of the Aryan community and did not deal with ritual of any kind, all dharmasatras gradually became authoritative in all schools. The dharmasatras were closely connected with the grhyasatras in subjects and topics. Most of the Grhyasittras treat of the sacred domestic fire, the divisions of Grhya sacrifices, the regular morning and evening oblations, sacrifices on new and full moon, sacrifices of cooked food, annual sacrifices, marriage, piuhsavana, jatakarma, upanayana and other sasmkaras, rules for students and sndtakas and holidays, 5124५14 offerings, madhuparka. In most cases the Grihya- 5111215 confine themselves principally to the various events of domestic life ; they rarely give rules about the conduct of men, their rights, duties and responsibilities. ‘The dharmastitras also contain rules on some of the above topics such as marriage and the samskaras, 55 तन्जवार्तिक ?. 119 ‹ पुराणमानवतिहासम्यतिरिक्तगानमवासेष्ठशङ्कलि खतह रानापस्तम्ब- बोधायनदिभिणीतधमशाखाणां गृद्यम्न्थानां च प्रतिशाख्यलक्षणवतपतिचरणं पाटम्यव- स्थोपलभ्यते । ATA MAM AMAA छन्द्‌गरेव परिगृहीते । वासिष्ठं यहचरेव शच्च लिश्चितोकतं च वाजसनेयिभिः । भपस्तम्बचोधायनयि तोतिरीयिरेव प्रतिपन्ने । एष तत्र तन्न गृद्यव्यवस्थाभ्युपगमादि alae विचारयितव्यम्‌ । किं तानिं तेषामेवं प्रमाणान्युत सर्वेषाम्‌ । (ong, मी. चु. 1. 3. 11). Oe ee History of Dharmasiastra “ahmacarya and snatakas and holidays, on éraddha and in revicy ka. It 15 therefore not to be wondered at that in the Hemad 0 the topics of the duties of the Brahmacarin the house-holder, of atithis and of sraddha are meagrely ly as compared with the Apastamba-dharmasutra. The dharma- प very rarcly describe the ritual of domestic life; they merely Such upon it; their scope is wider and more ambitious; their 4incipal purpose is to dilate upon the rules of conduct, Jaw and custom. Some stitras are common to both the Apastamba-grhya and the dharma 45५. Sometimes the grhyastitra appears 10 refer to the dharmasdtra’?, ‘There are certain. points which distinguish the dharmastitras (the more ancient of them at least) from. smrtis. (2 ) Many dharmastitras are cither parts of the Kalpa belonging 10 cach sutracarana or are intimately connected with the grhyastitras. (0) The dharmasttras sometimes betray some paruality in their Vedic quotations for the texts of that Veda to which they belong or in the caranas of which they are studied. (८) The authors of the Colder) dharmastitras do not claim to be inspired seers or superhuman beingsi*, while the other smritis such as those of Manu and Yajnavalkva are ascribed to Gods like Brahma. (५) The dharimasulras are in prose or 111 mixed prose and verse; the other smrus are inverse. Ce) Phe language of the dharmasutras is gencrally more archate than that of the other smrtis. Cf) The dharmasatras do not proceed upon any orderly arrangement of topics, while the other smritis Ceven the oldest of them, viz. Manusmrriti ) arrange their contents and treat of the subjects under three principal heads viz, dedra, vyavabara and prayaseitfa.((g ) Most of the dharmasitras are older than most of the other smrtis. 5. The Dharmasutra of Gautama. This has been printed several times (there is Dr. Stenzler’s edition of 1876. the Calcutta edition of 1876, the Anandasrama 56 ° & पशे GUS! AANA... इत्यवर्णसंयोगेनेक उपदिशन्ति | भप.गृ. IV. 17. 15. 16 and 4qig. 7. 1. 1, 2. 38. 57 ९. 8. the आप. a, Says ^ मास श्रद्रस्यपरपक्ष यथोपदेशं कालाः ' (णा. 21. 1. ). This has in view अव. ध्‌, सु. Tl. 7. 16. 4-22. rer ज 58 Compare ग, ध, I. 3-4and अष, ध, q I. 2. 5. 4. ‘AEAISTT SAVY जायन्ते नियमालिकमान्‌ ? and अप. घ. सु. 613.9 agedieg प्रयुजानः सीदत्यवरः. 6. The Dharmasitra of Gautama 13 edition with the commentary of Haradatta, and the Mysore Govern- ment edition with the bhasya of Maskari; it was translated by Buhler in S. B. E., Vol. If. with an introduction ). The Anandasrama edition of 1910 which is incorrect in a few places (५.९. 21. 7) has been used in this work. ‘This dharmasttra is, as we shall sce, the oldest of those we have. The Gautama-dharmasutra was specially studied by followers of the Simaveda (sce note $ $ above). The com- mentary on the Caranavytha tells us that Gautama was one of the nine subdivisions of the Ranayaniya school of the Samaveda. A teacher Gautama is mentioned frequently in the Latyayanasrautastitra (५. ९. 1. 3. 3 and I. 4. 17+) and in the Drahyayanasrauta (९. 2.1. 4. 17, IX. 3. 15 ) of the Samaveda. The Gobhilagrhya (II. 10. 6) which belongs to the Samaveda cites Gautama as वा = authority. Therefore it is not improbable that a complete Gautamasttra mbody- ing Srauta, Grhya and Dharma doctrines once cxisted. There are other indications pointing to the close connection of the Gautama- dharmasttra with the Simaveda. Chapter 26 of the dharmasitra about Kricchra penance is the same, almost word for word, as the Samavidhinas? Brahmana (1. 2, Burnell’s ed. ). = Among the purifi- catory texts (21 in number ) mentioned in (का. Dh. S. (19. 12) there are nine that are Samans. The mention of the five utterances ( ° Vvahrtis’)) resembles the number in the Vyahrtisima®? though the order is different. It is however to be noted that Gautama is ageneric name. In the Kathopanisad, both Naciketas CII. 4. 15, 11. 5.6) and his father (I. 1. 10) are styled Gautama. In the Chandogyopanisad there is a teacher Haridrumata Gautama (1५. 1) ~~-- हि । 99 There are however considerable divergences; e.g. गौ, ध, सू 26. 10-12 are | “आपो हि Bia तिसमिः पाविच्रवतीभिर्माजंयीत oral: शुचयः पावका इत्यष्टाभिः । अथोदकतपणम्‌ | नमोहमाय Kc. while the सामविध,न is (आपद्ि्ठीयाभिरथःद्‌कतर्पणं ARIAT १, ग्‌. I, स्‌ 26.12 contains many additions. Wherever there is divergence, it is generally Gautama that amplifies the passages found in the सामविधान. । 60 गो. ध. सू. 1. 52 ओपूवां भ्याहूतयः पञ्च सस्यान्ताः. Again in गो. ध. सू, 25. 8 we “Af ° [|] क have प्रर्तिषद्धुवाद्मनसापचारे व्याहृतयः पश्च सत्यान्ताः; While in गौ. 28. 8. the five व्याहूतिः seem to be भ्‌ः, भुवः, स्वः, तपः, सत्यं. A हरदत्त remarks the five व्याहृतिऽ in व्याहुनिसाम ५० मुः, मुवः, स्वः, सत्यं, पुरुषः. The व्याहति are gene- rally declared to be seven ( ते, आ, 10. 28.1), the first three heing styled महाग्याहूति (vide मनु II. 81.) 14 History of Dharmasastra According to Haradatta the dharmasitra has 28 chapters. The Calcutta edition adds one chapter on Karimavipdka after chapter 19. In many places Gautama unmistakably refers to his own previous dicta; ९. g. Yathoktam va ( 23. 16 ) refers to 23. 10; 23. 26 refers to 17. 8-26; 17. 18 refers to 15. 18. The following are briefly the contents of the Gautamadharmastitra :—r. Sources of dharma, rules yabout interpretation of texts, time of Upanayana for the four varyas, the appropriate girdle, deer skin, cloth and staff for each Varna, rules about Sauca and Aacamana, method of approaching the teacher; 2 rules about those not invested with sacred thread, rules for the brahmacarin, control of pupils, period of study ; 3 The four 4éramas, the duties of brabmacarin, bhikgsu, and vaikhanasa; 4 rules about the house-holder, marriage, age at time of marriage, eight forms of marriage, sub-castes ; 5 rules about sexual intercourse on marriage, the five preat daily sacrifices, the rewards of gifts, madhuparka, method of honouring guests of the several castes; 6 rules about showing respect to parents, relatives Cimale and female) and teachers, rules of the road ; 7 rules about the avocations of a brahmana, avoca- tions for him in distress, what articles a brahmana could not sell or deal 111 ; 8 the forty sarnskaras and the eight spiritual qualities ( such as daya, forbearance &c.); 9 the observances for प sndtaka and householder ; ro the peculiar duties of the four castes, the responsi- bilities of the king, taxation, sources of ownership, treasure-trove, suardianship of minor’s wealth ; 11 Rajadharma, the qualitics of the king’s purohita; 12 punishments for libel, abuse, assault, hurt, adultery and rape, theft in the case of the several varnas and_ rules about money-lending and usury and adverse possession, special privileges of brilmanas as to punishments; payment of debts, deposits ; 13 rules about witnesses, falsehoods when excusable ; 14 rules of impurity on birth and death; 15 Sriddha of five kinds, persons not fit to be invited at Sriddha; 16 Upakarma, period of Vedic study in the ycar, holidays and occasions for them; 17 rules about food allowed and forbidden to Brahmanas and other castes ; 18 the dutics of women, yoga and its conditions, discussion about the son born of wiyoga ; 19 the causes and occasions of prayascitta, five things that remove sin (Japa, tapas, homa, fasting, gifts ), purifi- catory Vedic prayers, holy food for one who practises japa, various kinds of tapas and gifts, appropriate times and places for japa &c ; 20 abandgning a sinner who does not undergo prayascitta and the way of doing it; 21 sinners of various grades, mahapatakas, upapatakas 5. The Dharmasiitra of Gautama ` 15 &c.; 22 prayaseittas for various sins such as rabmahatya, adultery, killing a Ksatriya, Vaisya, Sidra, cow and other animals &c.; 23 prayascitta for drinking wine, and nasty things, for incest and un- natural offences, and for several transgressions by brahmacarin ; 24 secret prayascittas for mahapitakas and upapatakas ; 26 the penances called Krcechra and Atikrcchra; 27 the penance called Candra- yana; 28 partition, stridhana, reunion, twelve kinds of sons, inheritance. The Gautama-dharmastitra is written entirely in prose and it contains no verses either quoted or composed by the author him- self, as is the case with the other dharmasutras. Here and there occur sutras that look like portions of Anustubh verses e.g. 23. 27%. The language of Gautama agrees far more closely with the standard set up by Panini than the dharmasntras of Baudhayana and Apas- tamba. It is not very easy to account for this difference. It 1s obvious that commentators and generations of students that were brought up in the tradition of the Panincan grammar tampered with the text and improved it in accordance with their notions of correct Sanskrit. But why this process should not have been carried out to the same extent in the case of Apastamba it is difficult to say. A conjecture may be hazarded that the Ap. Dh. S. being a well-knit component of the Ap. Kalpa and being studied as such was. less liable to being tampered with than the Gautama Dh. 9.3 which probably did not in its origin belong to any particular kalpa. The same commentator, LJaradatta, explained both Gautama and Apastamba. Llaradatta, who as will be seen later on, was a great grammarian, shows in several places that the current reading was ungrammiatical from the Paninean stand-point and that he preferred readings that were in consonance with Panini’s rules*?, There are still a few un-Paninean words, ८, g. in 1. 14 (‘dvavirhsateh’ for dvavith- sat’ )and 9. 52 (kularhkula ). ‘The Tantravartika ( p. 99 ) appears भण यय = धि 7 वि ~ ~~~ ~~ Ts mee ~ ~ ee —_— =-= ~" ~~~ —_ Ol आ।क्रोशानृतह्िसिास् Rt परमं तपः । 62 ९.8.०० aj, घ, सू. 16. 2 ( ऋग्यजषं च समशब्दो यावत्‌ ) ४० 8४58 ‹ sea युग ITI । अचतुरेत्यादिन। निपातः । पश्वधन्तप।टस्तु (ie ऋम्यजुषां ) नास्मम्यं रचिते; Ma, ध. सू. 28 ( प्रतिषिद्धवाद्ृमनसापिच्रि ) hesays TEATS पाठोस्मभ्यं न रोचते। अचतुरोति समासान्त बिधिपरसङ्गात्‌ । › 16 - History of Dharmasastra to discuss the various readings in Gautama (I. 45%). A few पाऽ quoted from Gautama in the Mitiksara (€. 2. the stitra ‘utpatyaiva arthsvamitvam labhantc), the Smrticandrika (dvyathgam va purvajah syat ) and other works are not found in the extant text. This fact along with the fact of an interpolation of one chapter makes it clear that the present text of Gautama is of somewhat doubtful authority. The literature known to the Gautama-dharmasttra was extensive. Besides the Vedic sarhhitas and Brahmanas it mentions the following works ; Upanisads (19. 13), the Vedangas (8.5 and 11. 19 ), Itihisa (8. 6), Purana (8.6 and 11. 9), Upaveda (11. 9) dharmsistra (11. 19). That he borrows a chapter from the Sama- vidhana-brahmana has been mentioned above. He borrows the first six sutras of the 25th chapter from the Taittiriya Aranyaka (11.18). The Sramanaka (in Gautama II]. 26) is, according to Haradatta, the Vaikhanasa-Sastra (either composed by Vikhanas or treating of the duties of hermits). Gautama refers to Anviksikt (XL. 3) The only teacher of dharma he quotes by name in Manu (in 21.7 ) who is cited for the proposition that there is no expiation for the three sins of brabmahatyd, drinking wine and violation of the bed of the gurn. Haradatta says that in the extant Manusmrti the same propositions are laid down about brabmahatya and surapana (in Manu 11. 89 and 146 respectively ), but that as to violation of guru- 14100 a passage from the Manusmriti has to be searched out (१.९. such a passage is not found there). From this Bthler drew the conclusion that Gautama refers to the dharmasutra attributed to Manu (and not to any versified Manu-smrti). But Bithler is not right in drawing this inference. In the first place in spite of what Haradatta says there are verses in the extant Manusmriti (XI.104-105) which say that death is the expiation for violation of the guru’s bed. In the second place there is nothing to show, even if Haradatta «were correct, that Gautama refers only to a dharmasutra of Manu and not to a versificd work. Besides Manu, Gautama frequently quotes certain views ascribed to the ‘ Acaryas’ ( €. g. Ill. 35, IV. 18). Wha teachers are meant by the word ‘ Acaryah’ (which occurs in the Nirukta, in Kautilya and various other works), it is difficult to say — - —— ~~~ —— = ~ ~+ ere ~ ~~ =, [मी mee = = => = 63 It follows from the discussion in the तन्बवार्तिक that the ancient pathu in its day was ‹ केपगन्धापकषणं शीचममेध्यालिपस्य > while the present text has ‹ ०शोचममेध्यस्य१, Vide TST EA IIT. 48 which reads ‘ ogqu शोचममेध्यालि- पस्य ज oto. 6. The Dharmastira of Gautama 17 Probably the word means ‘the general traditional view of most writers in that particular sastra on a particular point.’ In numerous places Gautama refers to the views of his predecessors in the words ‘ eke’ (2. 15, 4oand 56, 3. 1, 4. 17; 7. 23 &c. ) and ‘ekesim’ ( 28. 17 and 38). This proves that Gautama was preceded by great literary activity in the sphere of dharmasastra. Gautama 11. 28 seems to be a reminiscence of the Nirukta CII. 3 )¢. The earliest reference to Gautama as an author on dharma occurs in the Baudhayanadharmasttra. Baudhayana discusses the au- thoritativeness of usages peculiar to the north or the south and quotes Gautama as saying that it is wrong to bold that certain customs must be held authoritative in certain countries ( even though opposed to Vedic tradition and smrti). This refers to ©. Dh. S. 11. 20. In another place Baudhayana gives it as his view that a Brahmana, if he cannot make a living by teaching, officiating as a priest or by gifts, should earn his livelihood as a Ksatriya and quotes the views of Gautama as opposed to 10156. The extant Gautama on the other hand teaches the same view as that of Baudhayana®*. Buhler made the plausible suggestion that the प्य्‌ in the extant Gautama is an interpolation. Govindasvami, the commentator of Baudhayana, suggests that anothcr Gautama is referred to by Baudhayana. [1 is possible to suggest that in the Ms. of Gautama used by Baudhayana the ऽप्य about living as a Asatriya did not occur and the next stitra about living asa Vaisya alone occurred. Chapter 19 of the Gautama- dharmasttra which forms an introduction to prayascillas in Gautama seems to have been borrowed wholesale by Baudhayana CII. 10) with slight changes. That Baudhayana borrows follows from the fact that the chapter in Baudhayana occurs in the middle of the discussion about prayascittas and not as an introduction, which is the case in Gautama. Baudhayana treats of penances in several places CII. 1, Il. $. roand IV. 1.4). There are besides many stitras in both Gautama and Baudhayana that exhibit a close correspondence, e. g. 6५ ‘augl द्म नादित्याहुस्तेनादान्तान्दमयेत्‌+ The निरुक्त has दण्डा aaa... gaTigeaI- मन्यवः », 6 अभ्यापनयाजनपतिगमरैरशक्तः HAMA जीवेस्मरत्यनन्तरत्वात्‌ | नेति गोतमोत्युम्रो हि श्च- अधर्मो बाह्मणस्य । बो. ध. सू. 71. 2. 69-70 6 यत्जन,ध्य।पनप्रतिमरदमः सर्वेषाम्‌ । Tas पूरवो गुरुः । तद्‌लामे AAA । तदुलामे वंश्य- वृत्तिः । ग।. ध. सू. 7" ५7 ४, ०, ३. 18 History of Dharmagastra Gautama III. 25-34 and Baudhayana Il. 6.17 about Vaikhanasa, Gaut. 3. 3 and 35 and Baud. I. 6. 29, Gaut. 15. 29 and Baud. II. 8. 2, Gaut. 23. 8-ro and Baud. II. 1. 12-14, Gaut. 24. 2 and Baud. 11. 3. 8. The Ap. Dh. ऽ. II. 6.15. 2 speaks of Smrti as laying down Ahatup to upenavana there is no adhikara for homa. This pro- bably refers to Gautama [. 1-3. The Vasisthadharmasttra also guotes the views of Gautania in two places ( 4. 34 and 36, impurity on death). “Vhe first refers to Gautama 4. .41 but the second cannot be traced in the extant Gautama. Chapter 22 of Vasistha 15 bor- rowed from the Gautaniadharmasutra, chapter 19. There are besides many sutras that are the sanie or almost the same in Gautama and Vasistha, ८. oe. Gautama 3. 31-33 and Vas. 9. 1-3, Gaut. 3. 26 and Vas. 9. 10, Gaut. 1. {| and Vas. 3. 37, Gaut. 1. 4o and Vas. 3. 38, Gaut. 1. .45-6 and Vas. 3. 48, (वपा, 1. 28 and Vas. 3. 49, Gaut. ty. 9-7 and Vas. |. 24-26. Gautama is referred to in the Manu- spirit (UL. 10) as the son of Gtathya. Gautama is one of the authors of dharinasastras cvumerated in Yajnhavalkya (Ll. 5). Apararka quotes a verse trom the Bhavisvapurana which speaks of Gautama’s pro- hibition about drinking™. Similarly Kullaka (on Manu XI. 146) quotes a verse from the same Purana which refers to Gautama 23.2. Kumarila ino his ‘Fantravartika quotes over a dozen sutras from Gautama which present the same text as we have’*. Gautama ry. 29 and 12. pare quoted by Suikara in bis bhasva on Vedantasitra 11]. 1. Sand [. 3. 38 respectively. Visvarupa in his commentary on Yajnavalkya quotes numerous sttras from Gautama. In Medha- 1111115 Ahdyva on Manu the writer more frequently quoted than any other is Gautama Ce. g. on Manu I. 6, भा. 125 &e.) The foregoing discussion about the literature known to the Gautama Dh. S. and the authors and works that mention Gautama or quote the dharmasutra helps us in arriving at the approximate age of the dharmasutra. [le is separated by a long interval from the Samavidhana Brethmana. Tle is later than Yaska and wrote at a time when Panini’s system was either not in existence or had not attained a pre-eminent positon, “The extant text was known to Baudhayana and Vasistha and was in the same state long before 700 A. D. The sutra betrays no knowledge of the onslaught delivered on Brahma- 67 प्रतिषधः सुरापाने मयस्य च नराधिपं । RAAT: सततं गातमादिभिः ॥ भविष्व्ुराण quoted by अपराकं 7. 1076. 68 Vide JBBRAS vol. 1 ( new series } for 1925, pp. 66-67, 6. The Dharmasitra of Gautama 19 nism by Buddha and his followers. He uses the term Bhiksu ( ३. 10) instead of the term parivrajaka that occurs in Baudha- yana, Apastamba and other siitra works and lays down that a bhiksn is to stay in one place in the rains, which reminds one of the Bud- dhist ^ bhikkhu’ and ( Vasso’”. Gautama cites the opinion of some that Yavana is the offspring of a Ksatriva male and a Stidra female (4.17). It is supposed by many scholars that the Yavanas became known to the Indians only at the time of Alexander’s invasion and hence every work in which the word yavama occurs must 16 hares than 320 B.C. Buhler (9. B. 1. vol. [. Intro. ivi.) seems to suggest that the stitra where the word Yavana occurs 1 Gautatua may be an interpolation. This is not a satisfactory explanation, One may ask, if Buhler belicves that the Indians borrowed their alphabet centuries before Alexander from the . neighbours of the Greeks, why it is improbable that the Indians may not have heard of the word Yavana centuries before Alexander and why Yavanas may not have resided in India long before that date. ‘Yaking all these things into consideration the Gautama-dharmasttra cannot be placed later than the period between 600-400 B. ^. Haradatta wrote a learned commentary on the Gautama-dharma- satra called Mitaksara. For an account vide sec.87 below. In numicr- ous places he quotes the explanations of other commentators of Gautama (€. 8. 9. §23 10. 12, 56, 66; 11. 173 12. 32; 21. ५९५. ). The bbasya of Maskari, son of Vamana, is also a learned one, but may probably be later than Haradatta, since the interpretations which he quotes as given by others are found to be those of Haradatta ( vide on Gaut. 12. 30, 13. 20-22 ) Asahaya seems to have written a bhasya on Gautama; aide sec. 59 below. The Mitaksara, the Snirticandrika, Hemadri, Madhava, and other writers quote a sloka-Gautama. Vide Parasara-~-Madhaviya, vol. I, part I, p. 7. Aparirka, Hemadri and Madhava quote Vrddha- Gautama, while the Dattakamimarhisa ( p. 72 ) quotes Vrddha-Caut. and Brhad-Gaut. side by side on the same point. ‘Uhese are later works, Jivananda publishes a smrti of Vrddha-Gautama 1) 22 chapters and about 1700 verses ( part II, pp. 497-636 ), where it 15 said that Yudhisthira asked Krsna about the dhurines of the four castes. Thissmrti seems to have been originally taken from the Asvarnedhikaparva of the Mahabharata, as Madhava and others cite 20 History of Dharmaégastra verses occurring in it as from that parva ( vide Paragaramadhaviya vol, I, part I, pp. 108-110). 6. The Baudhayana Dharmasutra. ^“ This has been editcd several times (text by Dr. Hultzsch at Leipzig in 1884, text in the Anandasrama collection of smrtis and in the Mysore Government Oriental Series in 1907 with the commentary of Govindasvamin ; translated in S. B. E., Vol. 14, with an Introduction ). The Mysore edition has been’ used in this work. Baudhayana is a teacher of the Krsnayajurveda. A complete set of the Baudhayanasttras has not yet been recovered and has not been as carefully preserved as the stitras of Apastamba and Hiranyakesin. Dr. Burnell arranges Baudhayana’s sutras into six sutras, the Srautasiitra in 19 prasnas ( probably ) ; Karmantasitra in 20 adhyayas; Dvaidhasutrain four prasnas; Grhyastitra in four prasnas ; Dharmastitra in four prasnas ; Sulvastitra in three adhyayas. The commentators offer no indication as to the place originally assign- ed to the grbya, dharma and sulva_satras in the whole collection. Dr. Caland in his monograph (A.D. 1903) ‘Uber das Rituelle sttra des Baudhayana’ gives on p. r2the contents of the Baudhayanasttra as follows: Prasnas I-XXI Srauta, XXTI-XXV Dvaidha, XXVI-XXVIII Karmanta ; XXIX-XXXI Prayaseitta, XACXIT Sulvasatra, XXXII- XXXV Grhvasiitra, XXXVI Grhyaprayascitta; XXXVIL Grhya- paribhasa, AXNVIT-XLI Crhyaparisista; XLU-XLTV Pitrmedha, XLV Pravara, XLVI-XLIX Dharma. Dr. Caland edited nine prasnas of the Srautastitra for the B. 1. Series (A.D. t904). Dr. रि. Sham- sastri published for the Mysore University (in 1920 ) the Baudhaya- nagrhyasatra with parthhasa, grhyasesa, Pitrmedhasttra. The Grhyastitra cites the view of Baudhayana himself (1.7). The Baudhayana-dharma refers to the Grhya and presupposes it in several piaces ( vide note 54 ). In the Baudhayanagrhya ( III. 9. 6 ) we have a reference to fudaxara Atreya, Vrttikara Kaundinya, pravacanakara Kanva Bodhayana, and Sitrakara Apastamba.6* A similar passage 68a अथ दृक्षिणतः प्राचीनावीतिनो वेशम्पायनाय फलिङ्गव तित्तिरये उसरायोख्यायात्रये AT याय पदकाराय कण्डिन्याय वृत्तिकाराय कण्वाय बोधायनाय प्रवचनकारायापस्तम्बाय सृजकाराय TANS दरण्यकेशाय वाजसनेयाय याज्ञवल्क्याय भद्राजायाभिवेश्याया- चार्येभ्य ऊभ्वरतोभ्यो वानम्रह्थेभ्यो DEPT एकपत्नीभ्यः कल्पयामीति, The epithets must be understood as arranged above, since elsewhere the epithet सञज्जकः।र्‌ is specially appropriated to anq¢gqrq, The दिरण्यकेशिगृद्य (II. 20. 1, vy 6. The Baudhiyana Dharmasitra 21 occurs in the Bharadvaja Grhyasaitra. In the Baudhayana-dharma- 5८५ (II. 5.27 Rsitarpana ) we have Kanva Bodhayana, Apas- tamba sutrakara and Satyasidha Hiranyakesin one after another. These references show that Kanva Bodhiyana was an ancient sage when the Baudhayana-dharmastitra was written and that he could not have been the author of the grhya or the dharma आप of Baudhiyana. Baudhayana may have been a descendant of this Kanva Bodhayana. ‘his surmisc is supported by Govindasvamin who explains Baudhayana occurring in Baudhayanadharmasitra [. 3. 13, as Kanvayana. 1) the dharmasitra Baudhayana is himself cited as an authority several times (e.g. 1. 4.15 and 24, TI. 5. 8, III. 6. 20). In all these places the Mysore edition reads Bodhayana, while the Anandagrama reads Baudhayana. In one or two places he isstyled ‘ bhagavan’ (III. 6. 20). Several explanations are offered by the commentator Govindasvamin (on I. 3. 132). He says that it isthe practice of the Acaryas to refer to themselves in the third person Cas Medhatithi says on Manu %) or that the author of the dharmasttra is a pupil of Baudhayana as the Manusmrti is promul- gated by Bhrgu, the pupil of Manu, or there was some other Baudha- yana whose works have not come down to us. The following are the contents of the Baudhayana-dharmasttra:— Prasna t:~-Sources of dharma, who are sistas, parisad, different practices of northern and southern India, countries where Sistas reside and where mixed castes reside, priyascitta for visiting countries of the latter type ; 2. Studenthood for 48, 2.4 or 12 vears, time of upanayane and the girdle, skin, staff appropriate to each caste, duties of brabmacdrin, eulogy of brabmacarya ; 3. The duties of the snataka who has completed bis studies and observances but has not yet married; 4. directions about carrying the earthen jar Cin the case of the sndtaka ); 5. bodily and mental sauca, purification of various substances, impurity on birth and death, meaning of sapinda and sakulya, rules of inheritance, purification on touching a corpse 07 a woman in her menses or on dog-bite, what flesh and food was — geet को 99 म eee ~ कः ed. by Kirste in 1889) makes this clear. It reads ‘ आचयाय पदकाराय कोण्डिन्याय वृत्तिकाराय सूत्रकारेभ्यः Bay प्रवचनकत्रभ्य आचार्येभ्यः &०. ARIST (quoted by Dr. Caland in ‘ Uber das Rituelle &c. p.3.n.2) reads ^ बोधायनाय भरद्वाजाय शूजकारायपस्तम्बाय स्वेभ्यः सुत्रकरेभ्यः Ke. | 69 ' प्रायेण eerie स्वमतं परापदेशेन AAA.” 22 History of Dharmaéastra allowed and forbidden ; 6. Purification from the point of view of sacrifice, purification of clothes, ground, grass, fuel, vessels, and articles used in sacrifice ; 7. Rules about the importance from the sacrificial point of view of sacrifice, of the sacrificial utensils, priests, the sacri- ficer and his wife, ghee, cooked offerings, the victim, soma and fires; 8. The four waryas and the sub-castes; 9. Mixed castes; 10. the duties of kings, the five greatsinsand punishments for them, punish- ments for killing birds, witnesses ; rr. The eight forms of marriage, holidays ; Prasua [[. 1. Prayascittas for brabmahatya and other great sins, prayascittas for a brabmacharin violating his vow of celibacy, for marrying a sagotra girl, for marrying before elder brother, sins lesser than the ereat ones, description of such penances as Paraka, Kre- chra, Atikrechra; 2. Partition of heritage, larger share for the eldest, the several substitutes for an aurasa son, exclusion from inheri- tance, dependence of women, pravaéscitta for adultery by men and women, rules about w/vega, means of subsistence in distress, con- tinuous duties of the house-holder such as Agnihotra &८.; 3. The daily duties of the houscholder such as bathing, acamana, Vaisva- deva, giving food; 4. Sandhya; 5. Rules about the manner of bathing, of Acamana, worship of the sun, and about the method of propitiating ( "(41/१५ ` ) gods, sages and pitris; 6. The five great daily vajias; the four castes and their duties; 7. regulations about dinner; 8. Sraddha; 9. culogy of sons and spiritual benefit: from sons; 10. rules about ऊत; Prasna UL. 1 modes of subsistence for the two kinds of houscholders, Salina and Yavavara; 2 the means of subsistence called ‘ Sannivartani’; 3. the duties of the forest her- mitand his means of livelihood; |. pravascitta for not observing the vows of brabmacarin or householder; 5. method of reciting Aghamarsaua, the holiest of texts; 6. the ritual of prasrtayavaka ; 7 the purificatory doma called Kigmanda; 9. the penance called candrayaua; ५ the recital of the Vedas without taking food; ro. theories about purifications for sin, purifying things; Pragna 1४. 1, prayascittas of various kinds viz. for cating forbidden food or drink &५.; 2. pranavamas and Aghamarsaua as purifiers in case of several SINS; 3. secret prayascittas; 4. Various Vedic texts as prayascittas; ३. Means of securing siddhi by means of japa, homa, ist? and yantra: the penances called Krechra, Ati-Krechra, Santapana, Paraka, Candravana; 6 the muttering (japa) of holy texts, the istis; 7 praise of Yantras, various Vedic texts used in home; 8 censure of those who enter on the means of siddhi out of great greed, permis- 6. The Baudhayana Dharmasiitra 28 sion to get these things done through another in certain circum- stances. The extant Dharmasutra does not appear to have come down in- tact. The fourth prasia is most probably an interpolation. Most of the eight chapters of that prasna are full of verses, the portion in prose being very small. The last three chapters (6-8) are entirely in verse. The style is quite different from that of the first two prasnas, ‘The first five chapters of the fourth prasna dealing with prayascittas are more or less superfluous, the same subject having been dealt with in [|. 1 and HI. y-1ro. Some of the stitras 1 the earlier prasnas are repeated verbatin 11 the fourth, ८. 2.1. 1. 33-34 and IV. 2. 101 Cavakirni-prayaseitta ). The पारात्‌ prasua also is not free from doubt. The tenth chapter of the third prasia is as said above taken from Gautama. ‘The sixth chapter of the third prasna agrees very closely 11) phraseology with the 4~8th chapter of the Visnudharmasttra. But itis rather difheult to say which is the borrower. Dr. Jolly (S.B. i. Vol. VIL. p. >>) is inelined to think that both borrowed from a common souree. It seems more probable that Visnu borrows from Baudhavana, as the Visnudharmastitra uses the form ^ punita’ in place of ^ punatha’ Cin Baud. ) and as the Visnu-Dharmasutra omits all reference to Rudra (Baud. 111. 6. 12.) and omits the words ^" तोता) pasvati, ganadhipatim = pasyati... bhagavan Bodhayanah ” (Baud 111.6. 20. ). 1४1 the Mysore edition all the four prasvas of the Daarmasutra ave divided into adhyavas, but the Mss used by Bihler appear to have divided the first: two prasnas into kandikas and the Jast wo into adhyvavas. “There are many repetitions even in the first two prasnas, which therefore make one rather doubtful about the authenticity of the first two prasnas also in their entirety. For example JT. 6. 11 and 31 are indentical ; In TI, 7, 22 and IT. 10. 53 the same verse ( “astau erasa’”” &e. ) is quoted. Such repetitions are frequent in the two last prasnas ९. $. {11.2.16 and Tis.3.23 5 TIL.4.5 and 1.7.12. Some of the quotations ascribed to Baudhavana in the Mitaksara and other works are not taken from the कावा, but from the Grhyastitra or its supple: ments Ce. g. the words ‘ ckarh sakham-adhite Srotrivah ” quoted in the Mit. on Yaj. HE. 24, which are cited by Hultzsch (on p. 125) are taken from the Grhya (vide note 78 below ) The Dharmasttra of Baudhayana is somewhat loose in structure and is notconcise. Govindasvamin remarks (on |. 2. 19. ) that $4 History of Dharmatistra Baudhayana does not aim at brevity.7° Several subjects are treated of in two places and often without any logical connection with what precedes or follows. Rules of inheritance ( daya-bhaga ) occur in the midst of rules about prayascitta ( in [[. 2. ) ; rules about holidays Canadhyaya ) occur immediately after the cight forms of marriage and the condemnation of the sale of a daughter (I. 11). Rules about saalaka occur in two places ( 1. 3 and [[. 3. 10 ff. ). Baudha- yana quotes at least 90 verses introduced by the words “ athapyuda- haranti,” more than 80 being from the first two prasnas alone. There are over two hundred other verses, about 80 of which occur in the first two prasnas and about ten are Vedic. Some of the verses even in the first two prasnas do not appear to be quotations e. g. I. 1. 16 II. 2. 1, IL. 3. 50, Il. 3. 52-5.4. and 56. A verse quoted is in the VathSastha metre CIV. 3. 14); there are two verses in the Upajati metre taken as a quotation (If. 3.78 ). Phere are some prose quota- tions introduced with the words ‘athapyudaharanti” (९, g. 11. 4. $ and [1]. 6. 30 which refers to the asare Kapila, son of Prahlada). The language of the Baud. Dh. 9. is archate and often departs from the Paninean standard. Baudhayana employs such un-Paninean forms as “erhya” (for grhitva in IL 5.1), pajya CIL 9. 5.), “ adhigacchanah ” ( 11 11. 9. 9. ),. anayitva (1. 3. 6), ^^ punatha” Cin 11. 6. 5; probably a quotation ), “tebhih” Cfor tath in TID. 2. 16, 3a quotation ). In several places Baudhiayana states opposite views and then gives his own opinion on the point, ८. g. Baud. 7, $ 105-109 (about impurity on bith ); UH. 1. 49-51. As regards the literature known to Baudhayana the following points may be neted. All the four Vedas are mentioned by name in [[. 5.27 Clarpaua ). We quotes very frequently the Taittiriya Samhita, Tai. Brahmana and the ‘Tai. Aranyaka (inthe Andhra recen- 57011 ). Well-known hymns of the Reveda such as the Aghamar- sana, the Purusasukta ane also simple ‘rks’ are frequently referred to. In HP. ro (which is almost the same as Gautama rg ) there ts a sutra enumerating the Upanisads, the Samhhitas of all the Vedas and several samans प", purificatory texts. There are long quotations taken from the Satapatha-brahmana ( XT. 3. 3. 1 ff and XI. 5. 6. 3 ) in Baud. (1 about brahmacart and [[.6. 7-9 about brabmayajiia ) It is noteworthy that in the farpaya there is an invocation of the ere ग 18 7 त 1 त म 9 1 ~+ = ~~~ ~ 10 नन्‌ द्विजातंष स्वक मस्थप इ।त AHA FIAT TAZA | सत्य, अव ह्याचार्यो नातीव प्रन्थलाघवामिप्रायो मवान्‌ । 6. The Baudhtyana Dharmasiitra 25 Atharvaveda and immediately afterwards of the Atharvangirasah. The same is found in the Baudhayanagrhya also (III. 2. 9 and 22). In the Upanisads (Brhadaranyaka [1.1.103 1V. 1.2) it is the word Atharvangi- rasah that stands for the Atharvaveda. Baudhayana quotes a gathi of the Bhallavins (I. 1. 29 ) about the geographical limits of Aryavarta. Vasistha adduces the same verse (I. 15) and says that it is taken from the Nidana work of the Bhallavins. The Nirukta also mentions a school of Vedic interpretation called Naidanah. It is difficult to say what Nidana works comained. [f/bdsa and Purana occur in the tarpaua (IL. 5.27). The (ष्का of the Vedas oecur in [1.8 and the six amgasin [. 8.2. 0 Whether the word “ rahasya” in 7. 8. 3 means the Aranyakas Cas Govindasvamin explains ) 1s doubtful. Baudhayana mentions a Vaikhdnasa-sistra in IL 6. 16, which appears to refer to the work of Vikhanas on hermits and speaks of Sramanaka ( the rites prescribed by Vikhanas for initiation as hermit ), just as Gautama docs. Among the auchors on dharma mentioned by name are : Aupajanghani ( 1. 2. 33 for the view that only aurasa son was to be recognised and not the other kinds of sons? ), Katya (J. 2. 47), Kasyapa ( or Kasyapa in other editions, J. rr. 20 on the point that a woman bought cannot be a patui ), Gautama (1. 1. 23 and II. 2. 70 ), Prajapau (1. 4. 15 about failure in Sandhyopasana, and IL. 10. 71 about saunydsa), Manu CIV. 1. 14 and 1V. 2.16), Maudgalya (Il. 2.61, about observances of a widow being restricted only to six months after her husband’s death), Harita (Il. 1. 50). Baud. I. 2. 7 quotes a verse, which Vasistha ascribes to Harita (Vas. 11. 6). As to Gautama, vide p. 17 above. Manu is only mentioned in the fourth pragna, the authenticity of which, as said above, is very doubtful. Baudhayana II. 2.16 (about the efficacy of Aghamarsaua ) closely agrees with Manu XI. 260. The first reference to Manu’s teaching cannot be traced in the Manusmrti. Prajapati (in IIT. 9. 21) seemts to stand for god Brahma and not for any real or mythical writer on dharma. One remarkable piece of information contained in Baudhayana (II. 6. 30 ) is that he quotes from a work ( of the Brahmana class in language ) a prose passage wherein the division into four 4sramas is ascribed to an asura Kapila, ‘son of Pralhada. In II. 2. 79 Baudhayana quotes a galha from the ee RE EE ney (गोरर 71 One of the verses ( अभमत्ता रक्षत तन्तमेनं ) 18 referred to by शयरस्वामीं ०४ पू. मी. सू, 1. 2.13 ( अपराधात्‌ कर्तुश्च TIANA ). H. D. 4. 26 History of Dharmatistra dialogue between the daughter of Usanas and the king Vrsaparvan’’, which is nearly the same as MahabharataI. 78. 10 and 34. Baud. quotes the view of Acdryas (II. 6. 29 ) as Gautama does. In several places he refers to the views of his predecessors on dharma as ^ others ” (eke, apare) ९. g. I. 4. 23, I. 5. 16, I. 6. 105-106, II. 5. 2. In II. 3. 18 two verses in the Upajati metre are quoted as sung by “anna” (food ). From the numerous quotations in verse cited by Baudhiyana on topics of dharma, it follows that the Dharmasttra was preceded by a considerable number of works on dharma in verse. Buhler (SBE vol. XIV, p. XLIID) says that Vijnanesvara was the first writer who quoted the Baud. 0. 9. But there are writers who flourished centuries before Vijnanesvara that regarded Baudhayana as a writer on dharma and either quoted his words or pointedly referred to them. Sabara in his bhasya on Jaimini, I. 3. 3 says that the rule in the Smrtis about the period of Vedic study being 48 years is opposed to the Vedic injunction “fone who has begot sons and whose hair are dark should consecrate the sacrificial fires7}.” This must be regarded as referring to the words of Baudhayana (I. 2. 1 ) Sabara uses the same word ‘‘Vedabrahmacarya” that Baud. employs. {ए is true that Gautama and Apastamba both refer to the rule about 48 years, but they do not employ the word ^" veda-brahmacarya. ” The Tantravartike of Kumarila says that the words of Apastamba (II. 6. 15. 7 ) which seem to accept the validity of local and family usages (even though opposed to Smrti tradition) stand refuted by the words of Baudhayana (I. 1. 19-24) who cites only such censured usages as are opposed to Smrti. Kumarila appears to think that Baudhayana attacks the extant work of Apastamba, 1. ९. the present Baud. is Jater than the present Apastamba. It is not necessary to follow 78 स्तुवतो दुहिता लं वे याचतः sire । अथाह स्तूयमानस्य ददतोभतिगह्णतः ॥ 13 शबर" words are “ अष्टाचत्वारिंशदरवर्षणि वेदुब्ह्मचयंचरणे Tags: रुष्णकेशं प्रीना- द्धीत-इत्यनेन विरुद ग * ००1. 8. 8 and again on I. 3. 4 ८ AIRF प्रच्छादयन्तश्चा- CATA TTT alate’, बोधायन words are अष्टाचत्वारिशद्रषाणे पारार्णं वेदब्रह्मचर्यम्‌. Compare गृ, घ, सु. 2.52 and अ, ध, सू I. 1. 2. 12. 7 तन्त्रवार्तिक 2. 139 “आपस्मम्बवचनं तु बोधायनेन स्मरति विरुदवदुश्टाचारोद्‌ाहृरणान्येव प्रय- च्छता निरारूतम्‌ १, The words in the a, ध, स, (7. 1. 22} tay ay देश- wn MARTA Eqiq’ A¥e opposed to the words of आपस्तम्ब ‘way देशकलधमी SOTA,” | न ¢. The Baudhayana Dharmasiltra 27 Kumiarila implicitly as regards chronological details, where he is speaking of writers that flourished over a thousand years before him. But his opinion deserves weight. The Tantravartika quotes a Smrti passage which bears a close resemblance to Baudhayana (II. 3. 28)"5. In the commentary of Visvaripa ( who as we shall see below flourished about 800 A. D. ) on Yajnavalkya, Baudhayana is quoted at least nine times in the chapter on dedra alone. Vide Visvarapa on Yaj. I. 21, 26, 29, 53, 64, 69, 72, 79, 195 ( Trivandrum edition ), where Baud. I. 5. 14, I. 2. 30, I. 5. $; I. 1.17, IV. 1.15, IV. 1. 18, IV. 1. 22, [V. 1. 20 and [. 5. 47 are respectively quoted. There are very few variations from the present text and the only serious variation is as regards the last (I. 5. 47 ) which is in prose ( while Visvaripa quotes a verse ). It is remarkable that Visvaraipa quotes several verses from the fourth prasna, which shows that even if the fourth prasna be an interpolation, it is comparatively an ancient one. The Mit. also (on Yaj. IIT. 306 ) quotes a long passage from the fourth prasna (IV. 1. 5-11). The words of the Sakuntala’® that the first precept is that a girl is to be given away to a meritorious person are probably a reminiscence of Baud. IV. 1.12. Medhatithi on Manu. ४, 117 quotes Baudhayana J. 5. 47 and on IV. 36 quotes Baud. I. 4. 2 ( which is mutilated as printed). On Manu. V. r1q he says that all the rules about purification of substances are con- tained in Baudhayana-smyti. On Manu. V, 118, he quotes Baud. I. 5. 50. About the home of Baudhayana it is dithcult to advance any posi- tive conclusion. In modern times Baudhayaniyas are mostly confined to the south. We know that Sayana, the great commentator of the Vedas, was a Baudhayaniya. ----~ ^~ = क ० ५ ० पानक = => ee न 7 तन्त्रवार्तिक ए. 993 ' तथा च स्मरतिः । ...धारयेद्रणवं दण्डं शभे Ta च कुण्डले-- इत्यादि सूपपत्स्यते 1’ Baud. has वेणवं दण्डं धारयेद्ुक्मकुण्डल च. Compare मनु 1४. 36. 1४ 18 probable that the तन्नवार्ति्र combines घ्या, and मनु. 10 ' गुणवते कन्यका प्रदेया इति तावलथमः कस्पः ` शकुन्नल 4४४ Act; while Baud. has ' दृद्यह्रुणवते कन्यां नभिकां बह्मचारिणे " 77 1, A. vol, 8, pp, 273-274. 28 History of Dharmafgastra belonged to the Baudhayanacarana. Buhler is probably right. In the grant most of the donccs are students of the Apastamba Sutra. First the Gotra, then the Siitra and then the name of the donee are intro- duced in the grant. Therefore as some of the donees are said to be students of “ pravacanastitra,” it follows that रन pravacana” stands for some sutra school. Jt appears that sa/ra and pravacana are two different things, whatever the latter term may mean. Baudhayana is called pravacanzkara and Apastamba is styled sitrakara. We are told by the Baudhavana-grhystitra?® that a Brihmana who studied sutra and pravacaia was styled “ bhrana. ” Bithler was inclined to hold that Baudhayana was a southern teacher for several reasons. Baudhayana mentions customs of the south and includes sea-faring as a custom peculiar to the north (I. 1. 20), while in another place he places sea-faring at the head of sins ( pataniyas ) lesser than the mortal ones (II. 1. 41). Therefore it is said that he was not a northern teacher. But as against this we have to remember that Baudhayana (I. 1. 29 ) quotes with apparent approval a verse in which the countries of Avanti ( Ujjain ), Anea, Magadha, Surastra ( Kathiawar ) and Daksinapatha are declared to be the home of mixed castes. Daksinapatha was generally supposed to be the whole peninsula south of the Narmada. Baudhayana, if he was a native of the south, would not lave speken of his ceuntry as the heme of mixed castes only, unless he put a restricted meaning on the word Daksinapatha ( which sometimes meant in later days Maharastra ) Vide J.B. 23. २. ^. 9. for 1५14 p. 620. The extant Baudhavanadharinastitra 15 certainly later than Gautama, as it mentions Gautama twice by name and as one quota- tion at least is found in the extant Gautama. Besides Baudhayana quotes by name several teachers on dharma, while Gautama quotes only one, Manu. Baudhavana is far removed from the times of the Upanisads. Baud. (TI. 7. 15) quotes a verse which is itself an adaptation of प passage from the Chandogya-upanisad He ee ~~ =o ons. ----- ~~ - ee ९.०७, Ee Oh 78 The whole passage is interesting ‘ दुपनीतमाचो व्रतानचारी वेदानां किंचिद्धीत्य बाह्मणः | एकां शखामधीत्य श्राचियः । अङ्गःध्य।य्यनूचानः । कल्प,ध्यायी ऋषिकल्पः । सूत्परवचनध्यायी भ्रूणः । चतुर्वेदाः । अत ऊर्वं देवः। ` बा. ग॒. पू. 1. 7. 28. 19 Baud. 'अथाप्युदाहरन्ति- यथ.हि तृलमेषीकमपनो प्रों wera । तदूत्सवाणि पापानि द्यन्ते द्यात्याजिनः ॥ ”; compare छन्दोग्येपनिषदू ४.24. 3. ‹ तयथेषीकातूलमण्नो रं प्रदूयेनेवं हास्य सर्वे पाप्मानः प्रदूयन्ते * &५. 6. The Baudhayana Dharmasiitra 29 quotes Harita. Jt is uncertain whether the Haritadharmastitra, a manuscript of which was discovered by the late Vaman Sastri Islam- purkar at Nasik, is the one intended. Buhler thought that the work of Baudhavana was earlier than that of Apastamba by a century ग two. His first reason was that Kanva Baudhayana receives ‘homage in the farpava before Apastamba and Hiranyakesin and that the same order is observed in the Baudhayana-grhyastitra. But this reason is far from convincing. [t may be conceded that Baudhayana was regarded as the oldest (or the most authoritative or respectable) of the three schools of the Black Yajurveda. But from this it does not at all follow that the extant dharma-sitra of the Baudhayaniyas ts carlier than that of the Apastambiyas. For aught we know the stitra com piled for the school of Baudhayana may be later than the sutra manual of the Apastambiyas. We saw above that orthodox opinion, represented by Kumiarila, regards Baudhayana’s work as later than Apastamba’s. All the three founders of the three schools are mentioned inthe Bandhayanagrhya and dharma stitra. One may equally argue with ००५ reason that both these works knew a stitra work of Apastamba and that the extant dharmasttra of Apastamba is that work. Another reason assigned for the priority of Baudhayana’s work over Apastam- ba’s is that, though both have numerous siitras that agree almost word for word, a comparison of the views of the two writers shows that Apastamba lays down stricter and) more puritanie Cand there- fore [71८1 ) views on certain points than Baudbavana. Gautama, Jandhavana and Vasistha mention several secondary sons, while Apastamba is silent about them. Gautama, Baudhayvana (IL. 2. 17, 62), Vasistha and even Visnu approve of the practice of miyoga, while Apastamba condemns it (TI. 6. 13. 1-9). Gautama and Baudhiyana (J. 171. 1) speak of cight forms of marriage, while Apastamba speaks of only six and omits Prajapatya and Paisaca (II. 5. 11. 17-20 and TJ. 5.12. 1-2). Baudhayana (TIT. 2. 4-6 ) allowed a larger share to the eldest son on a partition, while Apa- stamba condemns such प procedure CII. 6. 14. 10-14). The Baudhayana-grhyasttra (11. 4. 6 ) allows upanayana to rathbakara, while Apastamba ( grhya 4. 10. 1-4.) does not do so ( dharmasttra I. 1.1.19). These points are hardly conclusive on the question of date. From very ancient times there was great divergence of opinion among the doctors of the law on most, if not on all, of these points. here is no hard and fast rule that these doctrines were up- 30 History of Dharmatastra held by carly writers and condemned by later ones. Baudhayana himself quotes the views of an ancient writer, Aupajanghani, who con- demned all secondary sons. The verses that Baudhayana quotes on this point (IT. 2. 34-36) are quoted by Apastamba also but with- out the author’s name (Ap. IL. 6. 13. 6), there being variants only in the first verse. Nevoga was allowed by Manu (9. 56-63) and then condemned (9. 64-68) and Brhaspati refers to this attitude of Manu ( vide Kullaka on Manu 9. 68). Even so late a writer 25 Yajia- valkya ( 11. 131 ) approves of niyoga. About the rathakara being allowed to conscerate the sacred fires there is a discussion in the sutras of Jaimini (VI. 1. {4 fF). Vedic passages supported both ‘methods w/z. equal division among sons and the bestowal of a larger share on the eldest. Even Yajnavalkya CII. 118) allows a larger share to the eldest son. Theretore hardly anyone of the circumst- ances relied upon by Bithler as indicating a later age for Apastamba is conclusive or convincing. “The third ground for placing Baudha- yana before Apastaimba is that the style of the former is simpler and older as compared with the latter’s. ‘That Baudhayana is simpler than Apastamba may be admitted. But this may be due to the fact that Baudhayana has been tampered with more than Apastamba. On the other hand Apastamba contains more un-Paninean forms more uncouth constructions, more words 111 an archaic sense than is the case with Baudhavana. All that is almost certain about the age of the Baudhavana-dharmasutra ts that it is later than the work of Gautama, that its style, its doctrines and its general out-look on different sub- jects do not compel us to assign it a later date than that of the other dharmastitras. We have adduced evidence to show that long before the days of Sabara ( whose latest date cannot be later than 500 A.D.) the Baudhayana-dharmasutra was an authoritative smrti; it follows that the dharmasutra must be placed somewhere between 500-200 B.C. Numerous sutras are identical in Baudhayana and Apastamba e.g. Ap. [. 1. 2. 30 = Baud. I. 2. yo-q1, Ap. I. 2. 6. 8-9 = Baud. I. 2. 39, Ap. 7.5.15. 8 = Baud. व. 2. 31, Ap. Tort. उ. [1 and 16 = Baud. IT. 3. 39 and 32. There are several verses that occur in both e.g. Baud. II. 1. 12 = Ap. 1. 9. 27. 11, Baud. II. 2. 34-36 = Ap. IL. 6. 13. 6 ( three verses condemning secondary sons ), Baud. IT. 10. 63 = Ap.-11. 9. 21. 10, Baud. II. 7, 22--23=Ap. II. 4. 9. 13. (two verses), Baud. II. 6. 36.=Ap. 11. 9. 24. 8. Besides these there are numerous Vedic quotations that are common to both. All this, The Baudhayana Dharmastitra 31 however, does not establish anything about their relative position. The Vasistha-dharmasitra also has numerous quotations in common with Baud. Vide Vas. I. 15. = Baud. I. 1. 28, Vas. III. 5, 6, 71, 20, 56 = Baud. I. 1. 10, 12, rr, 8 and I. 5. 58 (respectively) ; Vas. 6. 20-21= Baud. II. 7. 22-23; Vas. VIII. 17 = Baud. II, 2,1; Vas. XI. 27-28 = Baud. II. 8. 21-22; Vas. XVI. 34 = Baud. I. to 35, Vas. XVII. 73 = Baud. FV. 1.17, Vas. XVII. 86 = Baud. I. 5. 102; Vas. XXII. 10 = Baud. IJ. 1. 33. It is to be noted that some of these quotations ( Baud. II. 8. 21-22, 1. 10. 35) occur in the extant Manusmrti also (JIT. 125-126 and VIII. 98 ) There are a few prose sitras in Vas. that are transformed into verse in Baud. and wire versa ८. ए. Vas. TIL 41 (prose) = Baud 1. 5. 20 (quoted asa verse ), Vas. III. 57 (quoted as a verse ) * = Baud. 1. 6. 19-20. It is not likely that one borrows from the other. ‘There are two other possible explanations, viz. that both ®Baud. and Vas. (and Manu also ) quote from or adapt a common source or that the three works have been tampered with and inter- polations introduced at every step. The latter alternative is too sweeping as the number of verses is very large and makes all the old stitras except that of Gautama valueless for all chronological pur- poses. One cannot subscribe to the view that such extensive inter- polations took place as the latter theory demands. The first alter- native appears more reasonable. What that common source was, whether it was a regular work in verse or whether there was a float- ing mass of such popular verses as शला holds, are questions that present very great difficulties. It is not casv to believe that there were hundreds of floating verses on dharma no body knew by whom composed, on which writers of the centuries preceding the Christian cra drew for supporting their opinions. That does not sound asa very likely procedure. It is more probable that such verses were contained in a work or works now lost. [4] TCR In the farpaua, Baud. (11. 5. 21 ) mentions several appellations of Ganega, viz. Vighna, Vinayaka, Sthala, Varada, Hastimukha,, Vakratunda, Ekadanta, Lambodara. But this affords no certain clue as to date. The worship of Vinayaka is found in the Manavagrhya 1150. In the tarpaya CID. 5. 23) we have the seven planets mentioned in the order of the days of the week and also Rahu and Ketu ; besides the twelve names of Visnu occur in I]. $. 24. In II. 1.44 Baud. speaks of the profession of an actor or of a teacher of dramaturgy ( Natyacarya ) as an upapataka. Several 32 History of Dharmaéastra sutras attributed to Baudhavanaon the subject of adoption in the Dattakamimainsa and other later works arc taken from the Baudhay- anagrhyasesasttra (II. 6 ), the sutras agreeing very closely with Vasistha (15. 1-9 ). According to Burnell the oldest commentator on the Baudhyana- Srauta-siitra was Bhavasvamin, whom he placed in the 8th century. The commentary of Govindasvamin on the Dharmasiitra is a learned one and is generally to the point. He appears to be a very late writer. 7. Dharmasutra of Apastamba. This has been edited several times Cave. by Bithler in the Bombay Sanskrit series with laree extracts from Haradatta’s commentary called Ujjvala and also at Kumbhakonam with the complete com- mentary of Haradatia and translated by Bithler with an introduction in 9. B. E. vol. IL). “Phe Apastambakalpastitra of the Taittiriya Sakha of the black Yajurveda is divided into 30 prasuas. According 10 Bithler, the first 2.4 prasnas contain the treatment of Srauta sacrifices; the 25th contains paribhisds, pravarakhanda, and Hautraka prayers to be recited by Hotr priests; 26th and 27th prasuas constitute the Grhyasitra, the 28th and 29th Dharmasutra and the उक्ती prasna isthe Sulvastitra. Bithler scems to ७८ slightly inaccurate here. According to Caundappa, who commented on the Apastambiva stitras in the ryth century, the Apastambiyamantrapatha forms the 25th and 26th prasnas of the Kalpastitra and the Grhyasittra forms 27th prasna.’’ The Srauta-stitra of Apastamba was edited by Dr. Garbe inthe B. [. series; the Grhya and = Mantrapatha were edited by Dr. Winternitz, “Phe Grhya with the commentary of Sudarsanarya has been edited 1 the Mysore Govt. Oriental series by Pandit Mahadeva Sastri (in 1893). [tis divided into cight paialas and 23 khandas. According to the Caranavyuha, Apastamba (or “‘bha” as written in many southern mss.) is one ofthe five subdivisions of the Khandikiva school of the Taittiriyasikha of the Black Yajur- veda. Whether the author of the Apastambiya Srauta, Grhya and Dharma sutras is the same ts difficult to determine. One satra in 80 पेचविशेय TaN गृह्यमन्त्राः मपञ्ित; । प्रश्नेथ समवि स्यद्र्यनन्धराविधिक्रमः ॥ (De. Winteruitz’s edition of Ap. Mantrapatha p. IX). The editor further states (p.[Xn.2) that Paribhds%s form part of the 24th prasna and not of the 25th, as Bubler says. 7. Dharmasiitra of Apastumba 33 the Apastambadharma (11. 2. 5.17) is the same as Ap. Srauta CI. 17. 8 and भा. 1. € ). Oldenbere CS. B. Evol. 30, [. NXXIL) does not subscribe to Bithler’s view CS. BLE. Voli, pp. XTIENTV ) that the authors of the Ap. Srauta and Dharnie were identical and gives 11 as his own view that another person oi the same schaci might have imitated the stvle of the author of the Srauta. What- ever may be said of the identity of the authorship of the Srauta and Dharma sutras, the Grhya and Dharma seem to be very closely related and both seem to be the compositions of the same author. “Phe Ap. Grhya satra, as compared with the Asvalavana-erhya or Gobhi- lagrhya, is extremely brief and leaves out many rules that are given in other Grhya works. For example, about the choice of a girl Ap. 21194 gives only a single rule Cr. 3. गणे? ). While it is the Dharmasttra that tells us that the bride must not be sagetra nor sapinda (Ap. Dh. S. II. 5. 11. 15-6). 11८ Ap. Grhya issilent about the forms of marriage, about holidays, about the dutues of brabma- carins and such other subjects which are venerally treated of in other Grhyasatras. These subjects are dealt with in the Ap. Dh. S. and there are several places where the Dharmasttra presupposes the existence of the Grhya and refers to it. Compare Ap. Dh. S 1. 1, 1. 10-11 *? with Ap. Gr. S. Til. 7 ( particularly stitras 1, 17, 23 ). Vide note 54above. Some sutras are identical in the Grhya and Dharma, ९. g. Ap. Dh. 9.1. 1. 2. 38 and Grhya lV. 11. 15-16 ( about the staff of Brahmacarin ) ; Ap. Dh. +. 1. 4.8.7 and Grhya V. 13. 19. In some cases the Grhya-satra itsell seems to refer to the teachings of the Dharmasutra, c. gy. Grhva 8. 21. 1 and Dharma 11. 7 16. 6-7, All these facts make it highly probable, if not certain, that the Grhya and Dharma stitras were composed by the same author and that the details of certain topics were purposely omitted in the = eee ~= ~ ~ ~ ~ = 8" बन्धुशीललक्षणसंपन्नामरोगामुपयच्छेत । 82 sara स्थाङीपाकः । तस्यपच।रः पवणेन व्याख्यातः | भप. ध. सू.; 'जथनामाम- येन स्थालीपाकेन याजयति । एवमत ऊध्वं दुक्षिणवजमुपोषिताभ्यां Tey कायः पार्वणेनातोन्यानि SANT ग्याख्यातान्याचरायानि TIT । आप. गृ सू. Vide also आप. ध. सू. 11. 7. 17. 6 ‹ सर्वेषु वृत्तेषु सवेतः समवदाय रोषस्य म्रासावराध्य प्राश्नी यायथोक्तम्‌ › and आप. ग. सु. 8. 21. 9 सवनः समवदायोत्तरेण यजुषा शेषस्य ग्रासावराष्यं प्राश्नीयात्‌, “उभयतः परिषेचनं चथा पुरस्तात्‌? आप. ध. 11. 2.3. and आप. 7, 1. 2. 3. ; “समावृत्ते चे... यथोपदेशं पजयेत्‌ › भाप. ध. सू. 11“ £ 5 4 refers to a7, गृ. सु. 9, 13, 2-19. He De 5e ; 34 History of Dharmesiie:ra (१1 Wee, “Pre Serr (1.4 Salis: (1041 1.4 boreal ane IP. 4 404 (1 SUTRA wets TAG - 1. ‘ he cont 13 (> te An gharmsa-sacn pif --- 1. Lite ५ (4१1६); १९.1.1५ EV TS Af पा Pipes ele `: Vi in, thr atv 1.05 of those whe ५11५५ cherraty Uae fer (लत, thor rrecedence; defi nition OC cay ada his greatness. une ur fe १८.१८८ according te the varnas and 2 ceriing to one’s पपात (4 Ho proper tio for npanavers 1५ ८ he whose foe, grandfather and psfac yrand-! can be pe ‘ = . rhav cousaagyaya pe fan J becomes palita, bet oo f १ ^: ’ . an ; r = MA ce fae [| = 1 $ 4 ” Vita SCilt: ४ ४ An toe. f १144५ .१८({/ ५६ । ५ ५,८१ 1 ५६. with teacher fg: AO: 1.9. ८ ne cae On coe 26) * a (ण 4 ५ 47 brabmaciriy, tis sta ctrdl Ai Fg 5. Gee 1 1 246. food, bringing [1 ता oferta fic `. : 11148 arc his fates, rules ६८... ५ [1.4 det नपे." hers eccordrag ve 11015, giving dalsavitotihe carne althe ond clo sunly s nues lor cuataka + rales about botidays and avedi the cw and place fo: ५८५1५ study + rules about holidays apely te ondy ef che Veda anc not 10 the use of muntras in Vedic nites , the five great caily yazitas 10 the bbulas, men, gods, pitrs, and sapes, benounag cacn of higher castes, old men, parcnts, brothers and ister ond others, method o: inquiring about oncs (८2. we. according to rashes occasions OF wearing yajnopavita पप्रा and maine of वव त cules about Sorbidden and permitted food and (हा) sche weeanon oof a vant row allowee toa Bidhmana except distress ; rules forbidding the sale or exchanve of certain thins... crave sins ( pacunwa ly such as theft. the inurde: of a 1}, 111114१1 ov पपा oa (प 1. 210, incest, drinking wine ete; काप्य्‌ si ate 11८ ० vrave, ough racy make ti perseirator impure y discssian of so. > ctaphysical questions पल; as tbe knowledge of the soul, सोषा , Uw moral faults tha. lead ५ perdition such as cine „ cvcrice, hypoctsy &c ; the virtues that lead to the vighest eo.0, + choos absence of anver oF avarice &e. trathfulvoss, teanquitiy } cosapensation tur killing a Ksatriya, Vaisya, 21 Sadra and women; [न्क tor killing z Brahmana and an Atreyi Brabmana woman, jor killing a guard or a Srotriya ; prayascitta for violatng Un bed of a gure, Cor drinking wine and for Gisit of gold , pravescittas tor kitling seveial birds, cows and bulls, and ter ebustis thase sho shoaid not be ebused, fo: sexual intercourse with a Sudra woman, for taking forbidden food Dharmasiitra of Apastamba 35 and drink &८. ; rales about Krechra tor twelve nivhis , ५५2 wonstivates eft; Soe ore, should act toward. a [बद ( patita ) guriand mother ९ variwus options about [तते चन्द dur (धप guri’s bed , vrayascitta for: hie pand who Sa. intercourse vith an- other woman and fr wife’s edulrery ; pravaseitta tor killine a ‘hyana (a Jecrned.brasinans ) ; गातात was not to wield त, पान, excepi in celt-detence ०2105 hadile injury; prayaseitua for abbr fast, praysécittas foc leer sins: various views about cata ( Vidyasnatike, Veussnateka ond Vidwawrateoagka } ; the observa- 1५65 Curdtas ) 0६ द्वाद :.5 regards garmenc, answer alls of nature, abou dalous talk, about not seeing the 1451128 Or setunge Sun, avoiding moral faults such astanger ; IL ( prasua) the honse- holder’s observances commence on marriage ( piuigrabana ) ; rules of conduct fer ~ hotschokies about taking food and fasting, about पवा intercourse 3 alls worgay attain unmeasured bliss by per: forming then Guiles ame arc ce born tiv eoudiuons appropriate (८. then actions and by swears of evi decds are re-born in evil surro- andings @ goo Beahimana who is a thicf or a murderer «cf a srabinaga tocumes ¢ Candala, a similarly guilty rajeiva becomes र 0४, che (त्त Higher castes should after bathing perferm 4४ 82 ध > . oe = a ee १ ध] . "क ^ । ~ ~ [क 8) ५.५०८.६५५. ८. , Sudras ima. cool toed tor 11.11 1९८13 of hivher castes 1.८1 he suparetste of (1 Offerings Cf diy of cooked foud ; 11.५4 Cathe Scboacl. oan shersd wcod, then curdren, old men, Sk ८१११५ Be a. 00. 1190 “spd 1. dee aeuseholder षै ‡ १ J eee ea ae ms, | 11.11. bono ar. ele oe sed शित" whet comes atthe end pat Vary ace Val १11९. , ay CCEL THY ५५ ES :1 6} ५५५ unfcarned 4 oy : 14111131), Wsatrivas, Vaisvas and Sudias; am nous:older should # ms, ¶ ५ v 1५५२१ NOL adi 11}. Ga {` 4.01 १.) fies sacred 1) प्त 11 serve that ५४८५1 OSC ध “4 jhe ५ ee ee Piya’ 1८4"... a 12141111 ॥॥ (131 (* व ५ a ' (5 et as -¶ rn ॥. ध greys arn [001 4 दध. Vaisya teacher, कषा of © marited man i A ’ १८ 4 ॥ ¶ ¶ | > द ड ५ “~ = ve t , . ~~ ॥ ८८ [ऋ | च~ #, + $ ४ -_ ८1141 1 0 oe pee Re ५ } 41४ i (. 14; {द {' ~ 1) 4 1 ‘a 2 f ~; ५ ५ ८१ J t ; 1 1 wits $ : ५ = = ‘ ४ { ¶ bs ५ १८ 1) abs ree toe col. ce Cad dese १1. 1 1; १ द्वनपणः 0 ८. ^^ Ces ae 11 Sa alias 9 # “ [ 1 १.५ ^“ # ) भेष = a ध | ५ le , ¢ ty ॥ 7 र > ९९ = * ॥ ae) ~ ~> = = १ Ps =. ० ¬+ + * छ 11८. 04111. ~ ८; ^“ 27८4 1 ॥ ॥ ^ a q ' ति ee वि prota.” “Saar a0 mew | ४, ,}६}) , ५ AA KH ०.८1 a ५ ४. ५१६६ ¢ # 14 . = । पः । , „1 a ee . ५ ~ eT ee = 9 hee of Wye Eg ८144144 44 £ 4 ; : ~ i, = \ | । = show. tod, + १ i.’ ५ ४ “a. ॥ ; e eee rau ^ १; + ५ ४, १६११ ९, 4८1 4 rr ae क = 2 eco „~ : 9६. {} ~, = ति ‘ ५१ । ¦ ^ ८५ (,7:,.- { sub, ५ rear Cig aes SG १३ i ee ne, = ~ ® r = ५ ५ yest ~ r sit > १५ . 1 १ ५ 4९.) ws ( ran | ८, न 4, a Li ५.८९ |} ) ' a } ५ भ. लनं ! ४. |, 36 History of Dharmagiastra brabmacdarin, householder, hermit & ८. ; occasions for begging are the teacher, marriave, sacrifice, maintenance of parents and avoidance of the cessation of some worthy obervance (like काव); the peculiar kKurmans of Brahmanas and the other castes; rules of war; the king to appoint a purohita skilled in’ dharma and art of govern- ment, who is to carry out punishments and penances; punishments including death sentence according to the gravity of the offences, but a Brahmana wasnot to be killed or injured or to be made slave; rule of the road;a man of the lower caste by practising his duties rises higher and higher when re-born and a man of the higher castes voes lower by 61/1:1111141 ; one should not marry another wife when the frst bas childran and is helpful in the performance of dhaninas res about marriageable girl, 1. ८, she must not be sagotra and supinda of the mother; six forms of maraiage, brahma, arsa, daiva, vandharva, dsura, raksasa, preference among the six; rules of conduct after marriaee; sons born of wives of the same caste can perform the duties appropriate to the father’s caste and inherit parent’s property; the sen of a woman who was once married or who isnot married according to presertbed forms or who is not of the same caste is censured; whether the son belongs to the begetter ( or to hing on whose wife he is begotten ); there can be no gift or sale of a child; partition during father’s lifetime and equal division; exclu siontrom inheritance of the impotent, lunatics and sinners ; the inheri- 1414८ in the absence OF son goes to nearest sapmda, then to the teacher and then to the pupil, or the daughter and ultimately to the king; the opinion Gi some that the largest share eoes to the eldest son is opposed to the Vedas; 10 partition between husband and Wife; usaves of countries and families not to be followed if opposed to the Vedas; impurity on death of agnates, cognates &c; gifts to be made at proper time, place and to proper person ; sidddhas ; times of sraddbay materials required at sraddha, food (including flesh ) appropriate ato क ; what Brahmanas are 10 be called at Srdddha ; the tour चर 445; rules about parivray 1. ९. sannyasin ; he duties of forest hermit ; praise of the meritorious and condem- nation of evil-doers; special rules about kings; founding of his capital and palace; position of the sabha@; extirpation of thieves; wifts of Jand and wealth to Brahmanas ; protection of people ; persons exempt from taxation, such as Srotriyas, women of all castes students and ascetics; punishment of young men for adultery ; punishment varied according as the woman w'onged was Arya or 7. Dharmasilira of Apastamba 37 Sadra; punishments for abuse and for homicide; punishments for various breaches of conduct; dispute between cowherd and master ; the perpetrator, the abettor and one who approves of the act are all guilty; who are to decide disputes; in case of doubt decision by inference and by divine proof ( ordeals ); punishment for perjury ; all other dharmas should be learnt, according to some, from women and people of all castes. Each of the two prasnas of the Apastamba-dharma-sitra 15 divid- ed into eleven patalas, there being 32 and 29 khaydikas in the two palalas respectively. The Dharmastitra is written in a more concise and compact style than that of Baudhayana and has more archaic and un-Paninean forms than any other extant Dbharmasttra. For cxample, the following are against the rules of Panini; Adhasana ( for adha asana ) in I. 1. 2. 21, aglarhsnu (1. 2. 3. 22), muhansca (1. 2. 8. 22), agrhvamana (1. 4. 12.8), sarvatopeta (for sarvata upeta ) in [. 6. 19. 9, sakhim (for sakhim ) in [. त. 21.9. Hara- datta points out in many places that the current reading was un- Paninean and therefore he read differently (५. g. in HL. 2. $. 2 he reads ‘viprakramana’, while the current reading was ‘viprakramina’)®. This makes it probable that in the original text there must have been many more un-Paninean forms than in the one preserved by Haradatta. “Fhere are many unfamiliar or rare words used by Apastamba, 1. ९. ananivoga (1. 6. 19, 12), anaiscirika ( 1. 8. 22. 1), Kartapatya (व. 2. 5. 32), vyupatoda and vyupajava (-‘pa’ ) in 1. 2.8. 15, brahmahasarhstuta (व . 32). We meet with strange forms of certain words, such as paryanta (J. 3. 9. 21), prasasta (II 8 3), anatvaya (I. 1.1. 21 for anatvaya ), brahmojjham Cior -ojjhah) in [. 7. 21. 8, Svavit (1. 5. 17. 37), sthewana CI. 1. 30. 19 for sthivana), acaryvadire (for -daresu ) in I. 2. 7. 27. Though the Ap. Dharmasntra is mainly in prose, there are verses here and there. Some of the verses are expressly stated to be taken from other sources by being introduced with the word ‘‘udaharanti” or with “athapyudaharanti” €. द. I. 6. 19. 13 (two Slokas from a Purana), 1. 6. 19. 15 ( compare Manu 8. 317 and Vas. 9. 44), 1. rr. उव. 1 J. tf. 32. 24, I. 4. 9. 13 (two verses, same as Baud. IT. 7. 22-23 ) 11. 7. 17. 8, 11. 6. 13. 6 (three verses almost the same as in Baud. II. 2. 34-36), IT. 9. 23. 4-5 (two Slokas from a Purina ) Besides these there are scveral isolated verses, most of which 83 प्रायेण मक्रारात्परमिक)।रमधीयते । तत्राप्येष एवार्थः । इकारस्त छान्द्सोपषाठो बा I’. 38 History of Dharmasastra seem to be quotations, though not introduced with words like “udaharanti”. They are [. 4. 14. 25, 1. 6. 19. 14 (the first pada of which is Manu 4. 212), I. 9. 27. 10, I. 9. 27.11 (same as Baud. IT.1 42), IL. 2. 4.14 (compare Manu TIT. rot). Some of these verses are defective in metre, there being nine syllables in one anustubh ‘pada as in 1.9. 27. 0, 1. 9. 23. 4-5, IL. 2. 4.14. One of the verses is in the classical Upajati metre (11. 7. 17. 18), while another closely approaches that metre ( {. 9. 27. r1 ). Besides these there are a few half-verses, IY. 5.11. 5-6 (same as latter half of Vanaparva 133.1), 1. 9. 21. ro (Manu 6. 43 has the first pada). Thus in all there are about twenty verses, of which at least six oce1r in Baudhayana. Some siitras that are printed as prose are parts otf verses, €. g. [. 2. 5. 11. Besides these there are several verses in the | patalas dealing with metaphysics (1. 8. 22. 4-8 and 1. 9. 23. 1-3 ) that are pieced together largely from Upanisad passages. Apastamba in several places employs the first person plural about himself%, e. g. I. 1.1.27, 1. 8. 22.3, 1.8.23. 4. Haradatta points out that in his day there was difference in the text as handed down in Northern and in Southern India.*: Apastamba quotes, besides the जक, the Brahmanas very fre- quently (९. ¢., 1. 1. 1 ro-rr, [. or. 3.9, Lor. 3. 26, 1 a es, 7.11, 1. 3. 10.8). He quotes the Vajasaneyaka (I. 5. 17. 31) and the Vajasaneyi-brahmana ( 1. 4. 12. 3 on svadhyaya ), he speaks of the Upanisads (11. 2.5.1), his quotations (IT. 2.3.16. 2. 4. 1-9 ) from the Tai. Aranyaka agree, according to पनि, with the text current in the Andhra country. He speaks of the six azgay of the Veda (11. 4. 8. 10) and in the next stitra cnumerates Chandas Kalpa, grammar, Jyotisa, Nirukta Siksa ( phonetics ) and Chandoviciti (metrics ), which are seven ( Siksa being probably. intended to be included in grammar). There ore passages in Apa- stamba which agree with the Nirukta, ८. g. ike definition of acaryas ४4 " आाषोडशाद AMIN... aA AAT समथः Spa a yeaa: y cy, 1. 1.1. श; नत्रात्मलःभीयात्नू -लकनद्‌।हरष्याएः' 1 ४. +; carey मुतदुाहोचन्नेषन्‌द्‌.ह- रिष्यामः' 1. 8. 25. 1 85 On the siitra अन्यच र्‌,हद्‌ शनात्‌ ( 7. 14. 295) hasags ५ उदी च्वारसवेतत्परायेण न Wed | तथाच पत्रने उ्ख्यानः 86 'यस्माद्‌मन।।चर्नति स WT श ~ f Foi. :. 14; । भा चार्यः कर्मः. दृचि म्यत TTT FED Se fet] |= tke} dig lay प्र । LAG {, 4 १2 « ate a ्रद्यत्कतमस्च नाह (quoted in निन iI, 5) 39 7. Dharmasttra of Apastamba He quotes the views of ten writers on dharma by name, viz. Eka (1. 6. 19. 7), Kanva (J. 6. 19. 3 and 1. 10. 28.1), Kanva (1. 6. 7), Kunika (1. 6. 19. 7), Kutsa (I. 6. 9.7); Kautsa (1. 6. 9. 4 and 7, 1.10. 28.1), Puskarasadi (1. 6. 19. 7, I. 19. 28. 1) Varsyayani ( 1. 6.19. 5 and 8, 1. 10. 28. 2), Svetaketu ( I. 4.13. 19 and I. 2. 5. 6 ), Harita (1. 4.13. 11, J. 6. 18. 2, I. 6. 9. 12, T. 28. 1, 5 and 16, J]. 10. 29. 12 and 16). Some of the names (viz. Kautsa, Varsyayani, and Puskarasadi ) occur in the Nirukta He quotes the view of Svetaketu) in) Svetaketu’s own words (in L. 4. 13. 20) that even a smarried man should every year stay with his teacher for two months to refresh his studies and gives it as his own opinion that Svetaketu’s view is opposed to the Sastras ( the Vedas ). In another place ( 1. 1. 4. 5-6 ) he speaks of Svetaketu as an avara (a person belonging to later ages ) and as ne who on account of the remnant of his meritorious actions done 111 १ dormer life or lives was able to erasp the four Vedas in 2 short time. 11 19 usual to stc in this a reference to Svetaketu in the Chandogya Upanisad (VI. 1. 1-2), where it is stated that Sveta- लाप mastered all the Vedas in twelve years. But this identification is somewhat of doubtful value. Apastamba quotes Svctaketu as a teache: of dharma. ‘The quotation from Svetaketu given by Apas- 1amba has nothing corresponding to it in the Upanisad. Besides the Chandogya Upanisad appcars 10 make a distinction between two Svctaketu’s (in VI. 1 and VT. 8), one being called Aruneya and the other Aruni (son of Aruna). Efarita, whose views arc cited so frequently, is quoted by Baudhiyana ( Tf. 1. 50 ) and also by Vasistha CIE. 6. ). From the two) sutras CT. 6.19. 3 and 7) it follows that Kanva and Kanva are two distinct writers. The Kum- bhakonam edition reads Kanva in J. 10. 28.1, while Bithler reads Kanva there. anya Bodhayana 15 a teacher, whose, name occurs in the pyilarpand in many works. The view ascribed to Kanva by Apastamba in J. 6. 19. 7 seems 10 be the same 25 that of the Baudhayana-dharmastitra (1. 2. 19१, ). It has been shown above that there are close parallels 11 thought and expression 8? ` कं आश्यान्नः । य हृष्सदिति कण्वः । ..- शुदा ea भाक्तभ्यककुणकां काण्वकृत्सो मथ) पुष्करसादि, | FUT. 1.6. 19. £, 3and7. Here various views on the question as to whose food shuuld he partaken by begging are set forth. Raudhayana says (ते वह्मणाय)।; स्वकमंस्था' which tallies with शुद्धा भिक्षा & ¢, | 40 History of .Dharmatistva between Baudhayana and Apastamba. In several places Apastamba seems to be controverting the views of Baudhayana or similar views held by others. Apastamba condemns the view of giving the paternal wealth to the cldest son as ‘opposed to the Vedas and explains the Vedic text ( Tai. ऽ. II. 5. 2. 7 quoted above ) about the eldest son being endowed with all wealth as a mere anuvada and and not a vidhi (vide Ap. Dh. $. IT. 6. 14. 6-13). Baudhayana cites both the texts of the ‘Tai. S. about equal division among sons and about the cldest son’s larger share and seems to favour the latter view by putting it last (II. 2. 2-7. ). Similarly the discussion in Apastamba (I.1. 4. 5-12 ) about a brabmacarin eating the leavings ( ucchista) of his guru, provided the things are not directly forbidden by Sruti, seems to be directed against Baudhayana (II. 1. 25-26). Although Apastamba does not expressly quote Gautama, he appears to have had before him the Gautama-dharma- sutra. He speaks of asmrti (II. 6. 15. 25 ) that lays down that upanayana confers adbikara on a man for gastric actions and that before upaiayana one is free to do anything and to eat anything. This, as interpreted by Haradatta, refers to Gautama (II.1 )**. There are striking coincidences between Gautama and Apastamba, €, g. Gaut. I. 19.=Ap. I. 1.1. 41 (about some teachers prescribing the yellow robe to a brabmacarin ), Gaut. I. 3 = Ap. 11.6. 13.7 ( about the violation of dharia by the great in former ages ), Gaut. 9. 52==Ap. I. 11. 31. 13), Gaut. 23. 9= Ap. 1. 9. 25. 2; Gaut. 16. 19 = Ap. I. 35 9. 14-15 ). Apastamba frequently refers to the views of his predecessors in the words ‘eke’? (I. 1. 2. 37, 38, 41: 14. 17 1. 2. $. 20; [ 2. 6.4: 1. 3.9. 3:0. 3.11. 3 &c.) and ‘aparam’ CII. 6. 15. 22 ). It is somewhat remarkable that in many of these cases ( where ‘eke’ occurs), the views are those either held by ` Gautama or ascribed by him also to others, €. g. Ap. I. 1. 2. 38 about the staff of a brabmacarin refers to Gaut. I. 2 3; Ap. 1. 1. 3. 41 is almost same as Gaut. I. 19, Ap. I. 2. 5. 20 seems to refer to Gaut. I. §4-59, Ap. 1. 3. 9. 3 (the view of some that Vedic study lasts for four months and a half) seems to refer to Gaut. 16. 2, and Ap. I. 3. 11. 3 ( about not studying after dining at a sacrifice for deities that are manusya-prakrti ) pointedly refers to Gaut. 16. 34. which contains the word ^ manusyayajnabhojana ’. Apastamba twice [0 1 = on ee ee ey = "भ भोयो oe eee ee oon, = ee er जो चद 88 अग्न CERT: शचर्भवति ॥ सा निष्ठा ॥ स्मृतिश्च । आष, ध, a. I. 6. 15, 28-25; ROMAN कामचारः कामवाद्‌ः कामभक्षः । अहुतात्‌ । बो, च, q. 7. 1-8 7, Dharmastitra of Apastamba 41 quotes verses from a‘Purina“(I. 6. 9. 13, II. 9. 23. 3 )and in one place gives in prose the view of a Purana (I. 10. 29. 7. )§. Apastamba (II. 9. 24.6) speaks of the view of a Bhavisyat- purgna ( about creation of the world after a periodic dissolution ) In one place Apastamba (II. 11. 29. 11-12) says that ‘the knowledge that exists ( traditionally ) among women and Stdras is the furthest limit of vidya and it is said to be a supplement of the Atharvaveda.’ Here he probably refers to Arthasastra, which according to the caranavyttha, is the Upaveda of the Atharvaveda. Apastamba refers ( II. 7. 16. 1 ) to Manu as founder of the institution of Sraddha. But this appears to be a reference to Manu, the mythical progenitor of mankind, and not to the Manusmrti. It is noteworthy that Apastamba ( II. 7. 17.8 ) quotes a verse, which is the same as AnuSasanaparva 90. 46 ( sambhojani nama &c. ). The Apastambadharmastitra stands in a peculiar relation to the Parvamimamsa. It is the only exiant Dharmasiatra that contains many of the technical terms and doctrines of the Mimarhsi. He says (I. 1. 4. 8 ) ‘a positive Vedic text is more cogent than an usage which merely leads to an inference (of its being based on a Vedic text now lost 9° >), This refers to Jaimini’s rule (I. 3.3) “‘ if there is a conflict between an express Vedic text and Smrti, the latter is to be disregarded : but if there be no conflict an inference (may be made that the Smrti is based upon some Sruti )’. In another place Apastamba says (1. 4. 12. 11) ‘where an action is done on account of finding pleasure theretrom (i. €. from a worldly motive >), there is no (inference of its being based on ) Sastra’. This isthe same as Jaimini’s teaching (1V. 1. 2 )9'. He speaks of the 89 यो हिंसाथमभिक्रान्तं हन्ति मन्युरेव मन्यं स्पृशति न तस्मिन्दीष इति पुराणे 1 आप. धः _ 1. 10. 29. 7; this seems to be a summery of a verse like the one in Baudh&yana ( 70. 8. I. 10, 12) and Vasistha ( 1, 18 ) ' स्वाध्यायिनं at ` जातं थो इन्यादाततायिननम्‌ । न तेन्‌ शरणा स स्यान्मन्युस्तं मन्युमृच्छति ॥ ' ( Baud. has geajqé कुले and Wrel भवति ). 9 ' gale बर्तीयस्यानुमानिकाद्‌ाचारात्‌" आप. ध. स्‌; “ विराधे त्वनपे्यं स्याद्सति छनु- मानम्‌" पू. मी. सू, Vide also “विप्रतिषेधे श्रुतिलक्षणं बलीयः आप्‌, ध, सू. I. 11. 30. 9 for the same position, ~ | 91 " यन्न तु प्रत्युपकाभ्धितः agit तन्न शाञ्जमस्ति ” अ।प.; यस्मिन्पीतिः पुरुषस्य तस्य लिष्ताथलस्षणावि WHEN › पृ, मी, सु. Vide also आप. ध. सु, I. 1. 4, 9-10 शदुश्यते आपि प्रषृत्तिकारणम्‌ । Aaserads’ ००० “Reaaay’ पू, मी. सू. 1. 8. 4. Ba By 6, 4g History of Dharmatistra convention ( samaya ) of those who know Nyaya (i. ©, Mimathsa) that 27625 ( such as the Kalpasitras are ) cannot be designated the Vedas ( which are the principal), which is clearly a reference to Parvamimarhsa (1, 3. 11-14 )9? and he says that those who know Nyaya lay down that a mere anuvdda (affirming or reciting ) of what is well-known to allis not a positive rule (a vidhi), which is similar to Jaimini’s rule}. The dictum of Apastamba that the word ०८ sale” ( kraya ) applied toa bride in some Vedic texts is merely figurative closely resembles Jaimini’s?* remarks on the same point. The remark of Apastamba that the rules of anadhyaya only apply to Vedic study and not to the recital of mantras at sacrifices corresponds to a rule in [17110195 almost in the same words. These examples show that in Apastamba’s day Mimarhsa doctrines had been far advanced and that works existed that dealt with Mimarhsa topics (Nyayas). ‘The correspondence in language with the Purva- mimarhsasttra is so close that one is tempted to advance the view that Apastamba knew the extant Mimarhsa-sttra or an earlier version of it that contained almost the same expressions. It cannot be said that all these passages are later interpolations. They have all been explained by Haradatta and one of the sutras referring to Mimarns& topics occurs in so early a work asthe commentary of Visvaraipa (on १}. 1. 7) who quotes “Brahmanokta vidhayah”. (Ap. I. 4. 12.10). The last passage is quoted by Medhatithi also (on Manu II. 6 ) The dharmasttra of Apastamba has been quoted from very ancient times as authoritative. Sabara in his bhasya on Jaimini VI. 8. 18 quotes one sutra of Apastamba and a paraphrase of another.9% The Tantravartika refers to the sitras of Apastamba about local and [१ ate oe — ee - >, नक 9४ “अङ्गानां त॒ प्रधानरेष्यपदेश इति ल्यायवित्समयः । ' आप. ध. सू. 71. 4.8. 18 93 “अथापि नित्यानुवादमविधिमाहुन्यायविद्‌ः' आप. ध. सु. 1. 6. 14. 13 ; ‹ अर्थवादो वा विधिशषत्वाचश्मन्नित्यानुवाद्‌$ प्‌, मी, सू. VI. 7. 0 9५ तस्यां ्रथशब्द्‌; संस्तुतिमात्रम्‌ । MAR सम्बन्धः | आप. ध. सु. 71. 6. 19. 19-18; कयस्य धर्ममान्नत्वम्‌ प मी सू VI.1.15 95 ‘feet प्रत्यनभ्यायः श्रूयते न कर्मयोगे मन्त्राणाम्‌" भप. घ. सू. 1. 4. 19,95 “विथ प्रति विधानाद्रा AES प्रयागः स्थात्कमांथत्वात्रयोगस्य' पू. मी. सू. 2. 3. 19. 96 “अथव स्मृतिः “धर्मे च अथं च कमे च नातिचरितध्या' इति, “धर्मभजासपनने दुरे नाभ्या pater’ इति ख एवामिद्मपि स्मर्यत एव ' अन्यतरापाये अन्यां कर्ति इति ।* शरं, ००५ ‹धमेपरजासम्यन्ने द्रे नान्यां कुर्वीत । अभ्यतराभाषे काथ भगे्विलात्‌ I, 8, 41. 12-18. 7”, Dharmasttra of ‘Apastamba 48 family usages,97 about drinking wine and about the conflict between . the views of Baudhayana’and Apastamba (vide above page 26 also ). Sankaracarya in his 01404 on Brahmasatra IV. 2. 14 quotes Apastamba I. 7. 20. 3 (about the planting of trees for fruit as a meritorious act and the collateral benefits of shade and fragrance ), He also cites (on Brahmasitra II. 1. 1.) about the supreme soul a half verse from Apastamba (I. 8. 23. 2228. In his bhasya on Brhadaranyaka, he cites Ap. 00. 5.1. 5. 15.1 ( upasane guranam &c. ). The two patalas of Apastamba (I. 8. 22 and 23) dealing with adhyatma (philosophy) were commented upon by Sankaricarya, who, from the general style and method of the commentary (vide Trivandrum edition of the adhyat- mapatala), seems to be the same as the great Acarya. Suregvara in his Vartika (1. 1. 97 >) on Sankara’s bhasya on the Brha- daranyakopanisad quotes the sitra about the planting of mango ( Apastamba I. 7. 20. 3 99) trees. Visvaripa, who according to ‘Madhava, was the same as SureSvara,'°° quotes ( Trivandrum edition) in his commentary on Yajfiavalkya (4cira and vyavahara only) Apastamba’s satras about twenty times. The quotations show that the text of Apastamba was identical with the one printed, barring a few variations that are no more than mere slips on the part of the scribes of Mss. In his commentary on Y4j. III 237 Visvaripa quotes eighteen sitras of Apastamba (I. 9. 24. 6-23 ) consecutively which are the same as those in the printed text. Medhatithi quotes Apastamba Il. 5. 11. 2, Il. 4. 7. 16, II. 8. 19. 20, I. 4. 14. 30-31 on Manu II, 247, III. 102, III. 273 and VIII 357 respectively and appears to refer to Apastamba I. 4. 13. 6 (about “om”) on Manu 7. 83. The Mitaksara has several quotations and Apararka contains 97 aoserfaes 7. 188 “प्रतिदेशं व्यवस्थया । आपस्तम्धेन संहृत्य दुष्टादुष्टत्वमादृतम्‌ I’. This ४85 17 view “एतेन देशकालधमो भ्याख्याताः' आप. ध. सृ, 7. 6. 15. 1; "यापि चपस्तम्बस्मरतिवचनासुल्यवलत्वादाङ्का मवेत्सापि तस्माद्‌ बाह्मणः सुरां न TAR एतेन प्रत्यक्षश्वतिविभिना निराष्तेति नेवं विपाचारपरामाण्यमाशङ्कितन्यम्‌.' 9 परमात्मानमेव प्ररूत्यापस्तम्यः पठति "तस्मात्कायाः प्रभवन्ति सर्वे स मूलं शाश्वतिकः स नित्य. 09 आनने wert इत्यादि छापस्तम्बस्सतेेषः | फलवस्वं समाचरे नित्यानामपि कर्मणाम्‌ | . आपस्तम्ब words are ‹ तद्यथा आम्रे फलार्थे निमिते छाया Mot इत्यनुष्पयेते एवं धर्मं अ्थेमाणमथां अनूत्ययन्ते । ` 100 Vide my article in JBBRAS for 1929 pp.'205-206. 4 | 2४2८ of Dharmatigiva about two hundred stitras of Apastamba, though rather in a mutilated form. But it is not necessary to refer to these and other later works in detail, since Haradatta’s commentary, as will be shown later on, was wtitten about the time of Apararka. Thus from the days of Sabara ( 500 A. D. at the latest ) to rr00 A. D. we have a host of writers who vouch for the authenticity of the extant text of Apastamba. About the home and personal history of Apastamba little isknown. Apastamba is not an ancient name. It does not occur in the Vedic texts. Jt occurs in the gaya “Bidadi? in Panini IV. 1. 164. He speaks of himself as belonging to later ages (avara). Vide Apa- stamba'?! I. 2. $. 4. and II. 6. 13. 9. In the tarpaya he is generally mentioned after Bodhayana and before Satyasidha Hiranyakesin (vide note 68a above). Therefore according to tradition his school was elder or more authoritative than that of Hiranyakesin. In one place Apastamba refers to a peculiar griddha usage of the udicyas (II. 7. 17, 17).!° Apastamba must be supposed to have embodied in his work the usages of his own country. If he specially mentions the usages of a particular locality, it would follow that he did not hail from that locality. But the exact meaning of ^ Udicya ” is doubtful. Haradatta quotes a verse of the grammarians, according to which the country north of the Sarivati was called (ववादः, According to the Maharnava quoted in the commentary on the caranavytha the Apastambiyas were to be found to the south of the Narmada, in the south-east, that is, in Andhra and the territory about the mouth of the Godavari. Thereforc it is natural to suppose that Apastamba’s school had its origin in the south and probably in Andhra. The Pallavas made land erants to Apastambiyas. Vide I. A. vol. ४, page 155. The age of the Apastamba-dharmasttra can be settled within only approximate limits. It is probably later than the Gautama Dharma- sitra and also the Baudhayayanadharmasadtra and before 500 A. D. it was an authoritative smrti work according to Sabara. Apa- stamba is enumerated by Yajiiavalkya as a writer on dharma (I. $ ) 101 ^तस्मादुषयोऽवरषु न जायन्ते नियमातिक्रमात्‌ ४०० ^तद्न्वी्य युजानः सीदत्यवरः. 102 उदीख्यवृत्तिस्त्वासनगतानां हस्तेषुद्पात्रानयनम्‌ | ०० this हृरद says शरावया उद्‌- कीरवासिन उदी्यास्तेषां वृत्तिराचारः. ह. / 1. 0 / “ and by Sarfkha-Likhita, Its style and grammar ( which is un- Paninean in the extreme ) entitle it to great antiquity. There is no clear reference to Buddhism and other schisms anywhere. It appears to look upon Svetaketu as not far removed from its own epoch. It was probably written at a time when Jaimini had founded his school. Hence we shall not be far wrong if we assign it to some period between 600--300 B. C. On several points his views are opposed to those of his predecessors, €. g. he rejects secondary sons, condemns niyoga, does not admit Paisaca and Prajapatya as valid forms of marriage ( vide above page 29 ). There are other points also wherein Apastamba differs from Gautama and the other sitra- karas. Gautama (IV. 14-17 ) and Baudhiayana (I. 8. 7-12) give long lists of mixed castes and Gautama includes Yavana among them. Apastamba is silent on this point. But this has hardly any bearing on chronology. Even the Vedic works mention the Nisada and the Parvamimarhsastitra has a special adhikarana ( VI. 1. 51) devoted to him ; the Br. Upanisad mentions (IV. 3. 22 and 37) such castes as Candala, and the Gita mentions the Svapika. The Ap. Srauta speaks of the Nisdda ( 9. 4. 12-13). The Ap. Dh. S. CII. 1. 2. 6) mentions Candala, Paulkasa and Vaina. Gautama ( 17. 30 ) forbids the cating of the flesh of cows and bulls, while Ap. (I. 5. 7. 30-31) seems to allow it and cites the Vajasanevaka for support. In this connection it has to be noted that _Vasistha also has a similar sutra (14. 46). Ap. (I. 9. 27.10) prescribes 1 penance for one who practises usury and lays down that one should not eat at.the usurer’s (I. 6. 18. 22 ), while Gautama appears to allow usury to a Brahmana as a calling if done through an agent (X. 6). Baudhayana, on the other hand, quotes verses that condemn usury in strong language as even worse than brahmahatya, holds that a Brahmana who is a usurer should be treated as a Sidra and allows the first two castes to practise usury only towards atheists, Stidras and such like persons (1. 5. 79-81 ). So these differences of Ap. from others are hardly conclusive as to his chronological position. व Che commentary of Haradatta called Ujjvala-vrtti is the only one so far recovered.. For an account of Haradatta, vide sec. 86. The Smrticandrika (I, page 25 ) quotes a passage from the bhasya of Apastamba (II. 6. 15. 19-20) and (II. p. 300) quotes the explanation of the bhasyakaraon Apastamba II. 6 14. 1. Both these passages ae History of Dharmattstra are not found in the commentary of Haradatta, though in the latter case, Haradatta ‘holds the same view as that of the Bhasyakara. Similarly the Viramitrodaya ( Vyavahara, page 671 ) quotes the bhasyakara of Apastamba, but that quotation does not agree with Haradatta. Haradatta himself does not call his work bhasya, but vrtti. Besides the Subodhini on the Mitaksara (on Yaj. II. 132) quotes a passage from the Apastambadharmavrtti which is found in Haradatta on Ap. II. 6. 14. 1. Haradatta himself cites sometimes two or three other interpretations of the same अप्त (९. g. on Ap. I. 2, $. 2; 1. 3. 10. 6; 1.5. 15. 20; Il. 2. 3. 16). So the bhasyakara was probably one of his predecessors. In Apararka, Haradatta, Smrticandrika and other works there are numerous quotations in verse ascribed to Apastamba. These quotations are concerned with topics of Ahnika, Sraddha, and Praya- Scitta, ‘The Smrticandrika ( TIL. pp. 423 and 426 ) quotes a Stotra- pastamba. Haradatta on Gautama ( 22. 18 ) quotes several verses on prayascitta from Apastamba. Three of these verses are found in the Apastamba-smrti in verse (Jivananda’s collection vol. I pp. 567-584 chap. I verses 16, 19, 31). The Smrti printed by Jivananda contains ahout 207 verses in ten chapters on prayascitta and purifications. But the quotations from the Smrticandrika and Apararkra show that the verse Apastamba was a much larger work and since they regarded the versified work as equally authoritative with the siitra work, the versified smrti must have been comparae tively an ancient work. 8. Hiranyakesi-dharmasutra. The Hiranyakesi-dharmastitra forms the 26th and 27th prasnas of the Hiranyakesi-kalpa. The Srauta stra has been published by the Anandasrama Press ( Poona ). The Hiranyakesi-grhya-sitra was edited with extracts from the commentary of Matrdatta by Dr. Kirste ( Vienna, 1889 ). The Grhya forms the r9th and 20th prasnas of the Kalpa, cach prasna being divided into eight patalas. The Srauta-sitra is largely based on the Srauta-satra of Apastamba. The Grhya-sitra is indebted to the Grhya-sitra of Bharadvaja. The Dharmasatra of Hiranyakesin can hardly be called an independent work, Hundreds of sitras are borrowed word for word from the Apastamba Dharmasitra. The Dharmasatra of Hiranyakesin is therefore the oldest voucher for the authenticity of Apastamba’s text and is very valuable for checking the latter, 8, H tranyaketi-Diarmastira 4? The HiranyakeSins form a satra-carana of the Khandikeya section of the Taittiriyasakha and were formed later than the Apastambiya School. In a grant of the Kongu kings dated in 454 A. D. Brahmanas of the Hiranyakesi School are mentioned (I. A. vol. V. page 136 ). According to the Maharnava quoted in the commentary of the caranavyiha, the Hiranyakesins were to be found in the south-west between the Sahya mountain and the ocean and near Parasurama (i.e. in the Konkan). There are at present many ‘Brahmanas in the Ratnagiri District who call themselves Hiranya- kesins. The Dattaka-mimarhsa of Nanda-pandita twice quotes pass- ages from the commentary of Sabarasvamin on the siitra of Satyasidha. If he was identical with the great commentator of the Parva-mimarhsa ( which is almost certain ), then we have unimpeachable evidence for the existence of the works of the Hiranvakegins long before the fifth century A. D, Bihler in his second edition of the Apastamba-dharmasttra ( 1893 ) gave (in appendix II) the various readings of the Hiranya- kesi-dharmastitra from two MSS. -I secureda modern transcript of the Hiranyakesi-dharmasutra from the Deccan College collection ( No 138 of 1881-82 ), which contains the text and also the commentary of Mahadeva thereon. There are 18 folios forthe siitra and 1o1 for the commentary. That ms. presents some readings which are not noticed by Buhler as found in the two mss. consulted by him. For example, the ms. reads ^ saptama ayuskamamastame brahmavarca- sakamam (reversing the order of years in Ap. I. 1. 1. 21-22), omits the words ^" yadi snayaét dandavat plavet’ (from Ap. I. 1. 2. 30. ), reads ‘vastranyeva vasitobhaya &c.’( Ap. I. 1. 3. 9 omits vasita ), reads ‘ gurave ’ for < acaryaya’ in Ap. I 3-31. The ms. of the Hiranyakesi-dharmasiatra contains certain additions to the stitras of Apastamba. For example, a satra ‘ ksaralavana-madhvu- marhsani ca varjayet’ is added -after Ap. II. 9. 22. 14, a sttra “tegam piaja Sreyasyatmanah karya’ occurs after Ap. Il. 9. 25. 8, and the sitra ‘sarva-dharminam svadharmanusthandniyamesu a yuktah syat’ occurs after Ap. II. 9. 25. 13. The manuscript con- tains a few verses, that are not found in the Apastambadharmasatra, introduced by the words ‘athapyudaharanti'®3,’ (except in one case ~~ [ भण ऋ ह कि 9. 1 | eee Se! 7 1 [क ee ee er ae [ 103 « पशवश्च TRAM अश्मा जालवणेधर (द)तः। एतद्‌ बराह्मण ते पण्यं तन्तुग्यारजनी कृतः ॥ ` after आष, ध, चू. 1 १, 21 ५; genes कुले जातं बो Paras | ‘48 History of Dharmattsira viz. ‘putrena, &c.) The manuscript also omits certain sitras found in Ap. e. g. ‘varnajyayasam cetarair varnaih’ (Ap. Il. 5. 11.8), < anyatra rahudarsanat’ (Ap. II. 7.17.25 ), ‘ athopanayanaim tata udakopasparsanam ’ (Ap. I. 1. 1. 36. ). In the case of some अप्र the readings of Hiranyakesin present a smoother and more classical Sanskrit than that of Apastamba and are manifestly attempts to bring them in a line with the requirements of the Sistas at the time when the Apastambasatras were taken over into the HiranyakeSi school. Hiranyakesisdtra has ‘padonam’ and ‘ardhonam’ for ‘padinam’ and ‘ardhena’ of Apastamba (I. 1. 2. 13-14 ), ‘asandargane’ for ‘asandarse’ (Ap. I. 1. 2. 29), ‘aglanih’ for ‘aglarhsnuh’ ( Ap. I. 1. 3. 22 ), ‘praksalayet’ for ‘praksalayita’ ( Ap. I. 1. 3. 36), ‘kartrpatyam’ for ‘kartapatyam’ ( Ap. I. 2. 5.3.) ‘yathaéakti’ for ‘Saktivisayena’ ( Ap. II. 5. 12. 1). Another noticeable feature is thatthe arrangement of the sutras into subsections is a good deal different in the two works. Bithler notes that from the 13th khandika ( 6th patala) of the second prasna both the manuscripts consulted by him do not indicate the pajalas. ‘The Deccan College manuscript does not number them from the second patala in the second prasna. ‘The number of patalas in the first prasna of Hiranyakesi is eight, while Apastamba has eleven patalas in each of the tao prasnas. The distribution of sitras in the khandikas is therefore differentin the two works. Hiranyakesi has 31 khandikas in the first prasuaand 20 inthe second. Besidesa few of the khandikas are differently placed. The first khandika of Hiranyakesi (first prasua ) stops after Ap. I. 1, 2. 1, the third reaches up to Ap. 1. 1.4.6; Ap. I. 8. 22 and 23 (the adhyatmapatala ) come in Hiranyakesi immediately after Ap. 1. 6. 19 and are Hiranya. 1.6.20; Ap. 1. 7. 20 and 21=Hir. I. 6. 21-22; Ap. I. 9. 24 and 25. 1--4= प्रि, 1. 6. 23 ; Ap. I. 9. 25. 4-13 and I. 9. 26. r-ro=Hir. L. 7. 24; Ap. I. 9. 26. 11-14 and I. 9. 27 = प्रौ. 1.7. 25; Ap. L 10. 28=Hir. 1.7. 26; Ap. { वा, 31, 1-10=Hir. 1,8. 29; Ap. 1. 11. 31. 11-23= मी te oe = ॥ ए we ee न तेन भूणहा भवानि मन्युस्तं मन्युमृच्छतीति | which is दिरण्यकेशे 1.17. 27, 8 and comes after आप, ध. सु. 1.10. 29. 7; पत्रेण लोकाजयति पोन्रेणाम॒तं सूते । अथ पुत्रस्य पोत्रेण प्रापनोति अरष्नस्य विष्टपम्‌ ॥ दोहिमिस्तत्मतिमुञ्ति यत्पापं महद्भयम्‌ | आह्देवास्त्वधिकारिणः ॥ after आप. 77. 5. 12. 4; 'वेदष्यायी qatar ज्ये- सामिकः । बाह्यदेयानुसन्तानी पर्ने पद्धिपावनाः ॥ ` after आप, ध. सू. प. 7.11. a. The verse अव्यापक is quoted in Baud. Dh. 8, 7, 10, 13 and Vas. III. 18 ond for pstoy -& ५, compare wa 9. 137.. 8 Hiranyakeé-Dharmasiiira 49 Hir. I. 8. 30. In the second prasna the variance in distribution of sittras into khandikas is still greater. Besides Ap. II. 4. 8-9 are placed in Hiranyakesi before Ap. II. 3. 6-7 and Ap. Il. 6. 13-15 before Ap. II. 5. 10-11. Sometimes a single satra of Apastamba is split up into two and placed in two different khandikas, €. g. Ap. 1. 9. 25. 4 15 split into Hir. I. 6. 23. 31 and I. 7. 24. 1 (the portion from ‘rajanam gatva’ being the first satra of Hiranyakesi’s 24th Khandika. The com. of Mahadeva Diksita called Ujjvala, is almost word for word the same as that of Haradatta’s Ujjvala. That one has borrowed from the other admits of no doubt and Bihler thinks that Mahadeva isthe borrower. But there is hardly anything to turn the scale in favour of Haradatta. Sometimes Mahadeva’s commentary contains more matter than Haradatta’s ( €. g. on the stitras ‘ Saptame brahma- rcasakamam &c, ‘ Upanayanam vidyarthasya Srutitah’, ‘ dvadaga- varardhyam ’) and sometimes Haradatta contains more explanation (€, g. on ^ tasminsca vidyakarmantam &c.;0n ‘napsu slaghamanah snayat’, on ‘panisarnksubdhenodakenaika &c.’). Mahadeva differs from Haradatta’s explanation of the word ‘atha’, which the former takes in the sense of ‘ anantarya or adhikara’, while the latter takes it only in the sense of ‘anantarya’. That Mahadeva also is an early writer follows from the fact ( noted by Buhler p.117n ) that por- tions of his commentary are contained in the Munich Ms. of Hara- datta dated Vikrama-Sarhvat 1668 (1611-12 A.D.). It is to be notéd that Haradatta after saluting Ganega at the beginning of his Ujjvala does obeisance to Mahadeva ( which may mean God Siva or the author Mahadeva ifhe was the guru or father of Haradatta) Mahadeva often comments on the sutras as found in Apastamba and not on the readings of them as existing in the Hiranyakesi school ; e.g. he comments on ‘ paddnam’, on ‘ adhasanasayi’ for ardhasana- Sayi ( the reading of the satra ), on ‘ atmasvastyayanarthena’ ( Ap. 1, 5.11.9) for ‘svastyayanarthena’ of the ms. of Hir. The explanations of the two writers sometimes differ, as for example on ‘ acaryadhinas syad-anyatra pataniyebhyah’ ( Ap. I. 1. 2. 19! ). One more circumstance that is worthy of note is that the Ujjvala of Haradatta does not contain many quotations from Smftis as com- 104 इददृत्त oxplains ‹ आचार्याधीनो भवेत्युपनयनान्ते यत्संश्ाकतनं तत्सि्धेवाचा्याषीनता- FOS, while महदिव makes it a विधि 'आचायोधीनतया रथातभ्पमिनि विधिः”, He De qe | History of Dharmasietra pared with his commentary on the Gautamadharmasatra. Although one may be inclined to hold that it is Mahadeva who borrows, it must be clearly recognized that there is hardly any positive evidence in support of such a vicw. There is a commentary called Vaijayanti on the Hiranyakesi-srauta-sdtra. This Mahadeva is very likely ‘dentical with the Mahadeva who commented upon the dharmasatra. 9. Vasistha-dharmasutra. This dharmasntra has been printed several times. The collection of Jivananda ( part II, pp. 456-496 ) contains only 20 chapters and a portion of the 21st and so does the collection of Mr. M. N. Dutt (Calcutta 1908 ). The Anandagrama collection of smptis ( 1905, pp. 187-231 ) and the edition of Dr. Fuhrer in the B. S. series ( 1916 ) contain thirty chapters. According to Dr. Jolly (R.uS., p. 6 ) some niss. give only six or ten chapters. The Vasisthadharmasuitra with the commentary called Vidvanmodini was printed at Benares. In the following Dr. Fuhrer’s edition has been used. Kumiarila ( vide note 55 above ) tells usthat the dharmasitra of Vasistha was specially studied by the students of the Rgveda, but that along with other dharmasitras it is authoritative for all caragas. No Srauta and grhya sutras of Vasistha, if they ever existed, have come down to us. We have therefore to fall back upon one of two hypotheses, viz. either the dharmasiitra of Vasistha is the solitary remnant of a school that might have once possessed a complete kalpa or that it was composed as an independent work on dharma and was subsequently seized upon by the students of the Rgveda, who had only srauta and grhya satras of Agvalayana. For reasons given elsewhere I incline to the latter view. The dharmasatra of Vasistha cites quotations from all Vedas and beyond the name Vasistha there is hardly anything special in the dharmasitra to connect it with the Rgveda. It is true that in the 17th chap. several verses of the Rgveda (such as I. अ, $, I. 124.7, V. 4.10 which occur in sutras, 3, 16 and 4 respectively ) and several passages from the story of Sunadsepa in the Aitareyabrahmana are quoted by the sitra and that several hymns of the Rgveda, such as the asyavamlya (Rg. 1. 164 ), havispantiya (Rg. X. 88), Aghamarsana ( X. 190 ), are referred to in the 26th chap. But there is nothing remarkable in this as some of the verses and saktas are mentioned in the Bav- dhayanadharmasitra also. Besides the Vas. Dh. 5; quotes several 9. Vasistha-dharmastira 5 passages from the Taittiriyasarhhita ( 25 in Vas. V. 7-9, which quotes Tai. ऽ. Il. $. 1. 6 and Vas. XI. 48 which quotes Tai. S. VI. 3. 10. 5), the Satapatha-brahmana, the Maitrayniya-sarhhita (in Vas. I. 37 ). The contents of the Vas. Dh. S. are :— I Definition of Dharma, limits of Aryavarta, who are sinners, the mortal sins, a brahmana can marry a girl of any of the three higher castes, six forms of marriage, the king was to regulate the conduct of people and to take the sixth part of wealth as a tax; II. The four varuas, the greatness of dcarya, before upanayana there is no authority for religious rites, the privileges and duties of the four castes, in distress a Brahmana could subsist by resorting to the calling of a Ksatriya or Vaigya, a Brahmana was forbidden to sell certain things, usury ‘condemned, rates of interest allowed ; III. Censure of illiterate Brahmana, rules on finding treasure-trove, who are dtatayins, when they could be killed in self-defence, who are panktipavanas, constitution of a parisad, rules about acamana, sauca and purification of various substances ; IV. The constitution of the four castes is based upon birth and the performance of samskéras, the duties common to all castes, honour- ing guests, madhuparka, impurity on birth and death ; V. dependence of women, rules of conduct for a rajasvala; VI. usage is transcendene tal dharma, praise of dcara, rules about answering calls of nature, moral characteristics of a brahmana and the peculiar characteristics of a Sidra, censure of partaking food at the houses of Sidras, rules of etiquette and good breeding ; VII the four 4Sramas, and the duties of a student; VIII. Duties of an householder, honouring guests, IX. rules for forest hermits ; X. rules for sarnnyasins ; XI. six persons who deserve special honour, viz. the priest at the sacrifice, son-in-law, king, paternal and maternal uncles and a sndtaka ; order of prece- dence in serving food, guests, rules about sraddha, times for it, the brahmanas to be invited at it, rules about agnihotra, upanayana, the proper time, staff, girdle &c. for ; method of begging for alms, prayascitta for those whose upanayana is not performed ; XII. rules of conduct for a s#ataka; XIII. rules about the beginning of Vedic study, rules about holidays for Vedic studies, rules about falling at the feet of the guru and others, guiding principles in precedence as regards respect (learning, wealth, age, relationship, avocation, each Prior deserving more consideration than each succeeding one ), rule of the road ; XIV. rules about forbidden and permitted food, rules about the flesh of certain birds and animals; XV. rules of adoption, 92 Fistory of Dharmasdstra about excommunication of those who revile the Vedas or perform sacrifices of §tidras and for other sins; XVI. About administration of justice, king as guardian of minors, threefold pramanas, viz. documents, witnesses and possession ; rules about adverse possession and about king’s advisers; qualifications of witnesses; perjury con- doned in certain cases; XVII. praise of aurasa son; conflicting views about fsetraja son, viz. whether he belongs to the begetter or to him on whose wife he is begotten ; twelve kinds of sons ; partition between brothers, grounds of exclusion from partition, rules of niyoga, rules about grown-up unmarried girl, rules of inhe- ritance, king as ultimate heir; XVIII. pratiloma castes such as candala, no Vedic studies for stdras or in their presence ; XIX. king’s duty to protect and to punish ; importance of purohita ; XX. about praya- Scittas for various acts unknowingly or knowingly done ; XXI. prayascitta for adultery by Sidra and others with women of the Brahmana caste or for cow-killing ; XXII. prayascitta for eating for- ‘bidden food and sacred texts that purify in case of sins; XXIII. penances for Brahmacérin having sexual intercourse, for drinking wine &c.; XXIV. Krechra and Atikrcchra; AXV. secret penances and penances for lesser sins; XXVI-VII. virtues of pranayama, “Vedic hymns of Gayatri as purifiers; XXVIII. praise of women, eulogy of Vedic mantras like aghamarsaya and of gifts; XXIX. rewards of gifts, brahmacarya, tapas &c. ; XXX. eulogy of dharma, truth and brahbmaia. The Vas. Dh. S. resembles in several respects the other dharma- satras described above. It contains almost the same subjects and is similarly composed in prose interspersed with verses. The Vas, Dh. S. is in style like the Gautamadharmasitra and has many sttras identical with or closely resembling those of the latter. Vide. p. 18 above. It has also several siitras closely corresponding with the sutras of Baudhayana. Grave doubts have been entertained about the authenticity of the whole of the text of the Vas. Dh. S. as the mss. contain varying numbers of chapters from 6 to 30, and as the text is hopelessly corrupt in several places (e. £, vide note 108 below ). The Vas. Dh. S. contains many verses which bear the impress of a comparatively late age. Chapters 25-28 are entirely in verse, while there are other chapters ( like III. 2-12, VI. 1-13, XI, 20-42 ) which contain many verses interposed between prose passages. In this respect Vasishtha’s work is on a-par with Bau- 9. Vasietha-dharmasiltra 58 dhayana’s, in the fourth pragna of which there are chapters entirely consisting of verses. It has therefore been argued that the text‘of Vasistha was tampered with freely, particularly as regards the chap- ters at the end. But as shown below it will have to be admitted that the interpolations, whatever they may be, were made at a very early period. The Mitaksara quotes Vas. by name about 80 times and the quotations are taken from almost every chapter from the first to the last. For example, Mit. quotes Vas. 27.1 0n ४}. Ill. 311, Vas. 27. 21 on ४). III. 324, Vas. 28.7 on Yaj. HI. 298, Vas, 28. 18, 19 and 22 on ४३}. III. 310. Even Medhatithi quotes Vasistha over twenty times. The quotations are mostly taken from the first chapter to the 21st. Only one quotation from the last few chapters ( viz. 27. 16 ) has been found in Medhatithi ( on Manu XI. 211) and that too is not quoted as Vasistha’s, but is ascribed to ‘others.’ Visvarapa, who flourished about the first quarter of the 9th century quotes Vas. about thirty times in his commentary on the acara and vyavahdra sections of Y4j. These quotations hardly differ in any respect from the text of Dr. Fihrer’s edition and are scattered over almost all chapters from the 1st to the 17th, six quotations being taken from chapters 3 and 17 each. In the prayascitta section Visvaripa quotes Vas. even more frequently. Resides several sutras from the rst, 4th, roth and rth chapters, he quotes here no less than 22 sittras of the 2oth chap. and 9 of the 215. Moreover sutras 37 and 39 of the 23rd chap. are quoted Con Yaj. IY 281-282 ). What is more remarkable is that two verses ( 2-3 ) of the 28th chapter are ascribed to Vasistha and explained in detail ( on Yaj. III. 256 ), while Vas. 28. 4is quoted without the author’s name. These facts make it certain that the Vas. Dh. S. contained in Visvaripa’s day all the chapters from the first to the 23rd and also the 28th. Sankara in his bhasya in Br. Upanisad (1. $. 1 ) quotes Vas. X. 4 and on Br. Up. IV. 5. 15 he quotes Vas. VII. 3. The Vas. Dh. S. quotes numerous verses preceded by the words ‘athapyudaharanti’, which is the case with Baudhayana also. Several verses occur without these words being prefixed, but most of them seem to be quotations (e. g. Vas. II. 3 which combines Manu. II-169 and 170, IV. 6 which is Manu 5. 41, VI. 6 and 8 which are Manu IV. 157 and 158). Some of these verses introduced with the words ‘ athapi’ &c. as well as some of those not so introduced are in the regular classical Upajati, Upen- dravajra or Indravjra (vide. I. 38, X. 20 for verses with athapi &¢, ध्व Fatory of Dharmatiisira and VI, 9 and 25, X.17, XVI. 36 for verses without them), Some of the verses are in the ancient Tristubh form (e.g. VI. 3 and 30, VII. 17, XVII. 71 ). In one verse (VI. $ ) there are twelve letters in the first pada and 11 in the rest. One quotation with the words ०० athapi” &c. is in prose (II.5 ). There are a few un-Paninean forms like ‘Vivadanti’ in XIV.47 (vide Paninil. 3.47 ). It looks as if the dharmasitra once ended with the 24th chapter, where we have an injunction (in sitra 6 ) against imparting the dharmasitra to one who is nota son or pupil. The same अप्य occurs in Baudha- yana Dh. ऽ. IV. 4. 9 and the succeeding satra is the same in both. But the words ‘ prayascitta has been described in the rahasya sections for playing false to the husband’ ( in Vas. V. 4) apparently refer either to chapters 25-28 (which contain rabasya penances ) or to some prototype of those chapters now lost. The Vas. Dh. S. quotes largely ftom the Rgveda and other Vedic Samhitas. Among the Brahmanas, the Aitareya and Satapatha are frequently cited. The Vajasaneyaka ( Vas. 12. 31 and 23. 13 ) and the Kathaka (Vas, 12. 24 and 30. 5 ) are mentioned by name. The Tai. Aranyaka is quoted in Vas. 23. 23. The Upanisads and Vedanta occur in 22. 9. Vasistha quotes a ८0170 of the Bhillavins from their Nidana work about the extent of the home of Brahmanism, which is quoted by Baudhayana also ( Dh. S.I. 1.27). He speaks of the 4145 of the Veda ( 3. 23 and 13. 7 ) and gives their number as six (3.19). Itihdsa and Purana are mentioned in 27. 6. The science of words ( grammar ), of omens and portents and of astrology and astronomy ( Naksatravidya ) are referred to in 10. 20-21. He prohibits the learning of the language of the Mlecchas (in 6. 41 ) Vas. quotes a verse that states that the view holding the apramayya of the Vedas leads to perdition (12. 41). In Vas. Il. 8-11 occurs the Vidydsakta in four verses that we meet with in the Nirukta ( Il. 4). Vasistha calls his own work dharmagastra ( in 24. 6) and probably refers to other works on dharma in the words ‘one who studies dharmas’ ( in 3. 19 ). The study of dharmagastra as a penance for even mortal sins is spoken of in 27. 19. Vas. quotes several authors on dharmasastra. He quotes a verse from Harita Cin II. 6 ) which occurs in Baudhayana also with slight variations ( Baud. Dh. S. 1.2.7), though without the authors name. The two halves of this verse are almost the same as thé latter halves of Manu. 2. 171-172. Buhler is therefore not quite accurate when he 9. Vasietha-dharmaatira 86 says without qualification that the verse attributed to Harita occurs in Manu ( p. XX, S. B. E. vol. XIV). Vas. quotes Gautama twice (in 4. 35 and 37 ) about impurity on death, the first corresponding to Gautama ( 14. 41 ), while there is nothing in Gautama to correspond tothe 2nd. Vas. quotes a verse (11. 20) which mentions Yama by name and embodies the latter’s views. Vas. (18. 13-15) quotes three Slokas sung by Yama, one of which (14) is the same as Manu 4. 80 and another (15) is very similar to Manu 4. 81. Another Sloka of Yama is quoted by Vas. ( 19. 48 ) which is almost the same as Manu 5. 93. From these facts and others Bthler draws the conclusion (S. B. E. vol. XIV, p. XX) that these verses were taken from the Manavadharmasttra, which occupied the same position in Vasistha’s day as the Manusmrti does at present. I demur to this conclusion, which will be discussed later on in detail ( under Manusmirti ). Vas. (14. 30-32) quotes slokas of Prajapati, the first of which mentions Yama by name. Vas. 14. 16-19 and 24-27 are quoted as Slokas of Prajapati, three of which (14. 16, 18 and 24) are practically the same as Manu. 4. 248, 249 and 5.127. Vas. 14. 19 contains a pada which occurs in Manu 4. 212. It is remarkable that the Vas. Dh. S. cites Vasistha himself with great reverence (as bhagavan ) in 2. 50 ( about the rate of interest ), 24. 5 (about Krechra penance ), 30.11. In numerous places the Vas. Dh. S. either refers to Manu by name or quotes the views of Manu (under the form ‘iti Manavam’ ) or a Sloka of Manu (with the words ‘Manavarh lokam ). All these passages have an important bearing on the age of the Manusmrti and on the supposed existence of a Manavadharma- sitra. They therefore deserve to be carefully examined. Vas. I. 17 is in prose (about local, family or caste usages ) and summarises the views of Manu. The absence of the word ‘iti’ before ‘abravin’ Manuh’ and the form of the sutra itself clearly establishes that Vas. is not directly quoting a sitra of Manu. That stra is only a summary of our Manul. 118. Vas. 3. 2 (which is preceded by the words ‘Manavath slokam’ ) is Manu II. 168. And so are Vas. 13. 16, 20. 18, which are Manu 4.117 and 11.151 (with very slight variations). That the Jatter existed in Vasistha’s text is vouched for by Apararka (p. 1075). Vas. 4. 5 isin prose and cites the view of Manu that animals may be sacrificed only for worshipping atid honouring the 86 History of Dharmatistra ` 0147065, deities and guests *°5. There is hardly anything to show that it is a direct quotation from Manu and not asummary of Manu’s views. The sitra briefly summarises the views that we find expressed in our Manu 5. 22, 32, 41 and 42 (the words of 42 ‘esvarthesu pasurh hirhsan’ are interesting and bear a close resem- blance to ‘pagum hithsyad’ in Vas.). That sitra is followed by a verse which is the same as Manu 5. 41. It is to be noted that the same verse occurs in the dharmasttra of Visnu (51. 64 ) which reads ‘nanyatreti katharhcana’ for ‘ nanyathetyabravin Manuh’. This change appears to have been purposely made to keep up the impression that the Visnu-Dh. S. emanated from Visnu himself and so could not have borrowed from a human author. Vas. 4. 7 1s very similar to Manu 5. 48. Buhler (ऽ, B. E. Vol. 25, p. xxx1) is wrong in taking Vas. 4. 8 as a quotation from the Manavadharma- 50४, There is nothing to show that it is so taken. It is more probably a quotation from or a summary of a Brahmana_ passage ( compare a quotation in Apararka on Yaj. 1. 109, which is similar ). Vide note 46. Vas. 23.43 (where Manu is referred to as prescribing an easy penance called Sigukrechra for children and old men) corresponds more or less with Manu 11. 211 and 219 and Vas. 26. 8 has evidently Manu 11. 260 in view. There are only two places in Vasistha where the name of Manu occurs for which it is not possible to point out a corresponding verse in the Manusmrti. They are Vas. 12. 16 and 19 37. The latter is cited as a Manavasloka and is in the Upajati metre.*°° Because this is not found in our Manu, Bihler and other Western scholars seem to think that the verse is taken from the Manava- dharmasitra which once existed in mixed prose and verse and is now lost. But as will be shown elsewhere this hypothesis is based, to say the least, on very slender foundations. Besides these two that are not found in our Manu, there are about forty verses that are common to the Vas. Dh. ऽ. and the Manusmrti and about a dozen verses which, though not strictly identical, are more or less similar. There are several prose अऽ of Vas. which correspond to the “08 िृदिरिषपूनासामेष प ERA more । परि ५.४; रि ५३॥ जपि मान वा राजन्याय बाम्यागताय मद्रक्षण वा महाज वा पचेदेवमस्मा अतिर्थ्यं a | | 106 शुके चापि eae ae भिन्का्षौपणमसि्ति शुल्के म॒शिल्पवृत्ती न शिशो न दूते । न मेक्षलब्धे न हृतावशेषे न MA न प्रवजिते न यज्ञे ॥. The बि. र, CB 005) says "वसिष्ठः शुल्के चापि मानय श्छोकमुदाहरति न भिन्नम्‌! &e- 9, Vasietha-dharmasittra $7 verses of Manu almost word for word.1°97 The hypothesis that commends itself to me is that Vas. contains borrowings from the Manusmrti or its purer ancient original in verse. In the words ‘6ramanakenagnimadhaya’ ( Vas. 9. 10 ), the ऽप of Vikhanas seems to be referred to. Gautama (Dh. S. 3. 26) contains the same words. Vasistha’s 22nd chap. is the same as Gautama’s 1970 and Baudhayana’s tenth in the 3rd prasna and seems to have been borrowed from Gautama. Vasistha refers to the views of others in the words ‘eke’ or ‘anye’ ( Vas, 1.12, 13,253 4. 10; 17. 66; 20. 2). Dr. Jolly (ऽ. 8.8. vol. VII, p. xvi) thinks that Vas. 28. 10-15 and 18-22 are borrowed from the Visnudharma- satra chap. LVI and LXXXVII for its original the Kathakadharma- satra. Dr. Jolly is not right with regard to both the places. Buhler has already pointed out his mistake as to the second passage (S. B. E. vol. XIV p. XXII). The verses in Vas. 28. 10-15 occur in several smrtis (vide Sankhasmrti, roth chap. in Jivananda’s ed. part II. pp. 356-357 forthe same verses ). Besides Vas. 28.11 occurs in Baud. Dh. S. IV. 3.7. Hence it is hardly proper for any scholar to make the dogmatic assertion that one particular smrti must have borrowed from any other. The rather very corrupt passage in Wasistha ( 16. 21-23"% ) very closely resembles a passage of Sankha, which is cited by Visvarapa on Yaj. I. 305 and by the Krtya-kalpataru (I. O. Cat. Ms. No. 852, folio 8a ). Buhler is of opinion that the home of the school to whiéh the Vas. Dh. S. belonged lay to the north of the Narmada and the 107 afer 7. 3. ‹ तेषां वेदमधीत्य वेदो वेदान्वाविशीर्णब्मचयों य॑मिष्छेत्तमावसेत्‌ । " compare मनु 3.2 ; वसिष्ठ 15. 61 ‹ त॒णभ्रम्यग्भयुद्कवाक्सुन॒तानसुयाः सतां गृहे ea taal Sara | 9 ; compare मन 3.101; ate 16.30 ¢ aint साक्षिणः क्षियः कुर्थाद्‌ द्विजानां सदृशा द्विजाः शूद्राणां सन्तः शद्राश्चान्त्यानामन्त्ययोनयः compare with मनु 8. 68 ‹ श्वीणां साक्ष्यं fea: कुयुर्िजानां सदृशा een: । शूद्राश्च सम्तः शुद्राणामन्त्यानामन्त्ययोनयः ॥ *. 108 The printed Vas. reads ' वेधसो वा राजा श्रेयान्‌ गुधपरिवारं स्यात्‌ | गृध्परिवारं बा रजा RANT MITRAL स्यान्न गधो गृधपरिवारं स्यात्‌ * . This hardly makes any sense. The कृत्यकर्पतङ्‌ Presents 8 good reading ( from शङ्खाणिशषित ) ‘a megan: स्यात्‌ । कामे गुधो राजा भयन्‌ इंसपरिवार; । परिवारा दोषाः भाङ्ुभेवन्ति । Ase विनाशाथ । ". H. ज 8. $8 History of Dharmatastra Vindhya (S. B. E. vol. XIV p. XVI). When it is extremely. pro- blematical whether the Vas. Dh. S. was the product of a school, it is idle to speculate as to the home of the Vas. Dh. ऽ. Buihler’s is no more than a mere conjecture and it is better to admit that we know nothing positive at present on thé point. The earliest work to refer to Vasistha as an authority on dharma is our Manu (8. 140 ), saying that Vas. allowed 1/80th of the prin- cipal as interest per month. This appears to refer to the rule in Vas. 2.50. Wesaw above that Vas. borrows from the Manusmrti, which in its turn quotesa rule of Vasistha. The explanation of this is twofold. Both the Manusmrti and Vas. have received later additions and further it is possible that the present Vas. Dh. S. 15 the work of some one who had received the teachings of Vas. through a succession of teachers and disciples. Yaj. mentions (1. 4 ) Vasistha as a writer on dharma. The Tantravartika as seen above ( note 55 ) remarks that the Vas. Dh. S. was studied by Rgvedins. The same work when speaking of works on dharma puts Manu, Gautama and Vasistha in the forefront.'°%%a Viéva- rapa, Medhatithi and other early commentators largely quote from Vas. The verse ‘agnerapatyam’ ( Vas. 28. 16) occurs in the Ragirh copperplate of Tivaradeva of the last quarter of the 8th century (Fleet’s Gupta Inscriptions No. 81). Therefore the existence of any k of Vasistha on dharma at least in the first centuries of the Ch era is vouched for with certainty and the authenticity of its text is supported by eminent writers from the 7th century down- wards. Apararka quotes passages from the Bhavisyapurana which have in view the present text of Vas.'°9 Some of the views held by Vasistha are very ancient. For example, he speaks of the twelve secondary sons, assigns a very inferior position to the Dattaka son (17th chapter ), allows niyoga (17. 56 ff ) and the remarriage of child widows (17. 74); like Apastamba he mentions only six 108 ‘sey मनुगोतमवसिष्ठादिपणीताः समानेष्वर्थैष धर्मसंहिता वतन्ते । तेनाविगाना्ताभ्य एवे श्रतयः स्वनुमानाः। न च व्याकरणस्य ताभिः समानार्थत्वम्‌ aorta on जेमिनि I. 3. 24. 109 “वसिष्ठेन समाख्यातं बह्हत्याग्यपोहरनम्‌ | AUT दवादशरात्रम॒पवसेत्‌ ॥* अर्ष- Te p. 1067 (thia is वसिष्ठ 23. 38); (वसिष्ठेन तथोक्तं वै प्रायगतं सुराधिप । कामतो ARITA तु न सुरायाः STP अपरा ४, 1075 ( this ०. efyg 90. 19). 9. Vasietha-dharmastira 89 forms of marriage ( 1. 28-29 ), brahma, daiva, arsa, gandharva, ksdtra and manusa. In some respects his views are different from those of early writers like Gautama and Baudhayana. He prohibits the marriage of a Brahmana with a Sidra woman (I. 25-26). Vide Baud. Dh. S. I. 8. 2 for the contrary view.’ He नम borates rules of adoption (15th chapter ) which are not found in Gaut. or Baud. or Apastamba. He speaks of documents as one of the three means of proof (Vas. 16. 10-15 ), while Gautama, Apa- stamba and Baudhayana are silent on the point, though in Gautama (13. 4.) there appears to be a reference to documents. Taking all these things into consideration it may be said that Vasistha is later than Gautama, Apastamba and Baudhayana, but much earlier than the beginnings of the Christian era and may tentatively be assigned to the period between 300-100 B. C. It has been asserted by an eminent authority (Cambridge History of India vol. I, p. 249) that Vasistha 18. 4 ( vaiSyena brihmanyam-utpanno Ramako bhavatityahuh ) probably contains a reference to the Romans. This assumptiou is gratuitous and does not deserve serious consider- ation. The reading Romaka ( on which the learned writer relies ) is not supported by the best mss. and it is most hazardous to seize with avidity on a variant reading and to build an imposing structure of chronology thereon. The offspring of a Vaisya male from a Brahmana woman is designated Ramaka by Vasistha, while Gautama calls him दप (4.15) and Baud. Dh. 9. (I. 9.7) calls such an offspring Vaidehaka ; so Ramaka has as much to do with the Romans as with Rameses. In the nibandhas there are several quotations ascribed to Vasistha which are not found in the printed Dharmasttra. For example, Haradatta on Gaut. ( 22. 18 ) quotes a verse in the Upajati metre which is not found in the present text १४०, So early a writer as Visvardpa cites ( on Yaj. I. 19 ) the views. of a writer called Vrddha-Vasistha. The Mit. on Y4j. ( II. 91) quotés the definition of a jayapatra ( judgment ) from Vyddha-Vasigtha and on III. 20 quotes him about impurity on miscarriage. The Smyticandrika quotes about 20 verses from Vrddha-Vasistha on abnika and Sraddha ; Bhattoji in his gloss on the Caturvirhsatiqgatg., SL NOTTS. M10 The verse ls न्‌ नालिदेरेग न शःणयलनं TT मंजेन न वभरङ्कलेः | एतेक ऋ नं निचम्धनीया बद्धननि्ठेत्‌ परशं प्रगृह्य ॥ The same verse is quoted च्छि tp Prarerer ( ०० याज्ञ, ILI. 264) without the author's name. a History of Dharmatistra ( p. 12 ) seems to quote a prose passage fron Vrddha-Vasisthe. From the above it follows that Vrddha-Vasistha was an early compilation and dealt with almost all such topics ( including Vyavahara ) as are dealt with by Yaj. The Mit. also quotes a Brhad- Vasistha. The Smrticandrika (III. p. 300 ) quotes a few verses from a Jyotir-Vasistha. The I. 0. catalogue ( No. 1339 p. 392 ) speaks of a Vasistha-smrti in ten adhyayas about the religious observances and duties enjoined on devotees of Visnu. That Yajfiasvamin wrote a commentary on the Vas. Dh. $. follows from Govindasvamin’s comment on Baud. Dh. S. (II. 2. 51), where he quotes Vas. 21. 13 and Yajiiasvamin’s comment thereon. 10. Visnudharmasutra. The Visnudharmasttra has been printed several times in India, viz. by Jivananda in his Dharmaégastrasangraha ( 1876 part 1 pp. 70- 176 ), by the Bengal Asiatic Society (1881, ed. by Dr. Jolly with extracts from the commentary Vaijayanti), by M. N. Dutt ( Dharma- astra texts, vol. II. pp. 541-666, Calcutta, 1909 ) and translated by Dr. Jolly (in the ऽ. B. E. vol. VII with an Introduction), In the present work Dr. Jolly’s edition has been used. The stra contains one hundred chapters. ‘Though the number of chapters 15 so large, the siitra is not very extensive. There are several chapters such as 40, 42 and 76 that contain only one satra and one verse. The first chapter and the last two are entirely in verse; the remaining chapters are in mixed prose and verse, the versified portion being generally at the end of each chapter. As pointed out by the Vaijayanti the sitra is in close relation to one of the oldest schools of the Yajurveda, viz. Katha. It also stands in a peculiar relation to the extant Manusmrti. According to the Caranavyaha, Katha and Carayaniya are two of the twelve sub-divisions of Caraka-sakha of the Yajurveda. Dr, Jolly (9, 8. E. vol. VII p. XII) says that the Visnudharmasatra has four chapters ( 21, 67, 73 and 86) in common with the Kathak-grhya ( except the final parts in 21, 67, 86 ) and that both drew from a common source. Bihler points out ( West and Bihler’s digest, 3rd ed. p. 35 ) that the Kathakagrhya found in Kashmir agrees closely with the Dharmasutra of Visnu and the mantras in the latter agree with the Kathaka recension of the Yajurveda. But the Visnudharma- siitra is not the work of the same author that composed the Kathaka Srauta or Grhya sutras, nor does it appear that it formed part of the 10: Visnudharmadifrs: | Kathaka Kalpa, Dr. Jolly (2. ४. 3. 9.7) says thar Govindaraja € 12th century ) in his Smrtimaiijari cites a passage in prose from 2 Kathasatrakrt on the penance for Brahmana murder which is wanting in our Visnusmyti ( vide ऽ. B. E. Vol. 25, p. xxr n for the passage ). The contents of the Visnu-dharma-sitra are :-r. The earth being lifted out of the surging ocean by the great Boar, went to Ka$yapa to inquire as to who would support her thereafter, and was sent by him to Visnu who told her that those who would follow the duties of vargas and asramas would be her support, whereupon the earth pressed the great God to impart to her their duties; 2. the four varnas and their dharmas ; 3. the duties of kings ( rajadharmah ); 4. the Karsapana and smaller measures; 5. punishments for various offences ; 6. debtors and creditors, rates of interest, sureties; 7. three kinds of documents; 8. witnesses ; 9. general rules about ordeals ; 10-14. ordeals of balance, fire, water, poison and holy water ( koSa ) ; 15. the twelve kinds of sons, exclusion from inheritance, eulogy of sons; 16. offspring of mixed marriages, aud mixed castes ; 17. partition, joint family and rules of inheritance to one dying’ son- less, re-union, stridhana ; 18. partition among sons of a man from wives of different castes ; 19. carrying the dead body for cremation, impurity on death, praise of Brahmanas; 20. the duration of the four Yugas, Manvantara, Kalpa, Mahakalpa, passages inculcating that one should not grieve too much for the departed; 21. the rites for the dead after period of mourning, monthly Sraddha, sapindikarana ; 22. periods of impurity on death for sapindas, rules of conduct in mourning, impurity on birth, and rules about impurity on touching various persons and objects ; 23. purification of one’s body and of various substances ; 24. marriage, forms of marriage, inter-marriages, guardians for marriage ; 25. the dharmas of women ; 26. precedence among wives of different castes; 27. the sathskdras, garbhadhana and others; 28. the rules for brabmacarins ; 29. eulogy of acarya ; 30. time for the starting of Vedic study and holidays ; 31. father, mother and acarya deserve the highest reverence ; 32. other persons deserv- ing of respect ; 33. the three sources of sin, viz. passion, anger, greed; 34. kinds of atipatakas, deadliest sins; 35. five mahapdtakas; 36. anupdatakas, that are as deadly as the mahapatakas ; 37. numerous upapatakas ; 38-42. other lesser sins ; 43. the twenty one hells and the duration of hell torments for various sinners; 44. the various low births to which sinners are consigned for various sins ; 45. the 6s Eidory of Dharmatistra various diseases suffered by sinners and the low pursuits they have to follow by way of retribution ; 46-48. various kinds of krechras ( penances ), santapana, candrayana, prasrtiyavaka ; 49. actions prescribed for a devotee of Vasudeva and the rewards thereof; 50. prayascitta for killing a brahmana and other human beings, for killing cows and other animals; 51-53. prayagcittas for drinking wine and other forbidden substances, for theft of gold and other articles, for incest and sexual intercourse of other kinds ; 54. prayascittas for miscellaneous acts ; 55. secret penances ; 56. holy hymns like Aghamarsana that purge sin ; 57. whose society should be avoided, Vratyas, unrepentant sinners, avoiding gifts; 58. the pure, variegated (mixed) and dark kinds of wealth ; 59. The duties of house-holders, pakayajiias, the five daily mahdayajnas, honouring guests; 60. the daily conduct of a householder and good breeding ; 61-62. rules about brushing the teeth, dcamana; 63. means of livelihood for a house- holder, rules for guidance, good and evil omens on starting on jour- ney, rule of the road; 64. bathing and tarpana of gods and Manes; 65-67. worship of Vasudeva; flowers and other materials of worship, offering of food to deities and pizdas to ancestors and giving food to guests ; 68. rules about time and manner of taking food; 69-70. sexual intercourse with wife and about sleep; 71. general rules of conduct for a sndtaka; 72. value of self-restraint; 73-86. sraddhas, the procedure of 5244125, astaka Sraddha, the ancestors to whom graddha is to be offered, times of Sraddha, fruits of Sraddha on the several week days and the 27 naksatras and the lithis, materials for graddha, brahmanas unfit to be invited at Sraddha, brahmanas who are pankti- pavana ; countries unfit for sraddha, tirthas, letting loose of a bull; 87-88. gifts of antelope skin, or a cow; 89. kartika snana ; 90. eulogy of gifts of various sorts ; 91-93. works of public utility such as wells, lakes, planting gardens, embankments, gifts of food, flowers &c. $ difference in merit according to the recipient ; 94-95. rules about forest hermit ( vanaprastha ); 96-97. about sarknyasa, anatomy of the bones, muscles, veins, arteries &c. ; concentration in various ways 98-99. praise of Vasudeva by the Earth and of Laksmi; 100. rewards of studying this Dharmasastra. The Visnudharma-satra somewhat resembles the Dharma-satra of Vasistha. Like the latter it is full of verses. But one feature which is peculiar to the Visnu-dharmasiatra is that it professes to be a revelation by the supreme Being. None of the other dharma- 10. Visnudharmastiva | 89 sOtras so far described assumes this role. The style of the Visnu- dharmasitra is easy and somewhat diffuse. It presents hardly any ungrammatical forms. The printed text is corrupt only in a few cases ; the verses occur generally at the end of chapters. Sometimes the number of verses in a chapter is very large e.g, in chapter 20 there are 21 siitras and 32 verses, in chapter 23 there are 24 verses, in chap. 43 there are 14, in chap. 51 there are are 20 verses. Some of the verses are in the classical Indravajra (19. 23-24 ) and the Upajati metres ( 23.61 and 59. 30) and a few are Tristubhs ( 29. 9-10, 30. 47, 72. 77 ). The three Tristubhs ( 29. 9-10, 30. 41 ) are three out of the four verses of the Vidy4-stkta occurring in the Nirukta (1. 4). There is one verse (72. 6) which has eleven letters in the first pada and twelve in the remaining three. In determining theage of the Visnudharmasatra one is confronted with a difficult problem. Some of the chapters undoubtedly contain material which is comparatively old and on a level with the ancient Dharmasttras of Gautama and Apastamba. Such are the chapters about rajadharma and punishments (3 and 5 ), the rules about twelve sons and the mixed castes ( 15-16 ), funeral rites and mourn- ing ( 21 and 22 ). But there are very large portions of the work that bear a clear impress of a later date. The Visnudharmasitra and the Manusmrti have at least 160 identical verses. But this is not 211. There are hundreds of satras which are merely the prose equi- valents of verses from the Manusmrti. For example, Visnu 2. 3 and Manu 2. 16, Visnu 3. 4 and 6 and Manu 7. 69-70, Visnu 3. 7~r0 and Manu 7.115, Visnu 3. 11-15 and Manu 7. 116-117, Visnu 4. 1-13 and Manu 8. 132-137, Visnu 5. 4-7, and Manu 9. 237, Visnu 20. 1-21, and Manu I. 67-73, Visnu $. 7-10 and Manu 4. 209-212, Visnu 59. 21-25 and Manu 3. 70, Visnu 62. 224 and Manu 2. 59, Visnu 71. 48-52 and Manu 4. 80, and Visnu 96. 14-17 and Manu 6. 46 agree almost word for word. ‘The verses that are identical in both are found in all the chapters of the Manusmrti from the second to the last, the largest number ( about 47 ) occurring in the sth and chap- ters eleven, two, and three respectively contributing 25, 24, and 19 verses. ‘Therefore the question whether the extant Visnudharma- ‘sutra borrows from Manu or vice versa or whether both borrow from a common original assumes very great importance. As the corres- pondence extends over several hundred verses of the Manusmrti, the last hypathesis of borrowing from.a common original does + History of Dharmasistra not recommend itself to me. No such common source is known to have existed and to say that there were hundreds of floating popular verses whose authorship was unknown and which were drawn upon by both works appears to me to be an extremely gratu- {tous and unsatisfactory assumption. In my opinion it is the extant Visnudharmasitra that borrowed the verses ad hoc or adapted them from the Manusmrti. There are several lines of reasoning that strengthen this hypothesis. There are some verses that are iden- tical in both, in which the name of Manu occurs, which the Visnu- dharmasatra omits by making slight verbal changes. For example, Visnu 23. 50 substitutes ‘tat parikirtitam’ for ‘Manur-abravit’ in Manu 5.131 and Visnu 51. 64 reads ‘ndnyatreti katharhcana” for Manu 5. 41 ‘ nanyatretyabravin-Manuh’ (this last occurs in Vas. 4.6). The reason for these changesisobvious. The Visnu-dharma- stra professes to be a direct revelation from Visnu and it is in keep- ing with this assumed role that notone human author is mentioned by name in the satra. Therefore where the name of Manu occurred in any verse, it was purposely omitted. Another reason why the sitra must be presumed to be the borrower is the character of the extant work itself. It isa kind of hotchpotch and contains verses that are identical with those of other works. For example, several verses of the Bhagavatgita occur in the Visnudharmasiatra. Visnu 20, 48-49 and 51-52 are the same 25 Gita 2. 13. 23, 24, 28 ; Visnu 72.7 and Gita 13. 14-18 are almost identical. Visnu 96. 97 and the first half of 98 are the same as Gita 13. 1-2, except that in keeping with its character of a revelation to the Earth, the Visnudharmasutra substitutes ‘ vasudhe’ for ‘ kaunteya’ and ‘ bhavini’ for ‘ bharata. ’ Several verses of the YAjnavalkya-smrti are identical with those of the Visnudharmasttra. For example, Visnu 6. 41 and Yaj. 2. 53, Visnu 8. 38 and Yaj. II. 79, Visnu 9. 33 and Yaj. 2. 97, Visnu 17. 17 and Yaj. 2. 138, Visnu 17. 23 (first half) and Yaj. 2. 210 ( latter half), Visnu 62. 9 and ४}. 1. 21, Vi. 63. 51 and Yaj. 1. 117 are iden- tical. Besides these there are hundreds of prose sitras that are identical with passages of Yajiavalkya. For example, Vi. 3. 72-74= ४2}. II. 1-4 ; Vi. 3. 82 = Yaj. 1. 318-320 ( rules about land grants ) ; Vi. $. 65-69 = Yj. II. 217-220, Vi. $. 73 = Yaj. II. 221 ; Vi. 45. 3- 12 = Yaj. 3. 209-211 ( about diseases suffered by sinners ) ; Vi. 60. 24 = Yaj. 1.17; Vi. 96. 55-79 = Yaj. 3. 84-90 (about 360 bonesof the body ) ; Vi. 96. 80-88 = ४३]. 3. 100-102 ( about the number of arteries, veins, muscles etc.); Vi. 96. 89-92 = Yaj. 3.93-39,- Dr. Jolly 10. ` Vienudharmastitra 65 thinks that Yajiivalkya borrows from Visnu the whole of the anato- mical section (vide ऽ. B. E. vol. VII, p. XX). With great respect I differ from this opinion. There is nothing to show that the anato- mical details were first given to the world by Visnu. They must have first been embodied in works on medicine such as those of Caraka and अप्पा" and were probably copied by Dharmasutra writers. But if there is any borrowing between Visnu and Yajfia- valkya I think from the character of the Visnudharmasutra that it is the sitra that must be regarded as borrowing from YaAjfavalkya. There are several matters in the extant Visnudharmasatra which are wanting in Yajnavalkya and which induce one to place the extant stra later than Yajiavalkya, viz. the name ‘ Jaiva’ for Thursday Vi. 78. 5), the long list of tirthas ( Vi. chap. 85 ) which include riparvata and the five rivers of the south cailed southern Pajicanada, the importance of the conjunction of the moon and Jupiter on 2 full moon day ( Vi. 49. 9-10 ), the vague definition of Aryavarta'"? (Vi. 84. 4). The verse in Visnu 54. 33 ( about half prayascitta for boys and old men ) is ascribed to Angiras by the Mitaksara (on Yaj. TI. 243 ). Therefore the most probable conclusion is that the extant Visnu- dharmasutra borrows from the Manusmyti, Yajfiavalkya and other authors. It would be too much to assume that the Manusmrti, the Bhagavatgita and Yajnavalkya borrow from such a comparatively unimportant work as the Visnudharmasutra. The above conclusion is further strengthened by certain other con- siderations. The Manusmyti has been quoted with utmost reverence by a host of writers from the fifth century downwards, such as Sabara, Kumirila and Sankaracarya. Yajiiavalkya was commented upon by Visvart pa in the first half of the 9th century. Vigvarapa in his commen- tary quotes scores of sitras from Gautama, Apastamba, Baudhayana, Vasistha, Sankha and Harita. Butit is significant that Visvarapa in his commentary on Yajiiavalkya does not quote even a single satra of Visnu by name. It is true that Visvarapa (on रक. III. 66) says that 113 Vide चरक, AIST chap. 7 and सुश्रुत, शारीरस्थान्‌ Chap. 5; in the STF हृद्य of वाग्भट, शारीर chap. 3, we find 360 bones and 700 musoles. 419 चजातुर्ण्यव्यवस्थानं यस्िन्देशे न वियते । स म्टेष्छदेशो विज्ञेय आर्यावर्तरततः परः ॥ It is to be noted that र ह), (1. 3) lays down dharmas for the country in which the black deer moves about, following Baud. I. I. 38 and Vas. 1. 13. ४, ०३, 66 History of Dharmatietra the four forms of asceticism ( parivrajya ) should be understoéd from other smrtis like those of Visnu'*3. This probably refers to chap. 97 of the extant Visnudharmasatra. Medhatithi (on Manu 3. 248 ) quotes Visnu ( 27. 12 ) andon Manu 9. 76 quotes a satra of Visnu which I could not trace in the printed Visnu.''** The Mitaksdra mentions Visnu about thirty times. The quotations are taken from chapters 19, 21, 22, 35-42, 50, §1, §2, 75 and 79 of the Visnu-- dharmasitra, 18 satras of chap. 22 ( on aSauca and kindred topics ) being quoted on ४३. III. 23, 24, 27, 29-30. Butit isa remarkable fact that notone of the verses in the extant Visnudharmasttra is cited as Visnu’s in the Mitaksara. The only exception is a verse cited as Visnu’s on ४३}. III. 265, which has the same purport as Visnu 52. 14 (a verse ) and the first pada of which is identical with that of the verse in the Visnudharmasttra.''' A few verses that are quoted as Visnu’s in the Mitaksara could not be traced in the extant dharmasitra.'"® It is not unlikely that the sitra first contained mostly prose 095 based on Manu and the Kathakagrhya and verses were tacked on later. Among later writers of nibandhas Apararka quotes Visnu most profusely and the Smpticandrika also quotes Vigsnu about 225 times. 113 स्त्यन्तरेभ्यश्च विष्ण्वादिभ्यो विशेषतश्चतुर्विधः पाखिज्यपरकारमेदोभ्यपगन्त्यः | 114 The quotation is ‘ अष्टौ विप्रसूताः षट्‌ राजन्याश्चतुरो वेश्या द्विगुणं प्रसूतेति न AIA कालनियमः स्वात्संवत्सरमित्येके ”, compare for a somewhat similar rule Vas. 17. 78 115 यथाह विष्णुः । दत्वेवापहूतं द्र्य स्वामिने वरतमाचरेदिति । while विष्णुधमंचुत्र reads ‘ दुत्तवेवापहृतं द्रभ्यं धनिकस्याप्युपायतः | Ta ततः कुयौत्कल्मषस्यप- नुत्तये ॥ 116 The verse are: ओष्ठौ विलोमो वासो विपरिधाय च | १०४९० on Yaj, I. 195; अपरशस्तास्तु कानीनगृढोत्यननसद्येढजाः | पोनमैवश्च नेवेते पिण्डरिक्थांशभागिनः ॥ quoted on Yaj. I. 138; अपुन्रपोत्रसन्ताने द्रा धनमा्रयुः | Tat तु स्वधाकारे पौन्ना दोदि्रिका भता ॥ OD ४ छ}. 1. 135 ; आङृष्टस्ताडितो वापि धनेवा विप्रयोजितः UNE त्यजेत्पाणांस्तमाहुमेह्यषातकम्‌ ॥ ज्ञातिमित्रकलत्रा्थं सृह्सन्नाथमेव च । यमुद्दिश्य त्यजेत्‌... घातकम्‌ ॥ उद्धिश्य कुपितो हत्वा तोषितः श्रावयेत्‌ पुनः | तस्मिन्‌ मते न दोषोस्ति TASS AM रते ॥ om ? ४). 777. 227 ; श्ीणाम्ं प्रदातव्यं द्धन रोगिणां तथा । पादो बलिषु दातभ्यः सर्वपापेष्वयं (A: ॥ on ४81. IIL 243: TEAST TATE मासमेकं पलत्रयम्‌ । प्यहं स्यात्यराको वा चान्द्रायणमथापि वा ॥ bn Yj. 1. 268 10. Vienudharmasitra 67 Many of the verses found in Vi. are quoted by Apararka 25 Visnu's, 6.8. Vi, 84. 4 on Yaj. 1. 2; 68. 46-47 on Yj. 1, 106 ; 67. 33 on Yaj. 1. 107 ; $. 183 on Yaj. 2. 60; 0. 9710) Yaj. 2.102. But there are numerous verses quoted as Visnu’s by Apararka which are not found in the sutra, €, g. on Yaj. 1, 21, 53, 89, 100. Apararka quotes almost whole chapters of Visnu, e. g. Vi. 68 on ४2}. 1. 106 and 90 on Yaj. I. 208, 70 on Yaj. 1.114. It is to be noted that Vi. 70. 17 ( a verse ) is quoted by Apararka asa prose sitra(on!.114 ) with slight verbal changes. All these facts make one feel naturally scep- tical about the authenticity of most of the verses in the extant Visnu- dharmasatra. They probably formed no part of the sutra at the time when the Mitaksara was composed. Atall events it cannot be gainsaid that the verses are a very late part of the sitra. ` The Visnudhamasitra contains quotations from all the Vedic samhitas and from the Aitareya-brahmana ( as in Vi. 15. 45 ). It mentions the Vedarigas very frequently (30. 3 and 38, 28. 35, 83. 6), it speaks of Vyakarana (83.7), of itihdsa (3. 70, 30. 38, 83. 7), of Dharmaégastras ( 3. 70, 30. 38, 73. 16, 83. 8), of Purana ( 3. 70, 30. 38 &c.). About the close correspondence between Baud. III. 6 and Visnu. 48 and between Vas. 28. ro-15 and 18-22 and Visnu 56 and 87 vide remarks made above pp. 23, 57. The satra quotes several verses (called gathas) and says they were sung by pitrs; vide 78. 52-53, 80. 14, 83. 21, 85. 65-67. They bear close resemblance to the gathas sung by the pitrs quoted in the Anugdsana-parva 88. 11-15 and a half verse ‘estavya bahavah putra yadyekopi Gayarh vrajet’ is the same in Vi. 85. 67 and Anu. 88. 14. The Visnusmrti enumerates twenty one hells (43. 1-22), which are almost the same as Yajiiavalkya’s (3. 222-224). It mentions the names of the seven days of the week (78. 1-7), Thurs- day being called Jaiva, while Yajiavalkya mentions only the seven planets ( with Rahu and Ketu ) in the same order (1. 296). Ie recommends the practice of sati (25. 14), speaks of pustakas (18. 44, 23. §6 ), a word which is not used by the other dharmasttras so far described. It gives a long list of good and evil omens at the time of starting on a journey ( 63. 33-39 ). Among evil omens it includes the sight of yellow-robed ascetics (i. €, Buddhists probably) and Kapalikas ( 63. 36 ). It prohibits speech with Mlecchas, Antyajas (71. 59 ). and journeys to Mleccha countries (84.2). It centains special directions about the worship of Vasudeva in chap. 49 88 History of Dharmaftstra and speaks of Svetadvipa as the reward of devotion to Vasudeva ( 49. 4). Here and there, there are eulogies of Vasudeva (1. 50-57, 65.1, 97. 10, 98 which gives one hundred names of Visnu ). It speaks of the four vyahas of Vasudeva ( 67. 2) and of the Varaha incarnation. It gives a vague location of Aryavarta as a country where the four varnas exist ( 84. 4 ). It enumerates numerous sacred places ( 85. 1252), among which Sriparvata, Saptarsa ( modern Satara? ), Godavari and southern Paficanada deserve to be specially noted. Though it does not specifically enumerate the eighteen titles of law just as Yajiiavalkya does not, yet it contains rules (in chapters 5-6 ) on almost all of them. As Yajfiavalkya enumerates Visnu among the propounders of dharmasastras, it follows that a work of Visnu existed in comparati- vely early times. What matters that work embraced it is difficult to say. It probably contained the topics found in the works of Gautama, Apastamba and others. It may have included portions borrowed from the Kathakagrhya. When Dr. Jolly says that certain chapters of Visnu agree closely with the Kathakagrhya, all that is meant is that some of the sutras of Visnu are the same or almost the same as those of the Kathakagrhya (e. g. compare Visnu 21, 73 and 86 with Kathakagrhya V. 12, V. 9, and V. 3 respectively ). But in all these places Visnu contains more details than the Kathakagrhya. It may however be noted that in a few cases the views of the Kathakagrhya differ from those of Visnu. For example, Visnu ( 30.1) speaks of Vedic studies for 444 months only in the year when once they are started on the full-moon day of Sravana or Bhadrapada, while the Kathakagrhya (I. 9. 10 ) gives three alternatives, viz. 444, ऽ or 514 months ; Visnu prescribes that the proper year for the upanayana of a ksatriya is the 11th from conception (27. 16), while the Kathaka prescribes the 9th, without specifying whether it is from conception or birth (IV. 1. 2); Visnu enumerates eight forms of marriage (24. 18 ), while the Kathaka (II. 3 and 4) speaks of only two, Brahma and Asura, and is silent about the rest; Vigsnu (46. 19-20 ) defines Santapana and Mahasantapana differently from the Kathaka (I. 7. 3-4 ), but agrees with Yajiiavalkya ( III, 315—316 ). Here the recent Lahore edition of the Kathakagrhya by Dr. Caland has been used. As it used Kathaka mantras and borrowed from the Kathakagrhya, the dharmasatra may have been a text-book of the Kathaka school and probably originated in Kashmir and Punjab which is the - home 10. Vignudharmasitra 89 of the Kathas. The date of the older portion of Visnu may be placed between 300 B.C. to100 B.C. But this is no more than a mere conjecture. It is to be noted that Kumirila does not mention the _Misnudharmasitra among the satras studied by particular schools. “Then several centuries later on the whole of the ऽप्य was recast from the Vaisnavite point of view and received large additions both in prose and verse. When these additions were made we have no exact means of determining. It is probable that they were not made very long before Visvarapa. Atall events the additions were made long after the Yajiiavalkyasmrti and after the 3rd century. The mention of the week days makes the sitra compara- tively a late work. The earliest epigraphic mention of a week day is in the Eran inscription of 484 A. D. (vide Fleet’s Gupta inscriptions pp. 88-89 ) and Varahamihira ( 6th century ) knew the week days well. The Brahmapurana (28. 55) mentions Sunday and the Padmapurana mentions Thursday (Brahmakhanda chap. 11. 34). The Sarya-siddhanta ( XII. 6 and 78) speaks of the lords of days. Thus although the extant Visnu-dharmasitra is a late recast, it contains a few doctrines that were held in ancient times. For example it allows a Brahmana to marry a girl of anyone of the four castes (24. 7 ) and does not inveigh against mtyoga as Manu does, A few of the sittras agree closely with Narada. Vide Vi. 7. 10- 11 and Narada ( Rnadana verses 136-137 ) The Mitaksara quotes allthe prose passages of chapters 35-42 and ascribes them to Brhadvisnu ( on Yaj. 3. 242). Similarly on Yaj. 3. 261 it ascribes Vi. 35. 3-5 to Brhadvisnu. Similarly the Smrticandrika (II. p. 298) ascribes Vi. 17. 4 ff to Brhad-Visnu. The Mitaksara (on Yj. 3. 267) quotes a verse of Vrddha-Visnu which summarises some sitras of Visnu "7 (50. 6 and 12-14). In the Anandagrama collection of smrtis there is a Laghu-Visnu- smrti in five chapters and: 114 verses dealing with the duties of the varnas and the four asramas. Apararka in his commentary on Yj. 3. 258 quates four verses from Laghu-Visnu, which are not found in the Anandagrama text. So Aparirka used some other work or perhaps a larger work. The Parasara-Madhaviya often quotes gadya- प The verse of afte © FA तु सकं देयं पादोनं GAT सतम्‌ | यमक पादस्त्‌ ्रजातिषु शस्यते ॥ The ००५२५ are ब्राह्मणं इत्वा दवादशसंवत्सरे Sig । पादोनं erred । अर्ध वेश्यवमे । aa TT । 70 ERdory of Diarmatistra Vigsnu and padya-Visnu. The former from a quotation in vol. I. part 2, p. 234 seems to be the Visnu-dharmasutra itself. In the Sarasvativilasa numerous sitras of Visnu with the explanations of Bharuci thereon are quoted, which are not found in the printed Visnu.'"8 a The Visnu-dharmasatra was commented upon by Nandapandita, author of several works on dharmaSastra, who wrote at Benares the commentary called Vaijayanti ( according to certain mss. ) in 1679 (i.e. 1622-23 A.D.) of the Vikrama era. Dr. Jolly publishes extracts from this commentary in his edition of the sutra. From the fact that the Sarasvativilasa quotes several times the sitras of Visnu with Bharuci’s explanation, it looks probable that Bharuci commented upon the Visnudharmasatra. For further infor- mation on Bharuci vide sec. 61. So far only the printed and well-known dharmasitras have been passed under review. But there were nnmerous other dharma- stitras which are either now extant in rare mss. or are not yet discovered but are only to be reconstructed from quotations. It is now time to discuss them. 11. The Dharmasutra of Harita That Harita was an ancient sitrakara on dharma is quite patent from the fact that the dharmasutras of Baudhayana, Apastamba and Vasistha quote him as an authority (vide pp. 25, 39, 54). Apastamba quotes Hiarita more frequently than any other author. From this it may == = LE 1 1, ता । Ne छ 2 ह ae ए 777. 1 1 0 al 118 ०. &. para 637 यथाह भारुचिरेतद्विष्णवधनभ्याख्यानावसरे बीजशब्द्‌ः पिण्डवाचीति | ( Vignu's stra seems to have been बीजम्रहणानुविधाय्मशं गृह्णीयात्‌ ); pare 719 अन्न भारचिः ( ०० विष्णु "° सूत्र ‹ पितृष्यपितभातुभिरेव संसर्गो नान्यैः ) वैकल्पिकोयं संसग विधिरिति; Pere 136 अन्नः ones मिन्नोद्राणामिति नि्धोरणे qe} ( ०० विष्णा qa‘ Pract संसृशटिनो गृह्णीयुः" ) $ Para 847 contains a long stra of एण ‘ अपत्यं गामं धामं मत्रं वेयमाकस्मिकमादशाब्दं प्रविभाज्यमत ऊर्वं स्व॑मविभाज्यम्‌ ° and para 848 contains भाहि ‘s explana- tion of it. Vide pp. 32, 50, 165, 166, 243, 244 &o. of the recently published Mysore edition of the qzeqdifaaig for sutras of Visnu which are not found in the printed text of Visnu. It appears that the सरस्वतींविल्छासं had a very much larger version of the stra before it, 11. The Dharmasiira of Harta 71 be concluded that they belonged to the same Veda. The Tantravartika (vide note 55 above ) mentions Harita along with Gautama and other sitrakaras on dharma. From Visvaripa down to the latest writers on dharmaégastra Harita is most profusely quoted. From the quotations it appears that his dharmasitra was perhaps the most extensive of all dharmasitras. The late Pandit Vamansastri Islampurkar discovered at Nasik a ms. of the Harita-dharmasitra. It was not possible for me to make use of it for the present work. Dr. Jolly (in R. und S. pp. 8-9) gives an account of the ms. from which I give a summary. It is so faulty that an edition based on it alone cannot be thought of. The ms. contains thirty chapters. So far as the language and contents are concerned the work impresses one as ancient, but the material citations ascribed to Harita in later digests on court procedure and the law of crimes &c. are not found in the ms. The prose is mixed up with verses in Anustubh and Tristubh metres, which are often introduced with the characteristic words <^ athapyudaharanti ” as in other dharmasitras. The ms. quotes ‘ bhagavan Maitrayani’ and the verse ^ Satadiyo viro” which is Maitrayaniya Samhita I. 7. 5 Dr. Caland points out remarkable correspondence between the cita- tions of Harita and the Maitriyaniya Parisista and Manavaéraddha- kalpa. All this tends to show that he was a sttrakara of the Black Yajurveda. The numerous quotations from Hiarita in Apastamba and Baudhayana are not however found in the ms. The ms. was found at Nasik, which is also the source of two mss. of the Maitra- yaniya Sarhhita. The Kashmirian word ‘kaphella’ is cited in Harita and so the Harita-dharmasitra probably originated there. Heméadri ( caturvarga III. 1. 0. 559 ) mentions acommentator ( bhasyakara''? ) of Harita. From the numerous quotations from Harita in the nibandhas it appears that the dharmasitra dealt exhaustively with the same topics as are dealt with in other dharmasitras, viz. sources of dharma, brahmacarin of two kinds ( upakurvana and naisthika ), suataka, the householder, the forest hermit, prohibitions about food, impurity 0 — sete eng etre en ~ >~ = --*~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ a oe ae eee ee ee । - = क —e . 119 The sttra of Harita is « पलङ्कन्था-नालिका-पातीक--शिगु--ससुक-वातकि-" म॒स्तण--कफछ-माष-मसुर--रूतलवणानि च ANS न दयात्‌” ०० which gang says, Ste: आरण्यविरोषः काश्मीरेषु प्रसिद्ध हति हारीतस्मतिभाष्यकारः,. व ' History of Dharmatistra on birth and death, graddha, the panktipavana, general rules of con- duct, the five yajiias, Vedic study and holidays, duties of kings, rules of statecraft, court procedure, the various titles of law, duties of husband*and wife, various kinds of sins, prayascittas, expiatory prayers &c. According to Kullaka (on Manu 2. 1 ) the Harita-dharmasutra opened with the words ‘ now then we shall explain dharma ; dharma is based upon revealed texts (Sruti ); revealed texts are of two kinds, the Vedic and the Tantric."7°” The quotations show that this very style was pursued in the body of the work. Apararka (on ४३. III. 322 ) quotes a satra'*’ in similar style about a penance ‘tulapurusa’ said to have been promulgated by Siva himself. The sutra often introduces verses as quotations with the words ‘an author says thus” ( evarh hyaha ; vide Apararka on Yaj. I. 83, I. 154, 1. 135, Vivada-ratnakara pp. 443, 626). Numerous passages quoted as Harita’s are identical with passagesfrom other dharmasastra works. The sitra ‘ Jayapatyorna vibhago vidyate’ is quoted as from Harita by the Smrticandrika (II. p. 268), which is the same as Ap. Dh. S. II. 6.14. 16. The same work quotes ‘pratyaksavidhanad garhasthyasya ’ as from Harita which is part of Gautama 3. 35. A verse about the enormity of usury quoted in the Smpticandrika (I. p. 177 ) as Harita’s is almost the same as Baudhayana (I. 5. 79 ) and Vasistha'?? (2.42). A verse about atipatakins (quoted by Aparirka on Yaj. 1. 231 ) isthe same as Visnu 34. 2. Manu is mentioned by name in several verses ( vide Smrticandrika III. p. 426, Vivada-ratnakara 0. 552-553). Iwo verses are cited in the Vyavaharatattva ot Raghu- nandana as found in Harita, Baudhayana (I. 10. 30) and Manu ( 8. 18-19 ), A verse quoted by the Smpticandrika (Il. p. 21 ) is almost the same as Manu 8. 95. Several times we have the words ‘Prajapativaco yatha’( vide Apararka on एव]. I. 154 and Smrti- candrika I. p. 187 ). पित्रा seems to have relied upon the views 220 ` अथातो धम व्याख्यास्यामः। श्रुतिप्रमाणको धर्मैः । श्रुतिश्च Rite वैदिकी तान्तिकी ब ॥ १, The Brahmayajfia probably takes the words अथातो," , स्यामः from हरीत and not from the Vaisegika-stitra, 181 अथातक्लिनयनोक्तस्य तुठापुरुषस्य Bet भ्यार्यास्यामः। 188 The verse is‘ meet बृद्धिजीवं च तुक्छया समतोखयत्‌ । अविष्ठ meg कोटा बृदधिजीवस्त्वकन्वत TST ॥ 11. The Dharmastitra of Harita 73 ot ‘dcaryas’ in several places.'?} He often quotes the views of others ( eke, apare'*+ ) and sometimes refutes them.'*5 Harita refersto the Vedas, the Angas, dharmaéastra, metaphy- sics, and other branches of knowledge.'76 The quotations do not show that he belonged to any particular Veda, as he quotes from all the Vedas promiscuously. In this connection it is worthy of note that though Kumiarila mentions H§arita as an ancient dharma- sitrakara, he does not assign him to any particular school, while he Some of the doctrines of Harita are worth noting. He speaks of eight forms of marriage, but two of them are styled Ksatra and Manusa, while Arsa and Prajapatya are omitted ( vide Viramitrodaya, Samskaraprakasa, p. 84). Vasistha has the same nomenclature (I. 29 ). प्रतता speaks of two sorts of women ( brahmavadinis and sadyovadhas) and states that the former were entitled to have the Upanayana performed, to kcepthe sacred fireand to study the Vedas.'27 He speaks of the twelve kinds of sons (vide Haradatta on Gautama 28. 32 ). He looks down upon the profession of an actor and forbids the employment of a Brahmana actor in any 5124473 or rite for gods.**8 Apararka (on Yaj. II.3332 ) quotes from Hiarita a lengthy passage in mixed prose and verse, where the worship of Ganesa comes in.'?9 188 विभ्वं on २}. 1. 195. ‹ तन्मान्रच्छेदनमेके वाससाम्‌ । न वा साधारणध्वात्‌। साधी. रणं हि वास इत्याचार्याः । तस्मात्सर्ववाससामुपधातापनोद्नादेवं शदिः । ', sates on शक}. 1.154. « SAVE MUIR: > शद्‌, पा, ४. 704. ‘a छथ्दानामयं लोको न पर इत्याचार्या › , 184 Vide मद्‌, षा, 70. 607, 706; स्पतिच° all. p. 483, अपराकै on YSj. II. 137, 125 अपराकं ०० YS). 1. 185. ‹ यानशयनान्यपरिहययाण्येके मन्यन्ते | तन्न । वर्णविदेषात्‌ शुङ्कमदिनसंसर्गदर्शनात्‌ पापसंसरगयोगा्च तस्मात्‌ पृथक शौषाण्टेयासः | 126 स्मृतिच. 77. ०. 200. वेदा ay ध्मौभ्यात्मं विज्ञानं स्थितिम्यति षड्विध श्रतम्‌ । 137 द्विविधाः जियः । nite सथयोवध्वश्च । ay अद्धवादिनीनामुपनयनममरीन्धनं बेद्‌ा- ध्ययने स्वगृहे अं भिक्षा । quoted in स्म॒तिच्‌ 9 1. p. 24. and जतुर्विशतिमत- व्याख्या ( Benares ed. ) p. 113. 188 कुशी लवादीन्‌ दवे पिश्ये च Wie । Woted by अपराः on २७. 1, 232-324. 139 We have there the names सालकररंकट, कूष्माण्डेराजपुत्न, भदह्यविनार्यक, वक्रतुण्डं, WAS, For the firat two vide जानवगृष्छसुश II. 14 and याज्ञ, 1. 285 ff. We De 20, 44 History of Dharmatiuire A very interesting question is the relation of the verse quotations from Harita with the prose quotations from Harita. The dharma- stitra was probably interspersed with verses as is the case more or 1655 with all dharmasatras except that of Gautama. But there are mumerous verses ascribed to Harita in the ntbandhas, which are manifestly modern. Both the Mitaksara and Apararka (on Yaj. I. 86 ) quote Hirita’s verses eulogising the sati. The Smpticandrika CII. p. 344 ) quotes his verses that refer to the signs of the Zodiac. There are numerous verses containing elaborate rules of procedure, ascribed to प्रिता, which are quite foreign to the general atmos- phere of the ancient dharmasitras. All such verses must be ascribed to a comparatively later date. In the Suddhimayakha it is said that certain verses quoted from the Mahabharata by Harita are not found in several copies of the Mahabharata. Dr. Jolly (in 1889) collected together most of the prose and verse citations from Harita on the Vyavahara section. In Jivananda’s collection, we have a Laghu-Harita smrti ( 1. pp. 177-193) anda Vrddha-Haritasmrti (I. pp. 194-409). The former contains seven adhyayas and about 250 verses, dealing with the duties of the four castes and the asramas and with Yoga. The latter is professedly a Vaisnavite work, said to have been proclaimed by Harita to Ambarisa; it is divided into eight chapters and contains about 2600 verses, dealing with the mitya and naimittika rites of the varnas and asramas, the nature of the individual and supreme self and the means of attaining moksa. In the Anandaégrama collection of smstis, Vrddha- Harita is divided into eleven chapters, the first two of: Jivananda’s being split up into five. The Anandaégrama collection contains a Laghu-Hiarita-smrti in 117 verses which is different from the Laghu- Harita of Jivananda. The former deals with purification from pollutions of various kinds, with prayascittas, rules about impurity on birth and death, sraddha and a few rules about inheritance, partition &c. It is noteworthy that Apararka ( on'Yaj. III. 254 ) quotes Vrddha- Harita and Harita, both in prose, one immediately after another. That the Vrddha-Harita in verse is comparatively a late work follows from the fact that it distinctly recites that the smrtisof Manu, Yajfiavalkya, Narada and Katyayana were known to it as authorities 11, fhe Dharmasttra of Htrita v3 on raja-dharma."3° Some of the quotations ascribed to Laghu-Harita in Apararka and other works are found in the Laghu-Harita, €. g. the verse ‘vina yajfiopavitena’ (Laghu-Harita, Anandasrama, verse 23) is quoted by Apararka on Yaj. III. 289. Some verses that are as- cribed to Harita are found in the Laghu-Harita, for example, the verse ¢ snanam krtv4 tu ye’, cited by the Smrticandrika (I. p. 203), occurs in the Laghu-Harita ( Anandaérama, verse 41). It appears that several compilations were made at different times, embracing different topics of dharma and ascribed to Harita, probably because they were based more or less on the Haritadharmasatra. That some of the verses ascribed to Harita are very ancient follows from several considerations. Forexample, Visvardpa quotes ( on Y4j. III. 246 ) a verse from Harita. The Sarasvativilasa quotes from Hiarita a brief passage which appears to bea portion of a verse and Katy4yana’s explanation thereon.'3* It follows that long before the sixth century A. D. Harita existed in verse. For Harita on Vyavahiara, vide sec. 56. 12, The Dharmasutra of Sankha-Likhita From the Tantravartika we learn ( note 55 above) that the Dharmasitra of Sankha-Likhita was specially studied by the Vaja« saneyins ( the followers of the white Yajurveda). The Tantravartika also quotes a few words from that dharmasitra which constitute an Anustubh pdda.32, The Mahabharata ( Santi. chap. 23 ) contains the story of the two brothers Satkha and Likhita. In the Santi- parva ( 130. 29 and 132. 15-16 ) the word Sankha-Likhita seems to be used in a double sense, Sankha also meaning the forehead. Ye jfiavalkya ( 1.5 ) mentions Sankha-Likhita among the writers on dharmasatra. The Parasarasmrti says ( 1. 24 ) that in the four ages of Krta, Treta, Dvapara and Kali, the ordinances of Manu, Gautama, Sankha-Likhita and Paragara are respectively of paramount authority 01 1 १911 150 रानधर्मोयमित्यवं प्रसङ्गात्‌ कथितो भया । कात्यायनेन मनुना याज्ञवल्क्येन न धीमता ॥ नारदेन च संप्रोक्तं विस्तरादिद्मेव हि । तस्मान्मया eater ates नृपोलम ॥ ( Jivananda I, 4th chap. p. 265; Anandaérama, 7th chap. 270-273 ). 181 हारीतेनापि केचन मेद्‌ Ten: । एकमूलो दिरत्थानो दिस्कन्धो Res: 1 कस्यायनरतु तानू ष्या षषे । ४०० उल्लास, 9. 91 ( Mysore edition ). 133 लन्तरवार्तिक, ?. 139. ‹ स्म तंषमाधिकारे हि शङ्कलिसिताभ्यामुक्म्‌ - आनायः स्मृति- ~ भरकः” : 28 . , व of Dhacmatidira +) in matters of dharma. Visvardpa (on Yaj. III. 248 ) quotes a verse from an ancient author which says that Sankha and Likhita pondered deeply over the dharma promulgated to the sages by Manu and drew upon the Veda'33 also. Commentators and nibandhakaras from Visvarapa downwards profusely quote Sankha-Likhita. A consi- derable portion of these quotations is in prose. Hence it is quite clear that the dharmasttra of Sankha-Likhita is an ancient one, that it was largely if not entirely in prose and that it was once easily accessible though it has not yet been discovered. In the Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (vol. VII-VIII ) I made an attempt at a reconstruction of Sankha-Likhita. Jivananda (collection of smrtis, part II., pp. 343-374) prints in ‘r8 chapters and about 330 verses a smpti of Satkha and a smrti of Likhita in about 93 verses (part II., pp. 375-382). The Anandasrama collection also prints the same text of the two smrtis. The latter also contains a Laghu-Sankha-smrti in 71 verses and a Safkha-Likhita- smrti in 32 verses. All these, except perhaps the Sankha-smrti in 18 chapters, are late compilations. The smrti in 18 chapters seems to have been compiled very early. About fifty verses from it are quoted by the Mitaksara. In the वपो and 12th chapters occur a few prose passages, one of which is quoted even by Medha- प्रप. The numerous prose quotations ascribed to Sankha- Likhita do not however occur in these smrtis. One point deserves special notice. Comparatively early writers sometimes ascribe the same text to Safkha-Likhita or to Sankha simply. The well-known 50118 about succession toa son-less man (athdputrasya svaryatasya bhratrgami dravyam &c. ) is ascribed to Sankha by Visvarapa and the Mitaksara, but to Sankha-Likhita by Apararka ( on Yaj. Il. 135- 136). Similarly the satra ‘pitaryasakte kutumbav Mohr eat jyesthah’ &c, is asaribed to Sankha by Apararka and to Sankha~Likhita by the Vivada-ratnakara, Dayatattva and Madanaparijata. Quotations ascribed to Likhita are few and far between. Some passages are ascribed by some writers to Sankha and by others to Likhita. For example, a prose passage ‘ Uddhrtya pariksitabhih’ &c. is ascribed to Likhita by Apararka (on Yaj. 1.18) and to Sankha by Visvarapa (.on ४३}. I. 20 ) and by the Viramitrodaya ( Ahnikaprakaga p. 68 ), Similarly the sdtra ‘ubhabhyimapi hastabhyam pratmukho deva- tirthena kuryat’ is ascribed to Sankha—Likhita by the Paragaramadhe- 188 समीक्ष्य निपुणं धर्ममृषिभ्यो मनुभाषितम्‌ | MATT TST arent सिसेतह्तथा 9 18. The Dharmastirva of Sankha- Likhita क~ viya (I. 1. p. 352) and to Likhita by Apararka (on Yaj. I. ror), The relation of the Sankha-smrti in verse to the dharmasitra of Sankha seems to be this. The former is based upon the latter and is a versified paraphrase or adaptation of portions of the dharmasitra.*34 The versified Sankha shows a tendency towards greater strict- ness. The dharmasutra allows a Brahmana to marry a woman of any of the four castes, while the verse Satkha restricts him to the first three castes.35 It is not unlikely that the dharmasatra cone tained a few verses as is the case with Baudhayana, Apastamba and Vasistha. Even soearly a writer as Visvaripa looked upon the ‘prose and verse portions as the composition of the same author ( vide his comment on Y4j. III. 237, and Aparirka pp. 1149, 1154, 1161 ). The dharmasutra of Sankha-Likhita was commented upon early. Laksmidhara in his Kalpataru ( Ghose’s Hindu Law vol. II., p. 504) draws attention to the fact that the bhasyakara of Sankha read a well- known sutra as ‘sa yadyekah syat’ instead of ‘sa yadyekaputrah syar’. Laksmidhara flourished between 1100-1160 A. D. as he was a minister of Govindacandra of Kanauj. The Vivadaratnakara (1314 A. D. ) also cites the bhasyakara of Sankha-Likhita. The Vivada- cintamani (p. 67 ) quotes from the bhasyakara of Santkha-Likhita. The dharmasttra of Sankha-Likhita would appear, from the quotations in the nibandbas, to have closely resembled the other extant stitras on dharma in style and contents. It embraced almost all the topics treated of in Gautama or Apastamba. It agrees very closely with the words of Gautama and Baudhdayana in several places. 36 It is curious to note that a quotation from Sankha 134 Compare ggeq प्रिपूतामिरद्धिरिवोक्षितामिरक्तारामिरनधिभिताभिरफेनाभिरबुहरदाभिः ( quoted as Sadkha’s by the वृर ९, आद्धिकमकाष्ठ, p- 68) with apart 9. 6 ‘aR: समुदतामिस्तु gant: Saget । वहिना बप्यद्ग्धामिरङ्गुलीमिरपस्पृशेत्‌ ॥ 135 The दुयमाम (ed. of 1829, p. $10) quotes CATE: कायाः ‘SAARI भेयस्यः सर्वेषां स्युरि Tiers | ततोनुकस्पश्यतस्रो ब्ाह्मणस्यानुपु्येण " } the शेङ्खस्मरति (५.7) says ‹ बराह्मणी क्षत्रिया वेश्या ब्राह्मणस्य मकीर्तिता ॥ 136 Compare ‹ नाब्राह्यणोतिधिभह्चणस्य ' (quoted in वीर्‌ ०, आहिक ०, 0. 452) with गो. lag, 8. 80-485 ° दुन्तवदुन्तलमेषु' (quoted by अप्राकं on याज्ञ. I. 195) with a}. ष, सू. I. 41-43; ‘a तिष्ठन्न प्रणतो नाङ्कलीभिः' ( चतुर्ग * IIT. 1, p.977) with बो. ध, चू. I, 5, 25, 8 । i Setory of Dharmatisira “containing the names of writers of smrtis cites Sankha-Likhita as authority .'37 The dharmasttra seems to have permitted niyoga, speaks of twelve secondary sons, and did not favour (like Apastamba ) the claims of females to succeed to males. On certain points the dharmasttra of Satikha marks a more advanced state of opinion than is the case with Gautama or Apastamba. Sankha speaks of several kinds pf ordeals and appears to have contained elaborate prose rules ‘about them (vide Apararka on Yaj. II, 95 ; Smrticandrika र, p. 112, Viramitrodaya, 2. 270 ). As regards partition ahd inheritance, Sankha-Likhita gives more detailed information than Apastamba or Baudhayana. The limits of Aryavarta's® stretched over wider areas according to Sankha (i. e. to the east of Sindhu-Sauvira and to the west of Kampilya ) than is the case with Baudhayana (1. 1. 25 ) or Vasistha (1. 8-9 ). The style of Sankha reminde one of Kautilya rather than of Gautama. The quotations hardly exhibit any ungram- - matical forms. It is noteworthy that Yajiiavalkya is included among the authors of smrtis by Sankha ( vide note 137 above ). If it is the extant Yajiiavalkya-smrti that is meant to be referred to, then ` the dharmasitra of Sankha will have to be assigned to a late date. But this does not seem to be likely. From the fact that the Yajfia- valkya-smrti itself enumerates Sankha-Likhita among ancient authors on dharma, from the general style of the work, from the develop- ment of the legal conceptions it presents and from its doctrines about the rights of women, it appears almost certain that the extant Y4jiia- valkya-smyti is much later than the dharmasttra of Sankha. There are close correspondences between Sankha and Yajiavalkya.'39 19 ¢ स्मरति््मशाख्लाणि तेषां प्रणेतारो मनुयमदृक्षविष्ण्वङ्गिरोवृहह्पल्युशनआपस्तम्ब- गोतमसंवर्तौभ्निहारीतकात्यायनशेङ्कलिखितपराशरण्यासशातातपभ्रचेतोयाज्ञवल्क्याद्‌यः । quoted in चतुर्वर् I. p. 527; वीर ° परिभाषा ०, ए. 16 and स्मति्च. 18 ‹ देश oral गुणवान्‌ ... प्राक्‌ सिन्धुसीवीराहक्षिणेन हिभवतः पण्यात्काम्बिस्या उदक्‌ धारिषोन्रादनषद्यं MITT | › quoted in वीर्‌ ०, परिभाषा ०, 9. 57. 189 compare ‘ qgwa वा सौमिन्तः > शद्भुः १४०४० in अतुवेगे ° III. 2. p. 784 with याह्ञ, I. 11; ¢ AEH यथाकृलम्‌ ¢ शङ्खः ( quoted in TAG ® Ti1.2., p. 743) whe याज्ञ. 1. 39 : "वरानाहरे्सटशनसमानारपेथानत्तम्बन्धानासपमपर्चययत्‌ पित॒मात- बन्धुभ्यः ' UE { quoted in gyvqqy ०० ang, ध. सु. H. 5.11.16) with „ ह्न I. 58, 18. The Dharmastiva of Ba. 0 The prose quotations from Satikha-Likhita refer to the Vedangas, Sankhya, Yoga, dharmasgastra. Sankha recognised eight forms of marriage. The views of Sankha about the status of the offspring of mixed marriages differed from those of Baudhayana (I. 8. 6 ) and Manu ( ॐ. 6 ) and were intermediate between the fatter two." The tarpana'** (which resembles the one in Baudhayana, though it is more elaborate ) refers to the six Vedafigas, Bharata (but not Maha-bhiarata ), to twenty writerson dharma and contains nume- rous details about geography, mythology, and cosmogony which ate generally found inthe Puranas. The dharmasttra frequently cites the opinions of others. It mentions by name the views of Praja- pati, Angirasa and USsanas ( Vivadaratnakara p. 537 ), Pracetasa (Vivadarat. p. 557-560), Vrddha-Gautama (Madana-parijata pp.7o1-2), The verse quotations ascribed to Sankha further mention Yama, Katyayana, and Sankha himself. But in drawing chronological con- clusions it is better to leave the verse quotations out of account. The same verses are ascribed to Manu and Sankha"#? and a few sitras closely resemble the Manusmrti.'4} Six identical verses occur in the Vasistha-dharmasutra (28. 10-15 ) and in the Sankha-smrti ( roth chap. ). All these circumstances lead to the conclusion that the dhafnia- sitra of Satikha is probably later than Gautama and Apastamba but earlier than the Yajiiavalkya-smrti and so must be assigned to some date between 300 B. C. to 100 A. D. 13, Manavadharmasutra—Did it exist ? Following the orthodox view of Western Sanskrit scholars that most of the dharmasitras are older than almost all, if not all, the metrical smrtis, I gave the first place of honour to the dharmasitras of Gautama and others. But my own views differ to a great extent from those of the orthodox school of Sanskritists represented by Max Miller and Buhler. It is high time to state here my views about 140 ‹ ब्राह्मणेन क्षत्रियायामुस्पन्नो क्षत्रिय एव wae” शङ्क ५०४०० in मिताक्षरा on YB). 1.91, 141 Vide चतुग ° IIT. 1. pp. 950-955 and aire आङ्गिक, ?. 366. 5. for तरेण. 142 The verse शर्भामे बै कुर्वीति 1" चतं ० 17. 1. 119 is मनु. ४. 36; ‹ भृतका- भ्यापको यस्त स उपष्याय उश्यते › ५४०४००१ in स्मरति I, p. 84. is मनु II, 141. 143 « इषं गृह्णाति राजन्या प्रतोदं वैश्या दशान्त शत्रा ° quoted in धरा. Ft. I, 2. p. 98 Compare मनु 3, 44. ' ध ` ` Bistory of Dhermtieted the existence of a Manava~dharma-satra supposed to be the original of our extant Manu. Some western scholars, particularly Max Muller and Weber, started the ingenious theory that the extant Manusmrti was a recast or remodelling of an ancient Manavadharmasatra. Max Miller went so far as to enunciate the bold generalisation ‘“‘There can be no doubt, however, that all the genuine dharma-gistras which we possess now, are without any exception nothing but more modern texts of earlier satra works on kuladharmas belonging originally to certain Vedic caranas” (H.A.S.L. pp. 134-135). For this sweeping generalisation there were very few data when it was made, as is admitted by Buhler. This theory of Max Miller was as hasty, as unfounded and as uncritical as several other theories of his such as that about the renaissance of Sanskrit Literature in the early centu- ries of the Christian era, about the absence of the art of writing in India before Panini and about the uniform employment of the sloka for literary purposes in his so-called उत्त period and earlier. Western Scholars had to give up such theories before the stern logic of facts, but they have tenaciously clung to the theory about the Manusmrti being a recast of the Manavadharmasatra. One of the main planks of Max Miiller’s edifice was the now exploded theory about the non-employment of the anustubh during the satra period (which he tentatively placed between 600 B. C.—200 B. C.) for con- tinuous composition. In spite of the fact that one of the main planks has totally collapsed Buhler makes strenuous efforts to rehabilitate Max Milller’s theory by additional 4 priori arguments CS. B. E. vol. 25, pp. उणा ~या and xxxi-xxxrx). The main points brought forward by Buhler are:-(I) The Vasistha Dh. S. CIV. 5-8) contains four sutras, the first of which is ‘The Manava says that one may kill an animal only in honouring the Manes, gods and guests.’ There follow two verses and a passage in prose with iat the end. Buhler argues that all the four sitras are quotations and as the extant Manusmrti is in verse, they must be regarded as taken from the Manavadharmasatra. (II) There are other quota- tions in Vasistha attributed to Manu which either contradict the present Manusmrti or have no counterpart in the latter. Bohler draws §pecial attention to the fact that Vasistha (19. 37) quotes a ro Sloka which is not in the anustubh metre and which has thing corresponding to it in the extant Manusmtfti. 18. Manavadharmasiitra— Did it exist ? $1 (I) A fragment of Usanas quotes an opinion of Manu about impurity, which is in prose.'4¢ Buhler himself points out that here one ms. reads ‘Sumantuh’ for ‘Manuh’. Therefore this argument is of very little uss in establishing the existence of a Manavadharmasitra. Besides, it is possible that the mutilated passage is not a quotation at all, but a mere summary of Manu’s views. ‘There is no ‘iti’ at the end to show that it isa quotation. (IV) Kamandakiya-nitisara (II. 3) says that according to the Manavas the vidyas to be studied by a king are three, viz. the three Vedas, Varta, and Dandaniti and that what is called Anviksiki is but a branch of trayi; while the Manusmrti (7. 43 ) appears to regard the four as distinct vidyas.'45 Kamandaka ( XI. 67) says that Manu prescribed that the council of ministers should consist of twelve "५८ while Manu (7. 54 ) says that the ‘sacivas’ should be seven or eight. Bihler therefore argues that Kamandaka has in mind the Manavadharmasitra and not the Manusmyrtiand on the word ‘Manavah’ makes the following observations ‘ It isa very common practice of Indian authors to refer in this manner to the books restrict- ed to special schools. But 1 know of no case where the doctrines of the Manavadharmasastra or ofany other work, which is destined for all Aryans and acknowledged as authoritative by all, are cited in the same or similar way’ (S. B. E. vol. 25, ए. XXXVIII). In the first place it has to be noted that Kamandaka is only paraphrasing’ the words of Kautilya in the above two places.'47_ Further it is note- 144 In No. 644 of Visdrambag (I) in the Deccan College there 18 a fragment of Uéanas where weread उपस्पृश्य... (४९7) HAUS । TS देशान्तरस्थे चानिके वोरध्वाने (1) अनाशकेपिभवेशे ASA च सद्यः ass, The words बलि देशचाम्तरश्थे occur in Manu 5. 78 in the same connection. For the rest, compare Manu 5. 98 and 95. We must probably read देशन्तरश्थे च सापिके, No. 191 of A 1881-82 is another fragment of Uéanas which contains the same passage, Buhler's mes. read सदयः शोचानष्पति ताभितनिन्दि ताचरिनं सह संवसेत्‌ and he proposes शौचािष्टमिति, 145 The words of the मनुस्मृति are ब्रैवियेभ्यखर्य। Pat दण्डनीतिं च way आन्वीक्षिकी चात्मवियां वातारन्माश्य SA ॥ 166 केमन्द्क 5958 grea मनुः प्राह षोडशेति eerie । seat विंशतिरिति avert मन्नरिमण्डलम्‌ ॥ 147 यी वातौ दुण्डनीतिग्येति मानवाः । श्रयीविशेषो Merete’ कोटिस्य 1. ४; मन्नि- परिषदं दादशरामात्यान्‌ SHA मानवा; षोढेति engeren: विशतिभित्योशनसा, itew 1.15. | M.D. IIe 8% | ` History of Dharmatdstra worthy that Kamandaka employs the word ‘Manuh’ while Kautilya uses the word ‘Manavah’ ( about the number of ministers). ‘There- fore according to the Kamandakiyanitisira there was no difference between the two, viz. the words ‘Manuh’ and ‘Manavah’ denoted the same thing, a work. What Bihler means by his emphasis on the word ‘Manavih’ is not quite clear. Early writers like Kumarila and Visvariipa employ the word ‘Manavam’ with reference to the Manu- smfti just as they use the word Vasistham to denote the Vasistha- dharmasitra ( vide Tantra-vartika pp. 80, 115, 642 and Visvaripa on Yaj. III. 245 and 257). Sankara in his bhasya on Br. Upanisad 1. 4. 17 applies the word ‘manava’ to the Manusmrti ‘ manave ca sarva pravrttih kamahetukyeveti’ ( referring to Manu II. 4) Besides, there is hardly any conflict between the views of the Minavas and the Manusmrti 0) the point of the number of the vidyas. The Manavas knew that Anviksiki was counted as a fourth vidya but said that it was really comprehend- ed in the study of the Vedas. The Manusmrti only lays down from whom the vidyas were to be learnt. As regards the number of ministers, we cannot afford to forget that the Manusmrti (7. 60 ) allows more ministers than seven or eight. Another explanation also is possible. In the final remodelling of the Manusmrti from its original in verse it is not unlikely that a few changes were made. (V) On the strength of the preservation of the complete set of the sitra works of Apastamba on इदा, grhya and dharma (also of Baudhayana and Hiranyakesin ), it is urged that the Manava carava had a ऽप on dharma. The Manavasgrautasatra ( parts 1-5 edited by Dr. Knauer and the chayana by Miss Gelder at Leipzig in 1921 ) and the Manava-grhyasitra ( edited by Dr. Knauer in 1897 and recently in the Gaikwad Oriental Series ) are extant. Bihler admits (ऽ. B.E. vol. 25, p. XXXVIII ) that the main pillars of his arguments are the quotations ascribed to Manu in the Vasisthadharmasitra. The four sGtras of Vasistha (IV. 5-8 ) which arethe sheet anchor ‘of Buhler’s argument have been dealt with above under Vasistha (pp. 53-56). If, as Bithler says, the four sutrasare one quotation, since “iti occurs at the end of the 8th sutra, then we have here a quotation within a quotation, as ‘ iti’? occurs also in sutra 5- But this would be absurd. Besides satra 8 is really summarised from some Brahmapa passage, as indicated above. The proper construction of the four ; 032 0G of 18. Manavadharmasiira~Did it exist ? 8१ satras is as follows ~ The fifth satra merely summarises the views of the Manusmrti to be gathered from Manu V. 41 and 48. The ord ‘ Manavam ’ stands for the Manusmyti just asit does in the Tantravartika and in Visvaripa. Then the two verses of Manu are quoted. In the 8th sitraa Brahmana passage is cited in support of the position that sacrificing an animal is not ‘killing’ ( that leads to sin), ` As regards the few quotations which cannot be found in the extant Manusmrti the following points deserve consideration. The Vasi- sthadharmasitra contains numerous verses identical with those of the Manusmrti. Most of the quotations attributed to Manu are found in the Manusmrti. Hence even if a few quotations are not found in our Manu, we cannot at once jump to the conclusion that Vasistha had before him not the Manusmrti, but the Manavadharmasitra. Besides Bithler is not right in saying that Vasistha 11. 23, 12. 16 and 23. 43 either contradict or find no counterpart in our Manu (ऽ. B. £. vol. 25 p. XXXIV ). Vasistha 11. 23 corresponds with Manu 3. 245-246."48 None of the three contradict anything contained in the Manusmrti. Vasistha 23. 43 ( about Sisukrcchra ) has nothing corresponding to it word for word in our Manu, but it seems to be an echo of Manu rr. 21.49 In Vasistha 12. 16 ( paryagnikaranarh M8 ‹ प्राकूसंस्कारात्पममीतानां स्ववंश्यानामिति स्थितिः । भागधेयं मनुः प्राह उच्छिष्टो स्छेषणे उभे ॥ वासिष्ठ 11. 23 Should we not read स्ववश्यानाम्‌ which would correspond to the word दासवगे in Manu ? मनु reads असंस्कृतप्रमीतानां त्यागिनां कुलयोषिताम्‌ । उच्छिष्टं भागधेयं स्याद्‌ ay विफरभ्च यः ॥ उष्छेषण भूमिगतमनजिहमस्याशटस्य च । दासवगेस्य तसिन्ये भागधेयं प्रचक्षते ॥ ” 9. 245-246 The close correspondence between Vas. and Manu in ideas and phrase- ology should he specially marked 149 वसिष्ठ (४8. 49) ‹ अहः प्रातरहर्मक्तमहेरेकमयाचितम्‌ । अहः पराकं तन्तरकमेषं SATE परो ॥ अनुग्रहार्थं विप्राणां मनु्मेम॒तां वरः । चालबुदध तुरेष्ववं शिशृषच्छर- मुवाच इ ॥ ; मनु 11. 245. ' cag प्रातञ्यहं साये त्हमाद्याचितम्‌ । यहं परं च नाश्नीयात्माजापत्यं WY दविजः ॥. ४ would be noticed that the RSS ` comes to one-third of the प्राजापत्यशष्कर, as the शिशुचान्रायण ( मन॒. 11. 218 ) is a milder edition of the चान्द्रायण. The प्रायाश्यित्त for minors and women was one half or one third of that for adult males (vide qj, ध. सु. | आङ्किरसस्म ८.4. bes th IT. 1,51. and 'रसस्मति verse 33). a7, ध, सू. ( II. 1. 65 ) describes the four day’s observance as the UH for women, minors and old men. याज्ञ, TIL. 319 calls it TIS, 84 History of Dharmattistra hy-etan-manuraha Prajapatih ) there is nothing that contradicts 4 Sur Manu ; that half and the preceding verses bear a close corres म्ण dence to Baudhayana Dh. 5. 1. 4. 2, Similarly Buhler’s argumear पा Manava sloka in the Tristubh metre is not quite sound.. The text of Vasistha is far from satisfactory. On the non-occurrence of that verse or a corresponding Sloka in our Manu no superstructure can be built. Vasistha quotes ( 4. 37 ) a sitra or opinion of Gau- tama which is not found in the extantGautamadharmasitra, Verses — ascribed to Vasistha in the nibandhas are not found in the printe? | text of Vasistha ( vide n. 108 above. ) The analogy of the works of the schools of Apastamba and others can furnish no proof. There are on the other hand weighty grounds for discarding that analogy altogether. It is a remarkable fact that excepting the three caranas (of the Black Yajurveda ) of Apastamba, Baudhiyana and HiranyakeSin that arose and flourished in the southern portion of India, no carana of any of the other Vedas has an extant dharmasatra ascribed to the founder of the satra-carana. An explanation is suggested in the following lines. The Brihmanas in southern India were in the very early days of their colonisation surrounded by-.an alien culture and by alien customs. It was necessary therefore to formulate dis- tinctly the rules of general conduct for the Aryan community in southern India, that studied the Black Yajurveda. The same neces- sity did not exist in northern India, where the members of the sntracarayas knew their ordinary every day duties very well, and were more or lessa homogeneous community with the same ideals and culture. Therefore in the beginning when manuals of Srauta and grhya ceremonies were first composed, it was not thought nece- ssary to compose set treatiscs on dharma for each carana. Some of the rules of conduct were embodied in the grhya sitras because they were germane to the subjects treated of in them (such as the duties of Brahmacarins and householders, holidays etc. ) Works, however, dealing with the general usages prevalent among the Aryan community in various parts of northern India must have been composed early enough. When the knowledge of ibe existence of the complete set of the satra works in the Apastamba “other carayas of the Yajurveda in southern India permeated to ‘rn and central India, the leaders of the carayas cast about for works@hat would complete the works of their carayas and bring 13. Manavadharmastitra-——Did it exist ? a5 them in a line with those of Apastamba and others. Therefore the various carayas seized upon several dharmasitras and adopted them in their schools for study. This must have occured at a compara- tively early date. For Kumiarila, as we saw above, enlightens us as to what dharmasitras were specially studied in which Vedic schools. The fact that, though Gautama and Vasistha are said to have been specially studied by the students of the Simaveda and the Reveda respectively, there is hardly anything in these dharmasitras that specially connects them with the two Vedas affords some corro- boration of the above hypothesis. This assimilation of independent dharmasitras into individual satracarayas probably took place before or in the first centuries of the Christian era. Sabara (on Jaimini I. 3.4) seems to make fun of the dharmasttras when he says that the direc- tion to observe brahmacarya for forty-eight years was a device of those who wanted to hide their impotence ( Gautama 2. 52, Ap. Dh. S.J. 1.2. 11-12, Baud. Dh. 9. 1. 2. 1. speak of brabmacarya for 48 years ). This shows that these dharmasitras could not have been regarded as very authoritative by all early writers. Jaimini I. 3.11 (according to Sabara) denies the independent authority of Kalpasatras. It appears that the Manava school, which according to the cara- navyaiha was a subdivision of the Maitrayaniya, dwindled in numbers very early. Kuméarila, who was a most learned and profound student of the various branches of Sanskrit literature, nowhere men- tioned the Manavadharmasitra as studied by followers of the Black Yajurveda, though he mentions Baudhayana and Apastamba as stu- died by them. He places the Manusmrti even higher than the Gautamadharmasttra and betrays no knowledge of the existence of the Manavadharmasitra. ViSvaripa who is generally identified with Suregvara, the pupil of Sankara, remarks that the Manavacarana is not existent ( or found ).15° The foregoing discussion will, it is hoped, induce every impartial critic to endorse the conclusion that on the materials so far available the theory that the Manavadharmasttra once existed and that the extant Manusmrti is a recast of that stitra must be held not proved. 14. The Arthasastra of Kautilya This epoch-making work was first published by Dr. Shamasastri in 1909 in the Mysore Sanskrit Series and was also translated by him. Pandit T. Ganapati Sastri of Trivandrum has published the work $50 नन च APTA ATM TST p. 18 of विष्थ्प्‌ ५ comment on आद section, 86 History of Dharmatistra with his own commentary called Srimala. Dr. Jolly and Dr. Schmidt edited the text with a valuable introduction and the commentary, called Nayacandrika, of Madhavayajvan on portions of the text in the Punjab Sanskrit series at Lahore. In this work the edition of 1919 by Dr. Shamasastri has been used. This work has given rise to frequent and furious controversies about its authorship, its authenticity and its age and it cannot be said that we have heard the last of this din of controversy. Moreover this work has inspired besides numerous articles in journals several monographs, some of which have somewhat high sounding titles, such as Narendranath Law’s ‘ Studies in Ancient Indian Polity,’ Dr. P. Banerjis ‘Public Administration in Ancient India,’ Ghosal’s ‘ History of Hindu Political Theories, ’ Majumdar’s ‘Corporate Life in Ancient India,” Benoy Kumar Sarkar’s ‘Political Institutions and Theories of the Hindus,’ Jayasval’s ‘Hindu Polity,’ Prof. ऽ. V. Visvanathan’s ‘International Law in Ancient India (1925 2). Itis not possible to discuss at great length all the problems about Kautilya here. Only a brief statement can be attempted. For fuller study reference may be made to the following works and papers :— Hillebrandt’s ‘ uber das Kautilyasastra und Verwandtes’ ( Breslau 1908 ), ZD MG vol. 67, ‘pp. 49-96 (Dr. Jolly ), ZD MG vol. 68, pp. 345-359 and vol. 69, p. 369 f; JRAS 1916, pp. 130-137 ( Prof. Keith ), I. A. for 1918, pp. 157-161 and pp. 187-195 ( Dr. Jacobi translated by Dr. Sukthankar ), Dr. Kalidas Nag’s ‘Les Théories Diplomatiques de |’ Inde ancienne et l’Artha- astra’ (Paris 1923) and its translation in ‘Journal of Indian History’ vol. V, Dr. Otto Stein’s ‘Megasthenes und Kautilya’ (Vienna 1922 ), K. V. Rangasvami Ayyangar’s lectures on Ancient Indian Polity €.Madras 1916), Dr. Winternitz in Calcutta Review 1924 and in his history of Indian Literature (vol. III, pp. 509-524), I. A. for 1924, pp. 128-136 and 141-146 (Dr. Jacobi translated by Prof. Utgikar ); Dr. Johann J. Meyer’s ‘Das altindische Buch vom Welt- und Staats- leben das Arthagastra des Kautilya’ ( Leipzig, 1925 ) and Prof. N. €, Bandopadhyaya’s exposition of the social ideal and political theory of Kautilya. The Indian Antiquary for 1925 (pp. 175 and 201 ) -gives an exhaustive bibliography on the date of Kautilya. ˆ ` The Kautiliya is the oldest extant work on Arthaégastra. Though Arthasastra and Dharmasastra are often contradistinguished -on account of the difference of the two Sastras in ideals and ip the 14. The Arthatasira of Rautilya 8१ methods adopted to reach them, Arthagastra is really a branch of DharmaéSastra as the former deals with the responsibilities of kings for whom rules are laid down in many treatises on dharma.5' For this reason and the further reason that the Kautiliya contains two sections ( called dharmasthiya and kantakaSodhana ) on the administration of justice, the Arthagastra of Kautilya deserves careful consideration in this work. According to the Caranavyaha of Saunaka, Arthasastra is an Upaveda of Atharvaveda. The purpose of this Sastra as stated in the Kautiliya itself is ‘to prescribe means for securing and preserving ( power over ) the earth 7.० Yajiiavalkya distinctly states (II. 21 ) that in case of conflict between Dharma- S4stra and ArthaSastra, the rule is that the former prevails 753, Narada also (I. 39 ) says the same thing.'5¢ From comparatively ancient times Canakya alias Kautilya or Visnugupta has been credited with the composition of a work on Arthagastra. The Kamandakiyanitisara '55 pays a glowing tribute of praise to Visnu- gupta, who, singlehanded, brought about the downfall of Nanda, bestowed the earth on Candragupta and distilled from the ocean of Arthgastra the quintessence, his work on politics. Kamandaka further tells us that he looked upon Visnugupta as his guru.'s¢ The Tantrakhyayika (H. 0. S. vol. 14) which is certainly not later than 300 A. D. pays homage to Canakya the Great as one of the authors of treatises on Politics. 7 Dandin in his Dasakumaracarita 151 ' धमेशाख्ान्त्गेतमेव राजनीतिलक्षणम्थंशाखमिदं विवक्षितम्‌ › मिता० om Yas. 71. 91. 159. तस्याः TUS छामपालनोपायः शाखमर्थशाखमिति । कौ. 15.1. 8० 818 the very 879 sentence is "पृथिव्या छाम पालने च यावन्त्यथेशाख्ाणि पूर्वाचर्थैः प्रस्थापि- तानि प्रायशस्तानि संहृत्येकमिदमर्थशाखं रुतम्‌ ।' 153 अर्थशाज्ञात्तु बलबद्धमशखमिति स्थितिः । 154 यच्च SMT स्या दमेशःखार्थशाखयोः | अर्थशाखकेमृत्सृज्य धमरासलोकतमाचरेत्‌ ॥ 155 यस्याभिचारवज्ेण वजज्वलनतेजसः । पपात मूलतः श्रीमान्‌ सुपवां नन्दपर्वतः ॥ एकाकी मन्त्रशक्त्या यः शक्त्या MBIT । आजहार नृचन्द्राय चन्द्रगुषाय दिनीम्‌ ॥ नीतिशाखाम्रतं धीमानर्थशाख्महोद्धेः | waged नमस्तमे विष्णुगुाथं वेधसे ॥ काम. 1. +6 156 ‘fq एवेता हति नो गुरुद्शनम्‌ ।* sere 77.6; ‹ चतस्र एव षया इति कोटिल्मः' कोटिलीय 7. ४. | 57 भनषे वाचस्पतये शुक्राय पराशराय ससुताय | चाणक्याय च महते नमोस्तु FTN कर्तृभ्यः || Verse 2, 68 History of Dharmatastra (section VIII, p. 131, 2nd edition B. S. Series) says that the teacher Visnugupta compressed Dandaniti for the sake of the Maurya king into six thousand slokas and quotes passages from Canakya.'s* Bana associates the work of Kautilya with harsh and cruel expedients.'59 The Pajicatantra identifies Canakya and Visnugupta and speaks of Canakya as the author of Arthasastra (vide part I. p. 2 ed. by Kielhorn part II. p. 65 and part III. 50 ed. by Buhler). Kautilya figures very largely in the Puranas (vide Pargiter's ‘dynasties of the Kali age’ pp. 69-70 and Visnupurana 4. 24. 26-28 ). He has a prominent place in the Brhatkatha of Gunadhya, as appears from the works of Ksemendra and Somadeva. The Mychhakatika (I. 39 B. ऽ. series ) refers to Cainakya. The Mudraraksasa identified Canakya and Kautilya and suggests the derivation of the latter name from ‘Kutila’ (crooked).'°° Some of the above items of information are supported by the personal references contained in the Arthagastra itself. At the end of the first chapter of the first adbikaraya, Kautilya is said to be the author of the Sastra and at the end of the roth chapter of the second adbikaraya Kautilya is said to have laid down the rules for royal edicts for the sake of the षट. The last verse'® tells us that he who impatiently wrested the earth from the Nanda king composed the work and after the colophon a verse tell us that seeing the differing interpretations of bhasyakaras on the Arthasastra, Visnu- gupta himself composed the stitra and the bhasya. The first question that arises for consideration is the authenticity of the work, that is, the question whether it can be the work of the ४६8 ‹ इयमिदानीमाचायविष्णगुपेन Hale wit: श्ठोकसहसेः Pera # द्शकुमार ०४77; सत्यमाह चाणक्यः ‘ चित्तज्ञानानुवर्तिनोऽनथां अपि प्रियाः स्युः । दक्षिणा अपि तद्वाव- बदिष्छता द्वेष्या भवेयुः > दृशक्रमार्‌ VIII. Compare aida ४, 4 verses at the end. | 159 + येषामतिनुशसप्राये।पदे शनिधरंण कटिस्यशालं प्रमाण › क।द्म्बरी ए. 109 (Peterson). 160 कृोटिल्यः कुटिलमतिः स एष येन क्रोधो प्रसभमदाहि नन्दवंशः । मुद्ाराक्षस F 161 सुखग्रहणविज्ञेयं तस्वाथपदनितिवितम्‌ । केटिस्येन रतं शुखं विमुकतमन्थविस्तरम्‌ ॥ कटिलीय 7. 1; सरवशाच्ञाण्यनुक्रम्य प्रयोगमुपलभ्य च । करटिस्येन नरेन्द्राय शास. नस्य विधिः Gas ॥ काचिरीय 7. 10 168 येन शाखं च शखं च नन्द्राजगत। च भूः । अमर्ेणोद्रतान्याशु तेन शङ्घमिदं कृतम्‌ ॥ ap विभरतिपत्ति बहुधा शालेषु भष्यकाराणाम्‌ । स्वयमेव Ren at षं भाष्यं, 14. The Arthaétsira of Kautilya 89 famons minister of Candragupta Maurya, who was a contemporary of Alexander, and who must therefore have flourished about 320 B.C. This question very largely depends upon the age of the work. But other considerations, more or less of a‘subjective character and de- pending upon the absence of certain things from the Kautiliya, must be dealt with first. Jolly, Keith and Winternitz hold that the extant Kautiliya is not the work of the Maurya minister. One argument, viz. that a person like Canakya who had to build a vast empire such as that of Candragupta and who was bent down with the cares of the empire could not have found time to write such a work, may be brushed aside as entirely futile, being a purely subjective argu ment. Some persons may say that he could have found time, just as Sayana and Madhava could find in later days, to write such a work in the midst of all cares, while others may deny the possibility of such a thing. Similarly most of the arguments from the silence of the Kautiliya are also quite unconvincing and lead to no certain and universally acceptable conclusion. The non- mention of Pataliputra or of the empire of Candragupta is of very little use in deciding the question of the authenticity of the work. The argument of Stein and Winternitz that in Megasthenes’ account of India no great person named Canakya or Kautilya appears and that the former’s account of the condition of India does not tally with that presented by the Kautiliya is of very little weight. We have no means for finding out what proficiency Megasthenes had acquired in the languages of India so as to be able to hold conversation with all sorts and conditions of men. Besides it is well known that Mega sthenes’ writings have been handed down in a fragmentary state and that he often spins his own yarns. Megasthenes declares the Indians to be unacquainted with writing. But no Western scholar would now subsribe to the view that writing was unknown in India about 320 B.C. Dr. Jolly himself has to remark that the idealising ten- dency in Megasthenes greatly impairs the trustworthiness of his statements ( p. 40, Introduction to Kautiliya). This question of the authenticity of the work is bound up with the question whether it can be the work of an individual author or whether itis the pro- duct of a school. Hillebrandt vehemently argues that it is the pro- duct of a school and Jacobi as vehemently repudiates that hypothesis. The great stumbling block according to many scholars in the way of regarding Kautilya as the author of the work is the fact that the ie of Kautilya are cited by name about 80 times in the work Be 1.22 90 History of Dharmatastfo itself almost always in opposition to the views of other teachers. But there is nothing specially to be wondered at in this. In order to avoid looking too egotistic, ancient authors generally put their own views in the third person as said by early writers like Medha- tithi and Visvarapa.'®} It has to be admitted that the first person singular also is used by ancient writers, though rarely.'*¢ Jacobi (I. A. for 1918 p. 188 ) and Keith are both wrong in thinking that the view of Kautilya is criticized by Bharadvaja in V. 6. Kautilya states his position first and then mentions the view of his prede- ८९७5०0८." Dr. Jolly (Intro. to Kautiliya p. 44) is wrong in his expla- nation of Apadega (in XV. 1.76 >). That word is applied to passages which mean ‘this or that author says this or that’ and the Kautiliya cites from his own work a case of the statement of various views on a certain point. These words do not at all indicate that according to the Arthasastra Kauti- lya was a stranger. Keith thinks (J. R. A. ऽ. 1916 p. 135 ) that as Kautilya is derived from Kutila, an author will not cite his own views under such an cpithet. It is not unlikely that Canakya ac- quired the epithet Kautilya on account of his methods in dealing with the Nandas and that as he did so from no purely selfish motives but for ridding the country of such tyrants as the Nandas are represented to have been, he might have come to relish the name given to him by the people. It has to be noted in this connection that many of the writers quoted in the Kautiliya bear nicknames ( such as Pisuna, Vatavyadhi, Kaunapadanta ). This leads to the question as to whether the name 15 Kautilya or Kautalya. Hillebrandt seems to imply that all mss. employ the first form, while Pandit T. Ganapatisastri says his mss. support the latter form though in the first few pages he prints Kautilya. Mss. of the Kadambari, the Paficatantra and other works support the form Kautilya and the Mudraraksasa does the same by pointedly hinting at the etymology ~ = 169 ‹ प्रायेण म्रन्थकारा; स्वमते पर पदेशेन ब्रवते मेधातिथि, OM याज्ञ. 1. 2 विश्वरूप says किं तु मगवतेव परोक्षीकृत्यात्मा निर्दिश्यते erate tea । 16४ यास्क 9४५8 तान्यप्येके समामनति ... तत्समामने ` निरुक्त VIL. 13; vide egy, I. 56 ( न तन्मम wa यस्मात्‌ &c.) and IT, 133 165 एवमेकेश्वर्यममत्यः कारयेदिति कौटिल्यः | नैवमिति भारद्वाजः 166 एवमस्तावहित्यपदेशः । “ मन्त्रिपरिषदं द्वादशामात्यान्‌ SAA मानवाः षोडशेति बाह स्पत्याः वितिमित्योशनस्षाः, यथासामथ्यमिति कोटिल्यः ’ इति 14. The Arthatisira of Kautilya 91. A-com. on the Kamandaktyanitisara styles the Kautiliya as Kutala- bhasya and Kutala is said to be a gotra. The form Kautalya is said to occur in an inscription at Ganesar in Dholka dated Vikrama Sathvat 1291 ( 1. e. 1234-35 A. D. ). Vide Indian Historical Quarterly vol. I. p. 786. It is very difficult to decide between the rival claims of the two forms, but it appears that the form of the name, Kautalya, is due to a later attempt to solve the difficulty of an author parading his views as those of a man nicknamed “crooked”. Whether Kutala or Kautalya was known as a gotra rsi in ancient times-is extremely doubtful. Neither the Aévalayana-srauta-satra ( Uttarasatka, 6th chap., roth Kandika ) nor the Apastamba-érauta- sitra ( 24. 5-10 ) mentions Kutala among the several gotra groups. In later works on gotras, we find the name in several forms. In the Pravaradarpana of Kamalakara Kautali is said to be one of the Jamadagnya-Vatsa group of the Bhrgus( p. 156, edited by P. Chent- salrao, Mysore ) and’ Kautilya is assigned to the Yaska group of the Bhrgus (2. 158). The Pravaramafijari enumerates the Kautilyas €. 32, of the edition by P. Chentsalrao, Mysore ) among the Yaska roup of the Bhrgus, alsoamong the Saradvanta group of the Gautamas, a branch of the Angirasas, (p. 161) and Kautili as one ot the Bhrgus ¢p. 42). We have to remember that so early a writer as Kamandaka (who was well known to Bhavabhatiand Vamana’s Kavyalankarasutra- vrtti ) who is assigned to the third centery A. D., and the Tantrakhyayika distinctly assign a work on politics to the minister ef Candragupta. No weighty arguments have been advanced so far why this tradition vouched for so early should be disregarded. Keith finds it impossible that in the words ‘six thousand Slokas’ used by Dandin the word Sloka could mean a unit ( in prose) of 32 letters. But Dandin is evidently repeating the words that occur in the ArthaSastra itself at the end of the first chapter, षन Before proceeding to discuss the age of the Kautiliya, it is advisable to say a few words on the form, style and contents of the work. The work is divided into 15 adhikaranas, 150 chapters, 180 topics and contains 6000 Sglokas ( 1. €. units of 32 letters). The work is in prose interspersed with a few verses. Each chapter has 197 शास्लसमुद्ेशः पञ्चदशाधिकरणानि सपच्चाशदध्यायशतं साशातिभकरणशतं षट्श्लीक- सहस्राणी | These words of the Kautiliya must mean 6000 upits of 93 Jetters and nothing else. 92 । History of Dharmatistra at. the end at least one verse and sometimes more.- A few verses occur also in the midst of some chapters as in I. 8, 1. 15, II. 10, I. 24, V. 6, VII. 5, शा. 6, भा. 9, VIN. 13, >. 3, श्वा. There are about 340 verses excluding mantras. Almost all these verses are in the Anustubh metre, only eight verses being in the classical Indravajra or Upajati metres (in II. 9, II. ro andX. 3). In our utter ignorance about the literature on Arthasastra prior to Kau- tilya it is impossible to say how many or these verses are borrowed and how many are of his own composition. There can be no doubt that some of these verses were composed by him (e. g. the two verses in I. 10, where the views of Aciryas are given, and the words *etat Kautilya-darganam’ occur ). It appears that some verses are clearly quotations. For example, the verse ‘ nasya guhyam’ at the end of I. 15, and the verse ‘ sathvatsarena patati’ at the end of IV, 7 are Manu 7. 105 and 2. 180 respectively. The last occurs in Baud, Dh. S. If. 1. 62 and also in Vas. I. 22. The two verses in the Upa; jati metre in X. 3 ‘y4n yajfiasanghaih’ and ^ navarh garavam ' occur respectively in the Paraéaradharmasastra (chap. III. p. 12 of Jivae nanda, part II) and in the Pratijia (IV. 37%). It is noteworthy that they are introduced with the words‘ apiha Slaukau bhavatah ° and follow a quotation from or summary of a Vedic passage. \welve verses in VII. 9 are introduced with the words ‘ tatraitad bhavati ’ and may be quotations. A few of the verses bear a close resemblance to verses of other works ; e.g. the verse ‘ prstah pri- yahitam brayat’ (in V. 4 ) which is very similar to Manu. 4. 138. In some cases he connects verses with his own words, e. g. the words ^ kurvatasca’ with ‘ ndsya guhyam’ (at the end of I. य; )and the last verse of II. 25. The style ofthe Kautiliya is simple and direct. It is not concise like that of the Vedanta or Vyakarana sutras. It resembles the dharmasuatras of Gautama, Harita and Sankha-Likhita, but is not as archaic as that of Apastamba. According to the commentaries the several headings of the a rakaranas are sutras and the contents of them the bhasya ( vide ayacandrika pp. 137, 143-44 &c., edited by Dr. Jolly). It 2Dounds in numerous technical and rare terms. It is generally in र —— ee ee ० comp "किन 168 The manner in which the Tisaqep brings in this verse does not show that it is the author’s own. The verse is preceded by the words शृण्वन्तु . भवन्त and 18 probably put in as a weighty utterance from some ancient *"\urce. 14. Tee Arthalasira of Kautilya ost accordance with Panini’s grammar, though such un-Paninean words as ° papisthatama’ (in VII. 11 ) rarely occur. It employs the word ‘avyaya’ in the masculine (II. 10 ), while Panini (I. 1. 37) em- ploys ‘avyayam ’. The whole work on account of its careful arrangement of topics and unity of design impresses one as the product of a single brilliant mind. The Kautiliya sheds such valuable light on the social, eco- nomic, political and religious life of ancient India and contains infor- mation on so many topics that it is not possible to convey any idea of its contents in a brief summary. The subjects of the fifteen adlikarayas are :— I. the discipline of the king, sciences to be learnt by him, the place of Anviksiki and politics, qualifications of mini- sters and purohita and. their temptations, the institution of spies, council meetings, ambassadors, protection of princes, duties towards harem, king’s personal safety ; IJ. about superintendents of various state departments, founding villages, pastures and forests, forts, duties of the chamberlain ( sannidhita ), the commissioner for revenues from forts, country, mines, forests, roads &c. ; accountant- general’s office ; embezzlement of public funds ; royal edicts; exa- mination of precious stones for the treasury and mines; superinten- dent of gold (1. €. of coins issued from the mints ) ; superintendent of store-house ( of agricultural produce &c.), of commerce, of forests, of arms, of weights and measures, of tolls, of weaving, of liquor houses, of slaughter houses, of prostitutes, of shipping, of cows and horses, of the capital and cities ; II. Administration of justice, rules of procedure, forms of marriage, duties of married couples, stridhana, twelve kinds of sons ; other titles of law; IV. removal of thorns, protection of artisans, merchants, remedies against national calamities such as fires, floods, pestilence, famines, demons, tigers, snakes, etc ; suppression of those who live by foul means; detec- tion of juvenile crime ; arrest of criminals on suspicion, accidental or violent deaths, torture to extort confessions ; protection of allkinds of state departments ; fines in lieu of cutting off of limbs, sentence of death with or without torture ; intercourse with maidens; punish- ment of fine for various wrongs ; V. conduct of courtiers, award of punishment for treason, replenishing of treasury in case of emer- gency ; salaries of state servants, qualifications of courtiers, conso- lidation ot royal power; VI. constitution of the mandala, seven elements of sovereignty, qualities of king, peace and arduous work as the source of prosperity ; sixfold royal policy; threefold Sakti ; VII. circle of states is the field for the employment of the six lines of policy ; the six gunas (sarndhi, war, neutrality,marching, taking shelter and dvaidhibhava ) ; causes leading to the dwindling and disloyalty of armies; combination of states; sarndhi for the acquisition of a friend, gold or land; an enemy in the rear; recouping of lost strength ; a neutral king and a circle of states ; VIII. about vyasanas (vices and misfortunes ) of the several elements of sovereignty ; troubles of the king and the kingdom ; troubles of men and of the army; IX. work of an invader, proper time for invasion, recruitment of the army, accoutrements, internal and external trouble, disaffection ; traitors, enemies and their allies; X. about war; encamping the army, march of the army, battle-fields, work of infantry, cavalry, elephants 8c. ; array of troops for battle in various formations ; XI. concerning corporations and guilds ; XII. concerning a powerful enemy ; sending an envoy ; intrigues, spies with weapons, fire and poison and des- truction of stores and granaries ; capture of the enemy by stratagems; final victory; XIII. capture of forts; sowing dissensions ; enticing of king by stratagem ; spies in a siege ; restoring peace in a conquered country ; XIV secret means, strategems for killing an enemy, pro- ducing illusive appearances ; medicines and incantations ; XV divi- sion of this work into sections and their illustrations. It would be interesting to say a few words separately on the chapter about judicial administration. Dr. Jolly has collected together the passages of the Kautiliya on judicial administration that bear a very close resemblance to the several works on ancient Indian Law ( vide Z.D.M.G. vol. 67, pp. 51-90). It will be seen therefrom that there is the greatest correspondence between the Kautiliya and Yajnavalkya. It 15 00 doubt true that many passages from Manu and Narada agree closely with those of the Kautiliya but not to the same extent as those of Yajiiavalkya. A few striking examples are quoted below.'69 The question then arises whether there is SS AO A 7 oe gue [| 169 (») अभियुक्तो न प्रत्यभियुञ्जीत अन्यत्र कठहसाहससार्थसमवायेभ्यः । न TATRA योगोस्ति । को. 117. 1; अभियोगमनिस्तीयं नेन प्रत्यभियोजयेत्‌ । क्यात्मत्याभि- योगं च कलहे साहसेषु च ॥ याज्ञ. 71. 9-10; (b) प्रतिरोधकम्याधिदुर्भिक्षमयपरतीकारे धर्मकाये च पत्युः। को. 777. 9; afte anand च व्याधो संप्रतिरोधके । गृहीतं लीधनं मत। न किये दातुमहति ॥ याज्ञ. 11 147; (०) सोदयोणामनेकापितृकाणां पितु- तो दायविभागः । कौ. 177. 5; अनेकपितृकाणां तुः पितृतो भागकल्पना | याज्ञ. 7, 10; 14, The Arthatasira of Kauttlya $5 borrowing and if so who the borrower is. The agreement in phraseology is so close that it must be regarded as a case of borrowing and in my opinion it is the Yajhavalkyasmrti that borrows. The reasons are many. Yajiiavalkya represents on numerous points of law a very great advance upon the doctrines of Kautilya. Kautilya does not contain distinct directions upon the four stages of a law suit ( plaint, reply, proof and judgment ) nor upon the threefold aspects of proof ( documents, witnesses, prescrip- tion ). Yajiiavalkya goes into all these matters. The Kautiliya does not recognise the widow or mother as heir to a sonless man ; Yajiiavalkya does so. Kautilya does not mention the bandbus as heirs ; he hardly says anything about re-union.'7? The Kautiliya divides the stridhana of a woman dying during her husband’s lifetime among her sons and daughters, while Y4j. prefers the daughters to the sons.'7" It is not necessary to multiply examples. It goes without saying that Yajnavalkya represents a far too advanced stage of juristic principles than the Kautiliya and so must be later than the latter by several centuries. The Kautiliya agrees very closely with Manu also, but considerations of space prevent me from going into the points of agreement. There are however numerous funda- mental points on which Manu and the Kautiliya disagree. Kautilya allows niyoga even in the case of Brahmanas (last verse of IIT. 6 and at the end of I. 17 about kings). Manu first speaks of Niyoga and then condemns it ( vide 9. 57-63 and 9. 64-68). As Brhaspati refers to this factin Manu’s फला], it appears that the ( १)नष्टापहूतमासाय स्वामी weds म्राहयेत्‌ | देशकालातिपत्तो वा स्वयं गृहीत्वोपहरेत्‌ | कौ. 171.16 ; नष्टेपहतमासाय हर्तारं ग्रहयेनरम्‌ | देशकालातिपत्तो च गृहीत्वा स्वय- aaa ॥ याज्ञ. 77. 169; (०) वानप्रस्थयतिबह्म चारिणामाचार्यशिष्यधमभतसमन- deal रिक्थभाजः । का. 771. 16; वानप्रस्थयतिब्रह्मचारिणां रिक्थभागिनः | करमेणाचयेसच्छिष्यधमेशरन्नकतीर्थिनः ॥ याज्ञ, 71.197. 170 But see ‹ अपितृद्रव्या विभक्तपितृद्रष्येः सह जीवन्तः पुनर्विभजेरन्‌ › की. 111. 5. This contains a reference to reunion. 171 जीवाति want म्रतायाः पुत्रा दुहितर्य Stet विभजेरन्‌ । अपुजाथा दुहितरः । TTA मतां । को. 777. ४; अमजःज्ीधनं भतुबाहञादिषु चतुष्व॑पि । दुहितरणां प्रसुता Qraty पितगामि तत्‌ ॥ याज्ञ. 71. 145. 173 अुहरपति'५ word are “उक्तो नियोगो मनुना निषिद्धः वयमेवं तु 5 vide कुलक on मनु 9.68 for the whole quotation, ee ee ~~ ~= ee eS Omen. 98 -. , 18. Dharmatistra passages condemning miyoga were put in probably earlier than the fitst centuries of the Christian era. Though Kautilya speaks of almost the same 18 titles as those in Manu (8. 4-7 ) almost under. the same names, there is a slight difference. Manu has no such title as Prakirnaka. Kautilya speaks of upanidhi and extends the same rules to Niksepa, while Manu speaks of the title as Niksepa. The ancient dharma-satras do not give the technica] names of the eighteen titles of law, though some of them do occur therein. Vak- parusya and dandaparusya occur in G. Dh. S. (12. 1) and Vas. (17.61). Baud. seems to have known the term ‘Strisafigrahana’ ( Dh. S. II. 2.54). Steya occurs in all. Gautama speaks of nidht ( Dh. S. 12.39). Manu positively says (9. 155 ) that the son of any member of the first three varnas from a Sadra woman does not inherit his father’s wealth (though the preceding verses 151-154 seem to lay down different rules), while Kautilya allows such a sona share when there are sons born to a Brihmana from wives of higher castes or one third when he has no other sons (III. 6). Manu expressly mentions the mother and paternal grandmother as heirs ( 9. 217), while Kautilya appears to ignore them. Manu prohibits the remarriage of widows ( V. 161-165 ), while Kautilya allows not only widows to remarry, but alsowives whose husbands have not been heard of for a year or more according to circumstances (III. 4). Kautilya allows a wife to desert her husband, if the latter is of a bad character, has become a traitor to the king, endangers her life or has become an outcaste or impotent?73 (last verse of III. 2). Kautilya further seems to have allowed divorce which is unknown to any other known lawgiver, but he bases it only on the ground of mutual hatred and says that a marriage in the approved forms cannot be dissolved'74 (III. 3 ). Manu isvery harsh upon gamblers and asks the king to supress gambling and banish gamblers ( 9. 221-224 ), while Kautilya only brings gambling under the control of the king for the purpose of detecting thieves &c.( II]. 20). Manu first allows a Brahmana to marry even a Sadra woman and then con- demns such a thing (III. 13-19), while Kautilya does not condemn. such unions. These divergences and others lead us to conclude 178 yi परदेशं वा प्रस्थितो राजकिल्विषी । प्राणाभिहन्ता पतित्त्याज्यः sat वी पातः ॥ Ble 174 अमोस्या मतुरकामस्व द्विषती मार्या । मार्योयाश्च भतौ । परस्परं Reverie: । अमोक्षो धर्मविवाहमनापिति। कौ ०, 14; The Arthatdstra of: Kautilya 97 that the Kautiliya is much older than the extant Manusmrti, which 18 in many matters carried away by puritanic zeal, while its older portion is more in harmony with the spirit of the Kautiliya. Therefore the Kautiliya is long anterior to the time when the extant Manusmrti took its present form. The Kautiliya refers to the opinion of the Manavas in five places. Two of the views ascribed to the Manavas by Kautilya are the sama as those which Kamandaka (II. 3 and XI. 67 ) ascribes to Manu. According to the Manavas, the vidyas to ‘be studied by a prince were three, viz. trayi, varta and dandaniti, what is called Anviksiki being but a branch of trayi; and the council of ministers was to consist oftwelve. ‘The Manusnmiti ( 7. 43 ) appears to regard the vidyas as four and lays down ( 7. 54 ) that the Council should consist of seven or eight sacivas. Bihler and others on account of this difference in the views of the Manavas and the Manu- sinrti thought that Kautilya was referring to the Manvadharmasitra. In my humble opinion the evidence for the existence of a Manavya- dharmasitra is practically nil, as detailed above in section 13. From the references to Svayambhuva Manu and Pracetasa Manu contained in the Mahabharata, particularly in the Santi and Anusasana parvans it appears that there were two works in verse on dharma and _ politics attributed to thesc two or there was one work containing both. These works were subsequently recast as the Manusmrti. It is therefore that some difference is noticed between the views ascribed to the Manavas aud the extant Manusmrti. Besides there is no real conflict in the matter of vidyas. The Manusmrti does not posi- tively say that the vidyas are four and not three; it simply says from ‘whom trayi and the other three are to be learnt. The Manusmrti (in 7.60) allows more ministers than seven or eight. It is possible that in recasting several changes.were made. The third Opinion of the Manavas quoted by Kautilya is about the fine to be imposed upon officers of the state occasioning loss of revenue (II.7). The other two views of the Manavas quoted are concerned with the fine to be imposed on false witnesses and for forcible seizure of jewels'?’ &c. It must be admitted. that in the extant Manusmrti there is nothing exactly corresponding with these views. But from this fact no one conclusion alone can be drawn. There may be a mistake in quoting, or there may be inter- ee ee MS कृटसाक्षिणो. यमथेममूतं चा नारयेयुस्तदहरागुणं दण्ड ददुरिति मानवाः । को. TIE 11 5 HUTT साहसे FTG वृण्ड इति मानदाः । क, I, -. Hs De 13. be प्ण), of Dhurmaltstra polations, it may be that some of the verses in the original Mana» smyti have dropped out or that Kautilya is quoting ‘not the Manu- smrti itself, but the views of works based on or explanatory of Manu. It is noteworthy that Brhaspati'7® contains a verse very similar 4 the views on sahasa attributed to the Manavas. We shail see ‘below that Brhaspati’s work was more or less a supplement of Manu. The ` only authors or schools, besides the Manavas, cited by name in the dharmasthiya section are the Barhaspatyas and the Auéganasas. It is remarkable that the well-known and ancient Dharmasttrak&tas like Gautama, Apastamba, Baudhayana, Vasistha, Harita are nowhere quoted by name. It is noteworthy that in the dharmasthiya section Kautilya several times quotes the views of 4ciryas and.of some cathers under the word “‘ apare”. Some of these views correspond closely ‘with the discussions in the ancient dharmasitras. One of these is - the question as to whom the child belongs, to the begetter or to #ि 0 whose wife it is begotten. Kautilya first quotes the view ‘of the A4ctryas that it belongs to the husband of the mother of the child, then says that some hold that it belongs to the begetter, while tilya holds that it belongs to both.*77 It-is 20 be:noted here that both Baud. and Ap. say that according .to . the Brahmanas the sons belong to the begetter, while Vasistha says there.is adispnte on the point, both views being supported by rancient authorities. Gautama speaks of both views and at last ( 18. 23 “4dvayorva” ) seems to come to the same conclusion as. Kaurilya. . -It -its not unlikely that Kautilya has in mind this discussion. in the (Dharmasttras and also in Manu.( 9. 48-54 where the view is that nhe-child ‘belongs to the husband of the woman). Some -of the other views-attributed to aciryas are that a woman could visit the ‘thousesiof her fhusband’s relations, of prosperous men, of village head- “tnen, of female ascetics &c. (III. 4); that very poor men «ould idivide-even waterpots ata partition (II. 5); that the master who did mot‘eiiploy:a servant ready to work according to agreement -had to 476 सियिनेहिमरल्नानि Salant तथा 1 "योयं et प्भ्यमे्ां मूर्कसमो वमः । WEA ४०४९० in `ईवर्वंहरभयस OD साहस "227 grate Sime क्षेत्रेण हत्यायाः । माता भका यस्थ Vereen । कियमानसुभवमिति कोदेस्यः |B U7. Vorpate- A, gg. 18 KIS बौ qq प. *B. 3५26 ; नपि. श. TI. ९, 3. "ग्नो "tite "मति विड shreg*wittedite दिके. कज) विहि 99. 14. Tha Acthaliistvs of. Keufilya ध pay-the wages agreed upon as if the work had been finished (compare Visaw V.. 247); he who forcibly confined a man er woman or wha by force released another frons imprisonment was. to be fined between gao:and 1000 € प्रा. 17); that disputes of a remote date shall not be camplained of and that he who is. the first to complain. wins, since ane; mins ¢ to court ) as one cannot bear the pain (III. 19); that in a complaint by one gambler against another, the successful party: has to pay the: fine called parvasthasa and’ the defeated party the fine called madhyasahasa ( II. 20 ). The foregoing discussion about the dharmasthiya section shows that in the sphere of the administration of justice, Kautilya is far in advance of the dharmasitras of Gautama, Apastamba and Baudhayana and sq is much later than these ( though in certain matters such as the rights of women to succeed to males he closely agrees with Gautama and Apastamba), while he is earlier than the extant Manusmrti ( though not earlier than the oldest kernel of the Manusmyti ) and very much earlier than Yajiiavalkya. ‘Fhe question of the date of the Kautiliya can be settled only approximately. and for that we have to rely only on the internal evidence. The external evidence does not carry us far; we can only. say, that the Kautiliya is certainly not later. than the 2nd century A. D.,. since Kamandaka, the Tantrikhydyika, and Bana, speak of it with admiration. No one claims it to be earlier than joo ए. C. JRven Keith who assigns it a late date and cannot place it earlier than 190 B. C. at the most has to admit (J ए A ऽ 1956, p. १३९ ) that for ॐ precise date we have no real ground. The Kautiliya quotes five schools by name: Manavah (five times ), Barhaspatyah ( 6 times), AuSanasah (7 times ), Parafarah (4 times ), Ambhiyah ¢ once ) and the following individual authors ; Katytyana (1), Kifijalka ( 1 ), Kaunapadanta ( 4), Ghotakamukha (1), € Dirgha ) Cartyana ( 1), 2005474 (2), Pisuna (6), Pigunaputra (1), Bahudantiputra (1), Bharadvaja (7, once as Kaninka Bharadvaja ), Vatavyadhi ($ ), Visalaksa (6). He either differs from all these authors or they differ from each other in all the places where they are cited. Alt the individual authors that are cited only once occur on the same page (except Babudantiputra ). He quotes the views of dcaryas over fifty times and in each case differs from them. ‘“Acaryas”.means the gncient authors on the Sastra £00 _ History of. Dharmatastra. . collectively. Even the Nirukta quotes certain views as -those’ of Acaryas. Kautilya is cited about 80 times. The Kamasatra. of Vatsyayana mentions a Ghotakamukha and a (ततरा). Whether they are identical with the authors cited by Kautilya is extremely doubtful. The Mahabharata mentions among writers on Dandaniti the following who occur in the Kautiliya also :--Brhaspati, Manu; Bharadvaja, Visalaksa, Sukra ( the same as 11627025 ) and Indra (probably Kautilya’s Bahudantiputra ), whose abridgment, of Brahma’s work is called Bahudantaka in the Santiparva (chap. 59 ). ` According to the Nayacandrika, PiSuna, Bharadvaja, Kaunapa- danta and Vatavyadhi stand for Narada, Dronacarya, Bhisma and Uddhava respectively ( pp. 73, 69, 74, 91 ) The Mahabharata mentions other writers on politics, viz. Gauragiras, KaSyapa, Utathya, Vamadeva, Vasuhoma, Kamandaka, ( Santiparva 123. 11) and a few others which are not found in the Kautiliya. | The Kautiliya knows the four Vedas, the charms and incanta- tions of the Atharvan, the six 0045, includes under itihisa, Puranas, Dharmaéastra and Arthagastra; it knows the Sankhya, Yoga and Lokayata'7® schools of thought. It mentions Mauhiartikas, Kartintikas ( astrologers ), Jupiter and Venus. It refers to dhatu- 5252 ( Metallurgy ). Sanskrit was the official language and in the Sasanidhikara it mentions such gunas of composition as madhurya, audarya, spastatva, which show the beginnings of the Alarhkara astra. There is nothing to wonder at in this. In the second century A. D. we have the inscription of Rudradiman, which enumerates the gunas of Kavya. The Kautiliya does not mention edicts on stone or copper. It refers to Vaisikakalajfiana (II. 27). The Kautiliya closely agrees with the Kamasitra in several respects, and the two works contain several identical passages ( such as the list of kings that fell victims to intrigues and about trivarga ). Keith argues from this that the Kautiliya and the Kamasatra are not separated by a long interval and that it is a late work. Dr. Jolly also is of the same opinion (p. 24 Intro. to ArthaSastra). If the Kamasatra held up the Kautiliya as its model, then the two works would certainly look very much alike. There are points of difference 178 लोकायत occurs in the महमाष्य OD वणका ताष्तबे (पा, VII, 3. 45 ). Vide Kielhorn vol. ए. pp. 325-326. 14. The Arthatastra of ‘Kautilya 10f between the two works, e.g. they differ in their attitude towards flesh-eating and the Kamasutra speaks of planetary influence and lagna, while the Kautiliya is silent on these points and only condemns in general terms the consulting of stars. We must note here that the Kautiliya ( IX. 4) speaks of consulting naksatras, which were known from the earliest Vedic period and some of which were looked upon as auspicious for sacrificial purposes even in the Satapatha Brahmana (S. B. E. vol. 44, pp. 1-2) and the Srauta and Grhya sitras. The Kautiliya follows the Vedanga Jyotisa in the system’ of a yuga of five sarhvatsaras, in prescribing two inter- calary months in a yuga and in saying that at the end of one ayana the variation between the length of the day or the night comes to six. muhartas ( vide II. 20 ). Keith argues that the Slokas in the Kautiliya are more classical than even those of the Ramayana and that it contains correct Tristubh stanzas which are wanting in the Brhaddevata ( a work of tbe 4th century B. C. ). But this argument can produce no impression on those scholars who ascribe the Ramayana to the sth century B.C. or earlier. Nor is the date of the Brhaddevata beyond the pale of discussion. There is no consensus of opinion among scholars as to the exact time when classical Slokas and correct Tristubhs first came into vogue. It is to be noted that the Kautiliya defines pada as varnasahghata and not as in Panini ( sup-tinantarn padam ) Among the countries and peoples frequently mentioned by Kautilya, several are interesting. He speaks of silks from the land of the Cinas'79 and blankets from Nepal. Keith says that the name Cina being derived from the Thsin dynasty in China ( which began its rule in 247 B. C. ) this would show that the Kautiliya could not have been composed about 300 B. C. No one however knows how the word Cina was derived and besides as Keith admits the passage may be an interpolation. He speaks of the Sangha of the Vrgnis (1.6) and the Sresis ( corporations ) of Ksatriyas in the countries of Kambhoja and Surastra that lived by varta (agriculture and trade ) and by the profession of fighting and the corporations of the Licch- civika, ‘Vrjika, Mallaka, Madraka, Kukura, and the Kurupanicalas that live on the title ‘raja’ (XI. 1). Some of these tribes such as the Licchavis, Vrjis ( Vajjis in Pali ) and Mallas are well-known from ancient Buddhist works. What is meant by ‘ rajasabdopajivipah” aah’ 119 तथा PS चीनपदट्य बीनमूमिजा भयाखूयाता; t को. 7. 11. 1m . Midtory of Dharualieira isinest. quite clear. 1t probably means that the erganisation of the Liechavis and others was‘on democratic lines and that there was very een competition for the honour of being elected the chief or president of those corporations, the latter being designated ‘ raja’."** The Nayacandrika explains. that they bear the proud designation of ^ कोन" ut are penniless (and so can be easily employed in military: seavice 25. mercenaries ). We are told that the breed of. horses from: Kambhoja, Sindhu, Aratta and Vanayu was the best and that Bahlika, Papeya, Sauvira and. Taitala breeds were of middle quality. The Kautiliya speaks of Mleccha tribes and tells us that among _them. one’s own children. could be sold or pledged without incurring punishment (IH. 13 ). There is hardly any distinctive reference to things Buddhist except one passage ( III. 20 ) where a fine of one hundred € payas ) is prescribed for him who invited to dinmers in honour of gods or Manes a Buddhist (Sakya ), an Ajivaka, a Sidra ascetic.8* Fhis shows that the work was written at a time when Buddhism was yet not a wide- spread religion and had not secured an honourable place among the people. The Ajivika was a well-known sect in ancient India, said to have been founded by Makkhali Gosala (vide V. A. Smith’s Asoka, pp. 134, 198 of edition of 1909, I. A. 1912, p. 286, ‘ Dialogues of Buddha’ 1, p.71, n.1, Journal of Bihar & Orissa Society, 1926, 70. 53-62). Asoka bestowed some caves on them. Kautilya says that weights should be made of iron or of stones from Magadha and Mekala ( country near the sources of the Narmada ).** It is extremely doubtful whether the Kautiliya knew the extant text of the Mahabharata. Most of the stories used as illustrations in the Kautiliya occur in the Mahabharata ( €, g. Aila, Duryo- dhana, Haihaya Arjuna, Vatapi, Agastya, Ambarisa, Suyatra i.e. Nala). But in some cases there is slight divergence between the two works, e. ह. Janamejaya 15 said ta have perished through having attacked Brahmanas in anger, while the Mahabharata (XII. 150 ) gives a different version ; Kautilya says (IV. 8 ) that Mandavya, though not a thief, declared 1380 Ta the Jétakas ( Fausbdl! wol F, p. 564 and vob. IFL., p: 1) reference is made te the 7707 rajas of the Licchavis in Vesalt ५6; बृषलमबणितान्‌ Saintly store शस्यो qegs et; LL 20. व नि मागकोकठश्षकमवनि + के, ए ५९, | Pee triieltetre df Maktiiya 904 himself to be a thief while the Mahabharata (1. 107. 9) ‘szys that he spoke nothing ; -Kautilya mentions Jayatsena as the oppe- nent of Nala ( VIII. 3 ) in gambling, while the Mahabharata pives his name as Puskara ; the Mahabharata and the Ramayana do net know that a Jamdagnya ruled long as aking.**3 Kautibya seems ‘to have known the Puranas. He says.( III. 7 ) that sata and magadha of the Puranas are quite different'*+ from members of the mixed castes called sata and magadha and includes Purana (1.5 ) among the subjects of royal study grouped under the head of itibasa. | Kautilya exhibits a wonderful knowledge of herbs and drugs and Dr. Jolly thinks that his Materia Medicais more ‘extensive -then even Susruta’s. But the dates of Caraka and. SuSruta are far from being settled and no approximately certain conclusion can be drawn fromthe drugs mentioned in the Kautiliya. Kantilya speaks of ‘rasada’ (-one who administers mercurial poison ) and prescribes banishment for those who trade in or administer ‘rasa’ for money in order to do away with a person secretly (IV. 4.) In II. 13 he speaks of gold that is ‘ rasa-viddha ’ (amalgamated with mercury ).and in II. 12 of liquids.containing gold ( rasa .Kaficanikah ) and of Hin- guluka. Dr. Jolly thinks that this knowledge of metallurgy and alchemy is of Graeco-Syriac origin and so the Kautiliya is a work of the third century A. D It is of great importance to note that Kautilya lays down (1.4) that in the midst of the fort were to be constructed the temples -of Siva, Vaisravana, the Aévins, Laksmi and Madira (Durga ?) and niches were to be set apart for Aparajita, Apratihata, Jayanta and Vaijayanta and that the tutelary deities of the gates were to be Brahma, Indra, Yaina and Senapati (i. €. Skanda ). We know from the Mahabhi- $$"; , ( Kielhorn Vol. II. p. 429 ) on Panini (४. 3. 99 ^ fivikarthe cApatiye” ) that the Mauryas set up images out of greed for money and that in its day images of Siva, Skanda-and Visakha were worshipped 195.शुजुषदूवर्गमस्सज्यं ज।मद्न्भ्यो जितेन्द्रियः । अस्वरीषश्य नाभागो । अन्वरीवभ्य नामागो aera (चरं महीम । का 18४ दोरोणिकस्त्यम्यः सूती मागधन्य बह्महलन्रष्धिरीषतः TS “जप्त geqeaa att न feet रिवः सकन्दः Ree हति । हि कोरणम्‌ । “aie भिदाः पक्रस्पिताः | वेलासु न स्यात्‌ eee: संपाति -पूणार्थाल्सासं witout । agning ‘104 - ` दिनो of नेम . The foregoing discussion clearly shows that the Kautiliya .has certainly an ancient atmosphere about it, and that all that has so far been gathered from it agrees with its traditional date of 300 B. C. and no cogent arguments have been yet brought forward that would compel us to assign it a date later than the above by six centuries. Two commentaries on the Kautiliya have been brought to light so far, one composed by Bhattasvamin being called Pratipadapaficika and.the other the Nayacandrika of Madhavayajvan. Both are frag- ments. The first was published in the Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society ( 1925-1926, vol. XI and XII) by Messrs. K.P. Jayasval and A. Banerji-sastri. The com. is incomplete and begins with the 8th adhyaya of the 2nd adhikarana and reaches up to the 36th adhyaya of the adhikarana. The commentary on the whole work must have been very extensive, as the portion already printed on a part of the 2nd adhikarana alone occupies 214 pages. This commentary quotes the explanations of previous commentators in the words ‘anye’, ‘apare’. It quotes several slokas of Brhaspati on the blemishes of diamonds and on prakaga-taskaras. The com- mentary Nayacandrika contained in Dr. Jolly’s edition (Lahore) also is incomplete and begins with the 7th adhyaya of the 7th adhikarana and breaks off in the 4th adhyaya of the 12th adhikarana. It also refers to the views of its predecessors in the words ‘ kecit’ &c. ( vide PP. 35, 61, 62, 104, 115, 131,191). It discusses various readings (pp. 136, 183, 188, 193 &c. ). Dr. Shamasastri includes in his edition 571 sutras attributed to Canakya. Their relation to the Kautiliya is a subject which requires careful investigation. In my own opinion they are later than the Kautiliya. It would be beyond the scope of this work to enter into details.' Vide Dr. Jacobi’s article in Indian Historical Quarterly, vol. III., pp. 669-676 There are several niti collections attributed to Canakya and pub- lished several times in different parts of India. All of them are later than the Kautiliya and are compilations of maxims and fine sayings. One of them the Canakya-rajanitisastra ( published in Calcutta Oriental series, 1921, 2nd edition ) contains 660 verses and was compiled under Bhojaraja. Several other compilations pass under the names Vrddha-Canakya, Laghu-Canakya &c. All these are passed over here from considerations of space and utility, © ` 18. Vatkh@nasa-dharma-praéna 108 15. Vaikhanasa-dharma-prasna This work has beem published in the Trivandrum Sanskrit Series by Pandit T. Ganapati Sastri ( 1913 ). Mahadeva in his*commentary called Vaijayanti (Anandasrama ed. >) on the Satyasadha Srautasdtra speaks of six Srauta sitras of the Black Yajurveda, viz. Baudhayana, Bharadvaja, Apastamba, Hiranyakesin, Vadhila and Vaikhanasa, and frequently cites ei from the Vaikhanasa-srautasitra. In the Caranavyaha of unaka, ४३५१११12 and Vaikhanasa are not mentioned. But that Vaikhanasa was a very ancient writer follows from the references contained in the ancient dharma works. In Gautama the word *‘Vaikhanasa’ occurs ( Dh. ऽ. III. 2 ) as the name for the order of forest hermits ( vanaprastha ) and in another ऽप (III. 26) he lays down that fire was to be consecrated according to the Sramanaka,'®* which latter is explained by Haradatta as Vaikhanasa Sastra. Baudhayana (Dh. S. II. 6. 17) has the same satra'®7 and defines a Vaikhanasa as one who follows the rules of conduct laid down in Vaikhanasa Sastra (Dh. S.II. 6.16). The Vasistha Dh. 9. (9. 10 ) also has the same satra as Gautama (Dh. S. III. 26). The Manusmrti( VI. 21 ) speaks of the Vanaprastha as one who abides by the views of Vaikhanasa ( Vaikhanasamate sthitah ). The Vaikhanasadharmapragna is divided into three 0725025, each prasna being subdivided into khandas. There are in all 41 khandas. The work isa small one. The contents of the work are :- 1. the four varyas and their privileges, and the four dsramas ; duties of brabmacarin; four kinds of brabmacarins; duties of the house- holder ; four kinds of grhastha, vartaurtti ( subsisting by agriculture ), salina, yayavara and ghoricarika ; forest anchorites; vanaprasthas are either sapatnika (accompanied by their wives) or apatnika (not so accompanied ) ; Sapatnika are of four sorts, Audumbara, Vairifica, Valakhilya and Phenapa; apatnika Vanaprasthas ; of four kinds of bhiksus, viz. kuticaka, bahadaka, harnsa and paramahathsa; sakama ( performed with desire of wordly gain) and niskama (not so performed) karma; pravytti and nivrtti; three kinds of ऋ गधन (मानन जनयक aw. ging, wg OTe 18? गौविन्द्स्वामी, the commentator of Baud. says ‹ वेलानसोपि वानप्रह्थ एव । शज्ञान्तरकरणं तु संन्यवहारारथम्‌ । विखनसा ऋषिणा पोक्तं वेलानसशाञ्जम्‌ । तत्र हि BEN वानप्रस्थस्योका मीष्मे पञ्चतपा इत्यादयः AAT’, ४ D. 14. 106 History of Dharmatastra Yogins and their subdivisions ; IL. the details of the §ramanaka rites of the vanaprastha ( khandas 1-4); duties of the forest hermit ; details of joining the order of sarhnyasins ( khandas 6-8 ); age for sarhnyasa (above seventy or when childless or widower); every day duties and observances of sathnyasins; about acamana and Sarthdhya; saluting (abhivadana ) of all relatives, male and female; holidays for study ( anadhyaya); bath and Brahmayajfia; rules about taking food ; forbidden and permitted food ; III. rules of conduct for grhastha ( khandas 1-3), rules of the road; purification of golden and other metallic things; purification of other things; about vanaprastha ; bhiksu; burial of a sathnyasin ; Nirayanabali on the death of a sathnyasin, tarpaya in the case of sarinyadsins with twelve names of Visnu, KeSava &c. and with water; anuloma and pratiloma ; the intermediate castes ; Vratyas, their origin ; name and means of subsistence ( khandas 11-15 ). The Vaikhanasadharmaprasna appears by its style and its contents to be a work of comparatively Jater date than the dharma- stitras of Gautama and Baudhayana. It is probably a recast of older matcrials. It contains the names of more mixed castes than the dharmasatras and than even some of the later smrtis. The present work secms to have been either written.or retouched by a devotee of Visnu. Faith in and devotion to Visnu or Narayana loom very — large here (1.5.5 narayana-parayanah, I. 7. 6 and 9; II. 4-5 bhaktya Visnuin dhyayan, III. 7. 3 Narayanapararh brahmeti grutah, LI. 9. 3 Visnoralayaparsve ). It speaks of the eight angas of Yoga (I. 10. 9 ), of the Ayurveda with its eight angas and of some treatise on evil spirits ( bhitatantra III. 12.7). It refers to the views of some in the word ‘eke’ (I. 7. 4. and II. 9. 10). It speaks of the Sramanaka fire (in I. 6. 2 and I. 7. 3-4). It does not allow sasimyasa to Ksatriyas (1. 1.11). Vikhanas is cited as an authority (II. 5.9 and TL. 15. 14 ). Bihler found a ms. of the Vaikhanasasitra, consisting of a grhya in seven prasnas, three prasnas of dharma (the same as described above >) and a fourth on pravaras. In the grhya a reference to Budhavara occurs ( १२. and ऽ. p. 9). Dr. Caland in his paper on Vaikhanasa-sitra holds that the Manusmrti borrows from Vaikhanasagrhya and that the author of the latter was saturated with the idiom of Dravidian languages ( vide Prof. Keith’s review in Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, 1927, p. 623). Dr. Caland’s 16, Atré 107 view about Manu is entirely wrong as will appear from the section on Manu. Vide Th. Bloch in ^ प्रलाः das Grhya-und Dharmasitra der Vaikhanasa ’ ( Lipzig, 1896 ) Other Sutra Works on Dharma. It will be proper to say a few words about some other sitra works on dharma thar are only available in mss. or are to be reconstructed from quotations inthe digests. It is by no means to be supposed that these works that will be spoken of here were composed as early as those of Gautama, Apastamba and others or were composed before the extant Manu and Y4Ajiiavalkya. But as the chronology of all ancient works on dharma is somewhat in a nebulous state, it is best to treat here of all works written in the sutra style, even though in individual cases they may really belong to a later age than the works composed entirely in verse, They will be taken up in alphabetical order ( Sanskrit ) 16. Atri That Atri was an ancient writer on dharma follows froma refer ence to him in Manu ( III. 16 ) as holding the view that a dvijati taking as wife a Sidra woman became fallen (patita ). In the Deccan College collection there are several mss. ( Nos. 185-187 of A 1881-82) of the Atreyadharmasastra in nine adhyayas. They treat of gifts, prayers ( japya ) and tapas by which men are freed from all sins, Some of the chapters are in mixed prose and verse. The first three chapters are entirely in verse and some of the verses ( such as eka- ksararh param brahma ) occur inthe Manusmrti. The fourth opens with a long satra, which, in style, resembles later bhisyas and com- mentaries.*88 The 5th also is in verse and contains several verses found in Vasistha ( Dh. S. 28. 1, 4,6). The sixth speaks of the specially holy hymns and verses of the Veda. Some of the verses here are the same as Vasistha (28. ro-11). The seventh refers to secret prayascittas and the very first अप्य after the opening words speaks of several non-Aryan tribes such as the Sakas, Yavanas, Kim- 1 Se aera: 188 अव्बीणप्रायग्विलानां यमविषयनरकयातनानिश्व (1) पतितानां यदि कदाचिन्मानुष्यं मवति तदेतचिचह्नङ्कितशरीरा जायन्ते । तयथा । अनृतवादी खली बह्हा कुष्ठी &०. 189 अथातो रहस्यानि व्याख्यास्यामः । नटनतेकगायन-गान्धर्विक-श्वपाककारकवीशोत्कट- वीणाशाञ्ज-शक-यवन-काम्योज-बाङ्कीक-खदा-द्रविड-वङ्ग-पारश-बील्वातदीनां ( ! ) भुक्त्वा प्रतिगृद्च चञ्रीगमने सहभोजने THT रहस्यातिभकारो भकाश्यानि चरेत्‌ । "08 History of Dharmatistra bhojas, Balhikas, Khagas, Vangas and Paraga ( Persians?) &c. It is to be noted that the same sfitra ( with slight variations ) is quoted as Atri’s by Aparirka ( on Yaj. III. 266 p. 1123). The 7th and 8th chapters are in mixed prose and verse. The 9th is in verse and speaks of Yoga and its angas. It refers to the fact that Sisupala, son of Damaghosa, because in his hatred of Govinda he always thought of the latter, went to heaven. The same आप्त work is noticed in 1. 0, Cat., pp. 380-81, Nos. 1305 and 1306. There are several works styled Atri-smrti or sarhhita in the mss, One of them is in six chapters on secret prayaécittas, gifts, pitrmedha and acara ( vide I, 0. Cat., p. 381, No. 1308 ). There is another work styled Atrisarhhita printed in Jivananda’s collection ( part I. pp. 13-46 ). It contains about 400 verses and deals with the follow- ing topics :— importance of honouring guru, duties of four castes ; purifications of several malas ; virtues of Brahmanads such as वप्त, anasuya ; definition of isfa and parta, ten yamas and niyamas; im- portance of sons ; adopted sons, prayascittas for taking forbidden food or drink and for other transgressions, impurity on birth and death; candrayana, Krcra, Santapana; gifts; purifications from avoidable contacts with rajasvala &c.; Sraddha and the Brahmanas to be invited for it. In this work Atri is himself cited-as an authority. Other authors and works quoted are : Apastamba ( p. 3¢ ), Yama (p. 41), Vyasa (p. 24), Satkha (pp. 22, 35), Satatapa (p. 35). The Vedanta, Sankhya, Yoga, Puranas, Bhagavatah ( p. 45 ) are mentioned. It contains (on p. 14) the verse ‘ sadyah patati mansena’ which is found in Vasistha Dh. 5. (2. 27) with the words ‘athapyudaharanti’. There are other verses also which occur elsewhere e. g. ‘atha cenmantravid’ occurs in Vasistha 11. 20, ‘tryahath sayarh tryaharh pratah’((p. 23) is also Manu XI. 211. On '‘p. 26 occur the words ‘ atrapyudaharanti’ and so what follows is a quotation. On p. 32 there are three verses in another metre. Atri’s verse about aduption "५० is quoted as the first authority on adoption in the Dattakamimansa, He mentions the seven antyajas to be the washerman, the shoemaker, nafa, buruda, kaivarta 11 1 Se I a ah 190 eqqtiony कर्तव्यः TMM: सद्‌ । पिण्डोदुकक्रियाहेतोर्यसम(चस्मात्मयत्नृतः ॥ TF Pp, 17. 16, Atré 109 (fisherman ), meda, and 20770 ( 2. 29 ). He further says ७ that there is no question of untouchability in fairs, marriage seasons, in Vedic sacrifices and in all festivals, He says that Brahmanas from Magadha, Mathura and three other places are not honoured (at a Sraddha ) though as learned as Brhaspati."9* The work mentions the signs of the Zodiac, Kanya and the Scorpion ( p. 43 ), and hence was not composed before the first centuries of the Christian era. In Jivananda there isa Laghu-Atri (part I, pp. 1-12) in 6 chapters and about 120 verses, dealing with the means of being freed from sins ( such as pranayama, sacred formula, gifts &c. ), with purifications from impurity on death and birth, with gifts. It mentions Manu. In the fourth chapter there are about ten lines in prose, There are numerous verses that occur also in the Vasistha-dharmasitra, e. £. Vas. 26. 8-9 and 16-18 occur on p. 3; Vas. 28. 11-16 occur on pp. 4-5. It is difficult to say who the borrower is. There is a Vrddhatreyasmrti in Jivanafda (part I. pp. 47-59) in five chapters and about 140 verses. This closely resembles the Laghu-Atri-smrti described above. In the commencement both have the same six verses beginning with ‘bhagavan kena danena’ and the works have many verses in common. In the fourth chapter of both the same prose passages occur. Viévarapa on Yaj. (III. 257 ) quotes two verses from Atri on prayascitta which are found in none of the three works described above.*93 In the Mahabharata ( Anusasana 65. 1 ) Atri is credited with the view that those who make a gift of gold give (practically ) all 191 देवयात्राविवाहेषु THTHTAG ख । उत्सवेषु च सर्वेषु सपृषटास्पाशनं वियते ॥ P- 83 199 मागधो माधुरश्येव कापटः कीटकानुजो । पश्च विप्रा न पूज्यन्ते हृष्पतिसमा यदि ॥ (2, 45). What is कपट { Should we read कीकटाङ्गजो ( residents of the countries of raz and अङ्ग ) ? 193 The verses are भुक्त्वा तु fama भूतादीनामकामतः। प्राजापत्यं WBS Prost ल्वाहताशन : ॥ ण्डालवभिते चान्ने erg शनं विरोषत :। भुक्तवा रठू- मविज्ञाते ज्ञात्वा चान्ब्रायणं चरेत्‌ ॥ 710 History of Dharmasdstra objects. This bears a close resemblance to two verses that occur in Laghvatri ( Jivananda part I. p. 5 ) and Vrddhatri ( part I. p. 51 ).19 é 17. Usanas. That Uéganas wrote a work on politics follows from several cireym- stances. The Kautiliya quotes the Auéanasah seven times. ` It is almost certainly referring to a work. That work contained direc- tions on the administration of justice also, as Kautilya speaks of AuSanasa method of partition ( in allowing a tenth additional share to the eldest son, III. 6), as AuSanasah prescribed fines in cases where witnesses proved stupid &c. (III. 11) and fines for forcible seizure of jewels &c. (Ill. 17). The Mahabharata, Santiparva'9: (chap. 56, 29-30 and 57. 3 ) refers to a work on politics by Usanas and quotes three verses, the last being found in Sabha 55. 14. In other places also we have a Nitisistra ascribed to Bhargava ( Santi 210. 20 ) and certain verses are ascribed to him (Santi 57, 40-41 and 139, 70-71 ). Vide also AnuSasana 39, 8-9 and Sabha 62. 11-12. The Nitiprakasika of Janamejaya refers to a succession of teachers of politics from Brahma down to Janamejaya and says that Sukra was 194 सर्वान्‌ कामान्‌ प्रयच्छन्ति य प्रयच्छन्ति क ्विनम्‌। इत्येवं TTA: पि तामहसुतोबषीत्‌ ॥ अनुशासन 65. 1. The verses in the two Atris are argyqey प्रथमं सुवणं Tang सु्यसुताश्च गाव; | लोकाञ्चयस्तेन भवन्ति दसा यः काञ्चनं गां च Ae च दयात्‌ ॥ सर्वेश्रामेव द्‌।नानामेकजन्मानुगं कलम्‌ । हाटकक्षितिधेनूनां सप्तजन्मानुगं FST ॥ The first verse occurs in Vas. 28. 16, in Vanaparva 200. 28, in the Rajim plate of Tivaradeva ( Fleet's Gupta inscriptions No. 81). 195 श्लोको चोशनसा गीतौ पुरा तात महर्षिणा । तो निबोध महाराज त्वमेकाममना नृप ॥ उदयम्य शखमायान्तमपि वेदान्तगं रणे । निंगृह्णयात्स्वधर्मेण धर्मापेक्षी नर।धिपः॥ षिनश्य~ मानं at हि योमिरकषेत्स धर्मपित्‌ । न तेन adel स स्यान्मन्युस्तं मन्युमृच्छति ॥ शान्तिपव 56. 28-30; भगवानुशना चाह ॒श्छोकमन्र विशांपते । तदिंहेकमना राजन्‌ गद्तस्तं नियोध मे ॥ द्वाविमौ ग्रसते भूमिः सपो बिलशयानिव । र।जानं चाविरोद्धारं ATM चप्रवासिनम्‌ ॥ शान्ति 57. ४-3 ; श्लोकम्ायं ger गीतो भागेबेण महामना | आख्याते रामचरिते नृपतिं प्रति भारत ॥ राजानं प्रथमं विन्देत्‌ ततो भाय तती ` धनम्‌ । राजन्यसति लोकस्य कृतो भार्या कुतो धनम्‌ ॥ शान्ति ° 57. 40-41. नित्यः स्वार्थशाखेषु विन्यासश्यासुखोदयः । उशना चेव गाथे द्वे प्रहदुयाबवीरसुरा ॥ शान्ति» 139. 19. 17. Uéanas 111 one of those who abridged the enormous extent of rajagdstra.*96 The Mudraraksasa (I. p. 71 Telang’s ed. ) also speaks of AuSanasi Dandaniti. Visvaraipa (on ४३}. I. 307 ) asks the king to appoint ministers in accordance with the views propounded in the Sastras_ of Brhaspati and Usanas and quotes a long passage in prose from Brhas- pati in which the sastras of Manu, Brhaspati and USanas are joined together. This work on politics probably contained verses also. Medhatithi on Manu (7. 15 ) quotes two verses speaking of eight activities of a king.'9% So also on Manu 8. 50 Medhatithi cites from Usanas the words ‘ prakrtinam balarh raja,’ which are an Anustubh pada. This प्रप्त work on politics by Usanas has not yet been dis- covered. The Tandya-Mahabrahmana says that Kavya USsanas was. the purohita of the Asuras ( 7. 5. 20 ) In the Deccan College collection there are two mss. of an Auéa- nasa-dharmasastra in prose with a few verses, viz. No. 644 of Visrambag (i) and No. 191 of A 1881-82. The first contains only two folios ( 2 and 4 ) and the available portion begins in the midst of the 2nd chapter. In the second ms. also the first folio is wanting and there are gaps in the fourth chapter. It is noteworthy that the second folio of the second ms. begins just at the beginning of the 2nd folio of the first. The work is a brief one (8 folios ) in seven adhyayas. Their contents are:-—II. impurity on birth and death ; purification of certain things in certain ways such as with water, ashes &c.; III. the four varnas and the mixed castes such as Rathakara, Ambastha, Sata, Ugra, Magadha &c, the Vratyas; IV. no bodily injury to be done to Brihmana ; prayascittas for killing a Brahmana ora man of the other varnas and for other Mahipatakas, prayascitta for eating 196 बह्मा महेश्वरः स्कन्द्वेन्रः प्राचेतसो मनुः । वृहस्पतिश्च शुक्रश्च AAAI Ai तपाः ॥ वेदृन्यासश्च भगवान्‌ तथा गौररिरा मुनिः । एते हि राजशास्ञाणां प्रणेतारः परंतपाः | SATAN बह्मा THATS महामतिः । Taney Age शद्रः wea चाधवीत्‌ | It is further said that Skanda, Indra, Pricetasa Manu, Brhaspati, Sukra, Bharadvaja, Gaurasiras and Veda-Vydsa abridged respectively to 25000, 10000, 6000, 3000, i000, 700, 500 and 300 adhydyas and that Janamejaya abridged even the last. 1965 आदाने च विसमे च तथा प्रैषनिषेधयोः । पञ्चमे चार्थवचने व्यवह्यरस्य वेक्षणे ॥ दण्ड. शद॒भ्योः wa wetness नृपः | अश्टकम दिव याति राजा waa: ॥ These are quoted also by कुलक ०४ Manu VII, 154, A 118 History of Dharmatisira the flesh of certain animals and for eating certain plants like garlic, prayascitta for adultery; discussion whether a Brahmana could marry a Sudra woman; prayascittas for killing various beasts and birds ; four- teen vidyas ; ए, sraddhakalpa; what Brahmanas are pankti-pavana ; details of Sraddha, food and flesh at graddha; who are unfit to be invited at graddha; VI. what things a Brahmana could not sell ; VII. punishments for the Mahapatakas; what are pure things at all times. Some of the views of the Auganasa-dharmagastra are worth special notice. The son of a Brahmana, Ksatriya or Vaigya from a wife of the varna immediately next to it belonged to the caste of the father."97 No sin or punishment attached to one if one killed an 01010; armed Brahmana, The fourteen vidyas are said to be the six angas and the four Vedas, Mimathsa, Nyiya, dharmagastra and Purana."98 The work very often quotes the views of others with the words ‘eke’ ; for example it says ‘ the impurity on birth is ten nights for the parents of the child, but according to some only for the mother.”99 The son of a Brahmana from a $adra woman is called parasava, but according to some he is nisada. ‘The whole of the portion in the ms. about the mixed castes bears a very close resemblance to Baudha- yana ( Dh. ऽ, I. 9) except in a few particulars.2°° At the end of all chapters from the second ( except the third >) there are verses and also in the midst. There are verses introduced with the words ‘there isa Sloka on this point’ ( bhavati catra slokah ) or with the words ‘api codaharanti ’. ON णि कक 197 ब्राह्मणेन क्षत्रियायां जातो बाह्मण एव सः | chap. IIT folio 3 a. 198 चतुदेश वियस्थानानि पुनः षडङ्गाश्चत्वारो वेदा मीमांसा न्याय एव च! धर्मशाखं पुराणं च॑ विया द्येताश्चतदश ॥ „+ 1४ will be noticed that there is a éloka from षडङ्गा which is almost the same as रत}. I. 3. 199 दशर्न मातापितुभ्यः सूतकं मातस्त्यिके | folio 2a; compare ay, ध. सू. 14. 14 J ध्मातापिंतनोस्तम्मातुर्बा |" (and हरदत्त 8 comment thereon for various views ) ; भो. ध. सु, 1. 5. 105-109, where BaudhZyana’s own view is that both are impure for ten days, but according to some the mother and according to others the father has to observe impurity for ten days. 200 The ms. (Srd chap.)has तन्न सवर्णासु सवर्णा; । बह्यणेन क्षत्रिया ,.. सः । बैश्यायामम्ब्ठः । श्रद्ा्यां पारशवो निषाद्‌ इत्येके । क्षत्रियेण वेश्याया क्रियः शूद्राजामुमरः। eta eaten शूद्रेण देश्यायामायोगवः क्षत्रियायां क्षया बाह्ण्यां षण्डाः &०. 17. Usanas | 119 There are about 45 verses in the work, the 7th and last chapter being almost entirely in verse. Asthe mss. are corruptand full of gaps, it is often difficult to find out whether a particular passage is prose or verse. In several verses the words ‘Manur abravid’ occur and in one place ‘tan manor anusasanam’, The latter closely agrees with Manu. Several verses are common to Manu and Uéanas. The verse ‘ gurutalpe bhagah karyah’ ( Manu 9. 237 ) occurs in the ms. So also the verse ‘yena yena cidangena ’ occurs in both.22 The words of Manu ( ४. 78 ) ^ bale desantarasthe’ are expressly quoted with the words ‘Manur-aha’, There are many other verses which, though not cited expressly as from a particular author, are found in other ancient works. For example, the verse ‘ apah Suddha bhimi- gatah’ is Manu 5. 128 and Baud. Dh. S. I. 5.57. The half verse ‘karuhastah Sucir nityam’ is Manu §. 126 and Baud. Dh. S. I. 5. 48. The verse ‘ yadekaratrena karoti papam ’ occurs in Ap. Dh. S.(I. 9, 27.11) and Baud. Dh. 5. IL. 1. 42. The verse ‘tryaham pratas tryaham naktam’ 15 Manu XI. 211. It is a remarkable fact that some of the verses in this dharmasitra agree closely with the verses in the Usanas-smyti in verse, published by Jivananda, e. g. the verse ‘ dattva tu Vedanatyartham ` occurs on p. 525 भात्‌ पा verse ‘niman- tritastu. yo vipro adhvanarh sarhprapadyate’on p. 527. Even the prose passages bear a close resemblance to the versificd smpti on many points, e. g. the prose passages about the duration of the satisfaction of the Manes by the offerings of the flesh of various animals occur almost in the same words in the versified smpti of USanas(Jivananda, part I, p. 522). The Ausanasa-dharmasutra contains several passages in prose which are the same as some verses in Manu.?°3 The sitra eS SR A श) 201 The ms. reads दशस्थानानि दुण्डस्य चात्मनो ( तन्ममे। 1 }रनुश.सनमू । निषु वर्णेषु सामान्यं MoE भवेत्‌ ॥ ” while मनु (8.124)is दुरा ,,, दण्डस्य मनुः स्वायंमुवोधवीत्‌ । तरिषु वर्णेषु यानि स्युरक्षतो बाह्मणो थजेत्‌ ॥ | 202 The ms, reads चेन्‌ येन हि चण्डेन ( चिदङ्गेन t) रिस्याच्छेयांसमन्त्यजः 1 तदेव तस्य छेत्तव्यं छिन्ने निर्विषो भवेत्‌ N; in Ay (8. 279 ) the last 7808 1» तन्मनोः रनुश्चासनम्‌, | 203 The ms. has (in chap. 77) TT aie शुचिः । शुचयः फलपातने wernt परसवे वत्स । AME (मृग 1 ) हणे श्वा । ऊर्वे नामेः पुरषः । गीरमे्या पृष्ठतः। पुरस्ता. am: | शियः सर्वतः । हृद्यमासामाबं | Compare मनु I. 9, बो, ध, सु, 1. 8. and wits 3. 45, Fe De Te 114 History of Dharmasistra — in one place the divergent views of Vasistha,2 Harita tunaka, and Gautama on the question whether a Brahmana could marry a $Gdra woman. ‘The view of Vasistha(as quoted in the ms.) is that a Brahmiana could take to wife girls of all the four castes, but in the printed text of Vasistha (I. 24 )a Brahmana is allowed to marry girls of the three higher castes only. It is possible that the ancient reading of Vasistha’s text was ‘catasrah’ (as quoted in the Auganasa ) which was changed into ‘tisrah’. The passage reminds us of Manu III. 16 ( Sidravedi patatyatreh ), but the views ascribed to Saunaka and Gautama in the ms. differ from those ascribed to them in Manu. In another passage Vasistha’s views seem to be quoted.?°5 From quotations in Haradatta’s commentary on Gautamaand from the Smrticandrika it appears that they had access to a sutra work of Usganas dealing with all branches of dharma, viz., acara, vyavahara and prayascitta. For example, the Smrticandriké quotes prose passages of Usanas on anadhyaya (I. p. 59 ), on dantadhavana (I. p. 106 ) and Haradatta quotes a prose passage on anadhyaya (on Ap. Dh. S. I. 3. 10. 1) and a prose passage on the fine for a ksatriya abusing a Sddra (on Gau. Dh. S. 12. 10) and on Niyoga ( on Gau. Dh. S. 18.5). These passages are not found in the ms. But there are others that are found. For example, the Smriti- candrikaé quotes two passages, which occur in the mss.?° It et pie rn ^“ _ one 204 The ms, (chap. IV) has पतितो ब्रृषर्छपातिरित्याचक्षते। न पततीत्येके । बाह्मणस्य कस्पर्विहिनाश्वतखो-( खो १ )नुपूर्ेण भाया भवन्तीति alts आह । Tale न पत्नीतिं संशयः। TIAL पतीति (TAT गत्वा पततीति !) इ।त | जनन।तततीमि शोनकः। ATT त्यः पततीति गोतमः | The words of वसिष्ठ are “तिस्रो बाह्मणस्य भार्या वर्णानुपूरवेण दवे राजन्यस्य एकेका वेश्यशृद्रय)ः। URAC मन्त्रवजं ag’ । तथा न Pa! I. 24-26, It should be noted that one ms. of वृ सिह omits the words ‘autiy ,.. BAT. ४05 यस्तु qaalign धमेपर्नमुसेन Had सेवेत स दुष्यतीति वेवस्वतः (वै वसिष्ठः ! ) माजापत्येन शुष्यतीति ह्यरीतः (chap. 4); compare वसिष्ठ 12. 23. and Manu XI. 67 and 173. The reading वैवस्वत! also is explicable. Sqxqq may stand for मर्म, ४00 The passages are (तन्न गोमयोदुकर्भूमिभाजनभाण्डशोचं Baia? (chap. ४, about Sriddha) and ' श्वविद्वराहमाजारकुकूटनकृलद्ररजस्वलाशुद्धीमतोरश्च FATT faaean: (०मपनेतध्य। ) They occur in स्मतिचन्धरिका (III. 9. 409 and 2.41). 17, Udanas 118 appears therefore that the mss. either contain a portion only of the complete Auganasa-dharma-sitra or an independent sitra work’, The former alternative looks more probable. The foregoing discussion has shown that the आ work is later than the dharma- sutras of Gautama and Vasistha and also than the Manusmrti, which it probably knew in a very ancient version slightly differing from the extant one. In Jivananda’s collection of smrtis there is an Auganasa-dharma- S4stra in 5x verses (part I. pp. 497-501). It deals with mixed castes and their avocations, such as sita, migadha, cAndala, Svapaca, pulinda &c. The same work occurs in the Anandagrama collection, pp. 46-48. The Mit. (on Yaj. 1. 94 ) remarks that the means of livelihood for the mixed castes should be sought for in the works of Usanas and Manu.?°7 It is probably this smrti that is meant. Kulltika on Manu X. 49 says that the sale of hides and working on hides were the means of livelihood for Dhigvanas according to the Ausganasa. In the same collection ( part. 1. pp. 501-554) there is another smrti ascribed to USanas in 9 chapters and about 600 verses. It treats of Upanayana, daily observances like dcamana, Vedic study, occasions of anadhyaya, the dharmas of snataka ; Sraddha, proper Brahmanas 07 Sraddha, impurity on birth and death, rites after death, prayagcittas for the mortal sins and lesser sins. This smrti quotes Usanas himself, also Manu, Bhrgu ( Bhrgu- putra IIT), Prajapati and speaks of dharmasastras, Puranas, Mimarhsa, Vedanta, Paticaratras, 77311145 and Pasupatas. Numerous verses from the Manusmrti are found in it (€. g. Manu II. 42, 49, 50, 125 ) occur in the first chapter alone. There is a brief prose passage towards the end of the 9th chapter. It speaks of Kapalikas, Pasupatas and atheists together ( ए. 525 ) None of these smrtis in verse contains the passages in verse on vyavahara ascribed to Uganas that occur in the Mitaksara, Smrti- candrika and other works. The Mit. (on Yaj. III. 260 ) and Apararka (€, ६. p. 158, 192, 24९ ) contain prose passages ascribed to Usanas and the same works contain numerous verses ascribed to USanas most of which are not 207 एतेषां च वृत्तय ओशनसे मानवे च द्रटन्याः । मित. 416 History of Dharmaédstra 7 ind in the two smrtis in Jivananda. Some of the verses in pararka ascribed to Uganas are found in the AuSanasasmrti (९. g, Apararka p. 418 ‘kuryad-aharah Sraddham’ is Jivananda I. p. 521 ) In other cases the verses quoted from Uéanas in Apararka, though not quite identical, bear a very close resemblance (e. g. the four verses in Apararka p. 450 closely resemble Jivananda I. p. 525 and have some verses in common ) Among the views on Vyavahira quoted from (58025 are some interesting ones. It was he who said that ason was not bound to pay his father’s debt, if it was a fine or unpaid toll or what is not vyavaharika.2°® He holds that even blind, deaf or old men, women, minors could be witnesses in charges of sahasa ( Apararka p. 671 ) He is quoted also on ordeals, on svimipalavivada and on steya. A work styled Sukranitisara was edited by Oppert (Madras 1882) and by Jivananda (Cal. 1892 ) and translated by Benoy Kumar Sarkar in S.B. H. Series. That work is a very interesting one, but is comparatively of a late date. 18, Kanva and Kanva From the Ap. Dh. S. it appears that Kanva and Kanva were two distinct writers on dharma. In I. 6. 19. 2 Apastamba starts the question as to the persons, food at whose house was permitted. He states various views on that point and says that Kanva was of opinion that food may be taken at anybody’s house provided the latter offered it with a request ( I. 6. 19.°3 ) and that the opinion of Eka, Kunika, Kanva, Kutsa and Puskarasadi (1. 6. 19. 7 ) was that only that food that was offered by a pure and religious man should be partaken. In another place (I. 10. 28. 1) Apastamba gives it as the opinion of Kautsa, Harita, Kanva and Puskarasidi that a man became a thief if in any case whatever he appropriates another's belongings. The Kumbhakonam edition of Pandit Halasyanatha reads Kanva for Kanva. Kanva is quoted a few times in the Smrticandrika on Ahnika (daily duties ) and sriddha. One of these quotations is in prose CI. p. 97 ).2°? Haradatta in his commentary on Gautama cites 208 दण्डो वा दष्डशेषो वा Yew तच्छेषमेव वा। न दातभ्वं तु THOT यश्च न म्यवहार्किम्‌ ॥ निता, and RATS on याज्ञ. II, 47. 208 seat वेदेतिदासपुराणानीति TAT ATT तीरथनी्ठयोः TSM TTA AT | 18. Kawwa and Kayea 117 verses of Kanva in several places (€, g. Gautama Dh. S. 41. 3, 23. 4 and 11 ).**° The first verse bears a close resemblance to Manu XI. 180 and Baud. Dh. S. II. 1. 62. Kanva is quoted in the Acar- mayikha and the Sraddha-mayakha. The Mit. ( on Yaj. TIT. 58) quotes a verse of Kanva on the length of the stay of a samnyasin in a village or town. On Yaj. II. 260 the Mit. quotes a verse of Kanva stating the prayagcitta for a Brahmana having intercourse with the Ksatriya wife of his teacher. In the Madras Govt. Oriental Library there is a ms, of Kanva (vol. V, p. 1929 No, 2624 ). 19 Kasyapa and Kasyapa. Baudhayana ( Dh. S. I. 11. 20 ) cites a verse which contains the view of KaSyapa that a woman who is bought cannot be a patné and that she is not authorised to take part in religious ( daiva ) rites or rites for the Manes.?'* This verse is ascribed to Katyayana in the Smrticandrika (I. p.87 ). The Vanaparva quotes gathas of Kasyapa on forbearrance ( 29. 35-40 ). Whether Kagyapa and Kasyapa are two different writers of dharmasitras it is rather difficult to say. Probably they are identical. It appears that the dharmasitra of Kasyapa comprised all the usual topics of dharmasitras, such as daily duties, Sraddha, aSauca, prayagcitta. This stra has been quoted by all eminent writers from Visvaripa downwards. Viésvarapa quotes Kasyapa (in prose) on the prayagcitta for contact with candalas?'? and for killing a cow when the sinner is a Brahmana or a member of another caste.243 The Mit. ( on Yaj. III. 23 ) quotes a prose passage from Kasyapa on freedom from impurity on death.?"4 210 The verse is संवत्सरेण पतति पतितेन समाचरन्‌ | यानाशनासनेर्नित्यमित्याहुंबह्मव।दिनि : ॥ य कीता ASAT या नारी सा न पत्नी विधीयते । BT Sa न सा sa दासीं at कश्यपोषदीत्‌ ॥ | 212 जण्डुलन्वपाकपुल्कसादिसंकरे सम्यवधने वण्मासान्‌ गोमृश्रयावकाः TTBS पातभ्याः । एवं पमरतिमासबृदभ्या वुदधिरा परिवृत्तेः सूथस्य । विश्बद्प ० याज्ञ, 111. 257 “13 प्रायग्यित्तमकामावाप कामरूतेष्येके |... ब्राह्मणेभ्यो निवेदयित्वा सशिखं ar ST माजापश्यं रष्छरमा्रेत्‌ । जीणन्ते धेनुं तिलधेनुं दयात्‌ । ... तेन चर्मणा प्रावृतो मासं गोष्ठे वसेत्‌ । विश्वरूप ० याज्ञ. 711. ४69 9“ बालानामदुम्तजाताना त्रिरात्रेण शुद्धिः । 118 Eftetory of Dharmatastra Whe quotations in the Smpticandrika on ahnika and éraddha are all in verse. Haradatta on Gautama ( 22. 18 ) quotes a अप्र on the prayascitta for govadha,?*s which is also quoted by Visvardpa. Haradatta (on Gaut. 23. 26 ) quotes a very long sitra on the prayascitta for eating several thingsand doing several forbidden acts.?"6 Haradatta (on Ap. Dh. 5. II. 6. 13. 2 ) quotes several verses mentioning the seven kinds of punarbhis. The Haralata quotes a satra from Kagyapa on asgauca. Aparirka quotes several sitras and a few verses under both names KaSyapa and Kasyapa ( vide Yaj. I. 64, WI. 265, I, 222-25, Ill. 251, 288, 290, 292 for verses ). tn the Deccan College collection there are two mss. ( No. 200 of 1884-87 and No. 122 of A. 1881-82) which contain a Kasyapa- smrti in prose ( 4 folios having 8 lines on each side). It begins ‘athatah Kasyapiyan grhasthadharman vyakhyasyamah’. It deals with the duties of householders, with prayascittas for doing mischief to wells, dikes, ponds, temples and houses of Brahmanas, for killing a cow and other beasts and birds, with rules on mourning after death and impurity on birth, with prayascittas for eating garlic and other similar things, with the five mortal sins, with prayascittas when such portents as earthquakes, lightning flashes occur, or for such accidental occurrences as the breaking of the milk pot, with purifi- cation of vessels of wood, metals, with the visible physical sins of sins committed in previous lives, with the seven punarbbas. In this work some of the sitras quoted 25 Kasyapa’s in the commentaries are found, ( €. 2. the quotation No. 216 ‘ lasuna’ &c. above ). So also the verses about punarbhias of seven kinds quoted by Haradatta are found in the mss. In this smrti, Kasyapa 15 frequently cited as an authority. It is to be noted that Kasyapa is not mentioned by Y4j. as one of the dharmasastraprayojakas, though Parasara ( chap.I) mentions Kasyapa dharmah. The Smrticandrika (I. p. 7 ) and the Sarasvati- _vilasa (p. 13) speak of 18 Upasmrtis in which KaSyapa’s is included. 215 गां इत्वा तश्चमेणा परिवृतो मासं गेष्ठेशयस्षिषवणस्नायी नित्यं पश्चगष्याह्मरः | 816 लशुनपलाण्डुगजञ्जनकुकृटमक्षणे मेदःशुकपनेऽयाज्ययाजनेऽभोञयमोजनेऽभक्ष्यमक्षणेऽ गभ्यागमने चवं भायश्ित्तं॑बाह्मणेभ्यो निवेय agains पराण्यामुव्ध््यां दिि गत्वा यत्र भाम्यपशूनां शब्दो न श्रूयते AKAM भश्वार्य बघ्ठासनमास्तीय तत्मणीतेनं विधिना पुनःसंस्कारमद्ति । $0. Gargya 119 20. Gargya Visvarapa (on ४}. I. 4-5 ) quotes a verse of Vrddha-Yajfiavalkya in which Gargya is enumerated among the expounders of Dharma (dharmavaktarah ). He quotes two sitras, one from Gargya (on Yaj. I. 727*7 ) and the other from Vrddha-Gargya?"* (on Yaj. I. 195). Therefore it seems that a sitra work of Gargya on dharma did exist. The Mit. (९, g. on Yaj. III. 326 ), Apararka and the Smpticandrika quote several verses of Gargya on = 21011६4, Sriddha and prayascitta. Parasara also mentions Gargya among writers on dharma. Apararka contains (pp. 124, 190, 368, 544 ) verses from Garpya on topics of dharma. It seems that the two writers are identical. Apararka also quotes several verses from Gargya of astronomical import (e. £, p. §47 on the nomenclature of the months as Cattra in connection with the signs of the zodiac ). This was probably an independent work. Fragments of a Gargi sarhhita on astronomy and astrology have been recovered and it contains valuable historical information ( vide Kern’s preface to Brhat-sarhhita pp. 33-40 and Mr. Jayasval in JBORS. vol. 14, p. 397 ff). A Jyotir-Gargya and a Brhad-Gargya are quoted in the Smpticandrika. The Nityacarapradipa ( p. 20, BIS ) mentions Garga and Gargya separately as smrtikaras. 21. Cyavana The Mit., Aparirka and other works cite several sitras and some verses from Cyavana. Apararka quotes 9 very long prose passage from Cyavana (on ४३]. 1. 207 ) about the procedure of making the gift of a cow and about the mantras to be recited in that ceremony. The Mit. ( on Y4j. III. 30 ) and Apararka both cite a sitra of Cyavana on the prayascitta for coming in contact with a dog, a §vapaka, a corpse, smoke from a funeral pyre, wine, wine- vessel &c. Apararka cites prose passages of Cyavana on the prayascitta for killing a cow (on ४३]. II. 264-265 ), for touching, carrying or burning the corpse of one who commits suicide (on YAj. III. 292), on the method of the purification of houses, vessels, articles of food when touched by candalas ( on the same verse ). 22, Jatukarnya Visvartpa on ( Yaj. 1. 4-5 ) quotes a verse of Vrddha-Yajfia- valkya in which Jatakarna is mentioned as an expounder of. “17 पतिताः जियल्याज्या भतुवधमतिन्ञाणां ् । ५४ भेको काह BARR | 130 History of Dharmatieiva dharma.*7 The name is variously written as Jatukarni or Jatakarnya or as Jatukarna. The Smrticandrika quotes a passage from Angiras in which Jatakarnya is enumerated among writers of Upasmrtis. Visvardpa quotes prose passages from Jatukarnya a number of पाऽ. On Yaj. I. 1, he gives a sutra about ^ pratilomas” ; on Yaj.1.2 there is a sitra sying that a pupil should not all of a sudden put a question to his teacher in an assembly of people, on Yaj. I. 29 about a Ksatriya and Vaisya wearing an Upavita of hemp and wool when initiated for sacrifice, on Yaj. I. 37 as to the age when a Brahmana became a vritya, about the prohibition of marrying another wife of a different caste when one has already married a savarna wife (on Yaj. I. 79 ), about the time for sraddhas (on Yaj. I. 215). These quotations show that Jatakarnya composed a stra work on ३८३7४ and Sraddha, which was comparatively ancient. The quotations of Jatakarnya in Mitaksara Haradatta, Apararka, and later writers are in verse and so it appears that by that time the work had been lost or forgotten. Apararka ( p. 423 ) quotes a verse of Jatakarnya which refers to the zodiacal sign Virgo. This would place the verse Jatikarnya not very much earlier than the jrd or 4th century A. D. 23. Devala In the Mit. there are several prose passages quoted from Devala, €, g. on Yaj. I. 120 there is a satra on the dharmas of the अवा and the avocations open to him ;?7* on Yaj. I. 128 there is a satra dividing householders into Yayavara and Salina and describing each of them.???, In Apararka and the Smpticandrika there are several 219 सूयांसो धमेवक्तार उत्पन्ना माविनस्तथा। निधानं स्ैधमीणां वेद्‌ एव हि awa ANG: Toe गाम्बः पुलस्त्यः Tere: क्रतुः । मोधायनो जातुकर्णो Reais: पितामहः ॥ 230 ्रतिलोमास्तवम्तावसायिनः' } 'नाकस्मात्समवाये गुरं TST’, "दीक्षितौ चेद्वाजन्यवेश्यो छाणाविके खुयाताम्‌ ,; द्विगुणां गायश्नीमतिक्रम्य ब्राह्मणो aes: स्यात्‌" , ‘aaa हृतदारो नाम्यामिच्छेत्सन्तानस्यान्यगानित्वात्‌” , "अथ भाद्धमपरपक्षे सरवश्राविशेषात्‌ | THEA एव वा सामभ्यपपतिम्याम्‌, ४ तानि ब देवलोकतानि । शधो Rony neat कलटन्नादिपोषरणं कर्षणपडुपा- कममारोषहनपण्यध्यवह्मएचिन्रकमनृत्यगीतवेणुवीणामुरजृदेद्वादेनादीनि । 322 यथा हि दुेद्धः । द्विविधो Teed यायावरः शालीनश्च । तयोर्थायावरः प्रवरः याजना- भ्यापनमतिमहरिक्थरंबयवजनात्‌ | षरकमांबिद्ितः पेष्यचतुष्पद्गृहामधनधान्युको wronged arate इति। £8, Devala 121 prose quotations from Devala. On ४४}. Ill. 58 Apararka quotes a long prose passage on the rules of conduct for a yati; on Yaj. III. 109 Apararka cites a very long passage, in which Sankhya and Yoga are defined, reference is made to extensive Tantras on the two systems and a brief résumé is given of the Sankhya system, which greatly resembles the Tattvasamasa. On ४३]. III. 227 Apararka has a prose quotation from Devala about patitas. In the Smrti- candrika (I. p. 63 ) there is a lengthy passage from Devala on the daily duties of the brabmacarin, a sitra (I. p. $2 ) is quoted about brabmacarya for 48 years and in another place there is a prose passage about the wife’s duties.*?3 In the Mit., in Haradatta, Apararka and the Smrticandrika there are numerous quotations in verse from Devala on वत्वा, vyavahara, $raddha, prayascitta and other topics. That seems to have been an independent work. In the Anandagrama collection of smrtis there is a Devalasmrti in 90 verses dealing with purification and prayacittas for contact with Mleficchas. This appears to be a _ late compilation. Some of the verses contained therein are ascribed to other authors, e. g. verses 17-22 are ascribed to Apastamba by Apararka (on ४३}. III. p. 1200) and verses 30-31 are ascribed by the Mit. (on Y4j. III. 290 ) and Apararka to Visnu. The Mahabharata ascribes the view to Devala that in man there are three jyotts, viz. offspring, karma, and learning.?*+ Apararka and the Smrticandrika cite verses from Devala of partition, inheritance, on woman’s power over stridhana. These show that Devala, the jurist, flourished about the same time as the great jurists Brhaspati and Katyayana. 24. Paithinas! Though not enumerated in Yajiiavalkya, Paithinasi seems to have been a comparatively ancient satrakara on dharma. On Yaj. Ill. 26a Visvarfipa quotes a प्तप of Paithinasi on the prayascitta for killing acow. Dr. Jolly ( R.undS. p. 12 ) following Dr. Caland( Ahnencult &c. pp. 99, 109) thinks that Paithinasi belongs to the Atharva- veda as the prose quotations on sraddha agree with the ritual of ॐ परतिशचभूषा सहपमेजयां ततपयमानेपूजनम्‌ । ५५ श्रीणि ज्योतींषि पुष इति बे देषरोगवीत्‌। अपत्यं कर्म वथा ज अतः Ger परास्तः ॥ समाप १४. &, Me Dy 56, 122 History of Dharmatdetrda the Atharvans. The Mit. (on Yaj. I. 53) quotes a sitra of एण masi to the effect that a person should marry a girl who is beyond the third degree on the mother’s side and beyond the fifth on the father’s 546. On Y4j. ITI. 17 the Mit. quotes two sitras relating to impurity on death.7© The Smpticandrika, Apararka, Haradatta and other writers quote numerous sitras of Paithinasi. The Smrti- candrika has a prose quotation on the duties of women.?27 In another place the Smrticandrika ( II. p. 263 ) cites a sitra on partition.29® Apararka (p. 112) quotes two verses of Paithinasi recommending the practice of safi to women of all castes except Brahmana women. Apararka (p. 239) quotes a sutra saying that the food of astrologers, bell-makers and gramakutas is poison.??9 Apararka quotes (on p. 744) a sutra of Sankha-Likhita and Paithinasi about inheritance to a deceased sonless man.?}° Apararka quotes another important prose passage?>' “‘the wealth of (a heirless ) srotriya goes to the parisad and not to the king, the king should not appropriate the wealth of temples and guilds, deposits and the wealth of minors and women.” Then the sutra quotcs a verse on the samc topic, which seems to refer to Manu 9..1941n the word ‘of sixfold origin ’ (sadagama). Another sitra quoted by Apararka (p. 754) says ‘when an appoint- ed daughter dies, her husband does not take her wealth ; if she be issueless, her mother or mother-in-law should receive it.’ Aparirka quotes a verse of Paijhinasi ( p.921 ) ‘at the time of marriage, tamincs, sacrifices, fairs and pilgrimages there is no impurity due to birth or death.’ 225 Saar मात्रत; पञ्वातीत्य चर Aaa इति च पेदीनसिना &० 226 नित्यानि पिनिवसरन्‌ येतानवर्ज USI चेक । साविन्या चाज weer `मदक्षिणं रत्वा सूर्यं MITA | ४7 जिय) गृहदेवतास्तासां न शोच न क्रतं नोपवासः । पतिशुश्रूषयेव जियो गच्छन्ति परमं गतिम्‌ ॥ स्मतिच ° IL. p. 252 228 पेतके. विभज्यमाने ara श्रातणां समो विभागः ४29 सावत्सर्किघाण्टिकम्मापकुटान्न विषम्‌ । , The word प्रामकरट ( a village officer ) is well known from inscriptions, 280 अपुत्रस्य स्वयांतस्य भ्रातगामि धनं तदभावे मातापितरौ wat पत्नी वा ज्येष्ठा । . 231 agama वा aera न राजगामि । न हरये राज्ञा देवतागणस्स्थितं न निक्षेपो. पनिधिक्रियाक्रमागतं न बाटल्ञीधनानि । एव॑ त्याह । नं हार्यं खीधन राज्ञा तथा बाल- धनानि च । Atal: षडागमं वित्तं बालानां Gas घनम्‌ ॥१, This whole passage is ascribed to शद्ध in वि, र्‌, 2. 698. 85. Budha 123 25, Budha This sitrakara is not mentioned by Y4j. nor by Parasara, He is very rarely cited, Apararka on रत्र. 1. 4-5, Kalpataru ( quoted in Vira-mitrodaya, Paribhasa p. 16 ), Hemadri,?32 Jimuta-vahana’s Kalaviveka are probably the earliest writers to mention him. In the Deccan College Collection there are two mss. of a Budha-dharma- sastra in prose ( No. 507 of 1881-82 and No. 145 of 1895-1902, 2 01105). The work is very brief*}3 and speaks of upanayana, marriage, eight forms of marriage, the sarhskaras from garbhadhana to Upanayana, the five daily great yajias, $Sriddha, pakayajjias, haviryajiias, somay4ga, the means of subsistence for a Brahmana, the duties of Vaisyas and Sadras, the orders of forest hermits and sannydsins, removal of thorns by the king, administration of justice, king’s duties. The work does not produce the impression of being early. It is in the nature of a summary of larger works on dharma. All quota- tions in Hemadri cited from Budha are not found in the mss, an 26. Brhaspati That Brhaspati was an ancient teacher of Arthasastra follows from the Kautiliya, wherein the Barhaspatyas are cited six times. In the Mahabharata (Santi, chap. 59. 80-85) Brhaspati is said to have com- pressed into 3000 chapters the work on dharma, artha and kima composed by Brahma. The Vanaparva ( 32. 61 ) speaks of Brhaspati-niti, The Mahabharata. several times cites verses ( ९04 or Slokas)) said to have been sung by Brhaspati23+ ( vide Santi. 23. 25, 56. 38-39, 57. 6-7 ). Vide GY रीरि 232 चतुवेगे ° (दानखण्ड 7. 527) says “अादिशब्दाच्च युधदेवलसोमप्रजापतिवृद्शातातप- पेदीनसिकछागलेयख्यवनमरीचिवत्सपारस्करपुलस्त्यपुलहकरतुऋष्यशृह्गान्रेयाणां WSU . 233 The Budha stra opens as follows ;--अथातो sere व्याख्याश्यामः। ्रेयोभ्यदयसाधनो धमः । MTA बह्मणो वसन्त आत्मानमुपनयेत्‌ । एकादशे AR मीष्मे ' द्वादशे वेश्यो वषि | मेखलाजिनदण्डकमण्डलूपवीतानि धारयेत्‌ । &०. हेमाद्रि ( परिशेष, काल, ४ 309 ) quotes this as Budha’s from स्मृति- M viet निगिरति सपो बिलशयाभिष । राजानं चाविरोद्धारं बह्मणं चाप्रवासिनम्‌ ॥ शान्ति. 28.15. This verse ( with the reading हवाविमो aaa भृमिः सर्पो &९.) is asoribed by शान्तिपर्व 57. 3. to 89788 ; vide note 195 above. Tee yf ph | Fistory of Dharmatistra also Santi. 58. 13-16, 69. 23-24. The Anuéasana (39. 10-11) speaks of the ArthasAstra composed by Brhaspatiand others. In some of these places there are distinct references to a sastra or mata of Brhaspati and sections of his work are referred to (as e.g. rajadhikara). The Santic parva (170. 12) describes how a king could, according to Brhaspati’s views, secure his goal in four ways.?35 In the Vanaparva (150.29) men are said to be upheld by the mayas proclaimed by Brhaspati and Uganas. Vide also Sabha 50. 9, 55. 6, 73. 7-8, Udyoga 33. 71-725 55. 66. The Kamasitra repeats the tradition that Brahma com- posed a work in one hundred thousand chapters on dharma, artha and kama and that Brhaspati dealt with a portion of that work, viz. on artha.236 Vide note 196 above. ASvaghoga ( Buddhacarita I. 46 ) speaks of the rajagastra of Sukra and Brhaspati. According to the Arthas4stra of Kautilya some of the special views of Brhaspati’s school were that there were only two vidyas for kings viz. varta and dandaniti and that the council of ministers should comprise 16 members. According to Kamandaka and the Paficatantra (II. 41 ) ‘aviSvasa’ was the sheet- anchor of royal policy according to Brhaspati. The YaSastilaka (p.13) says that the niti of Brhaspati had no place for @©०45.>7 The com- mentary on the Nitivakyamrta gives the first verse of Brhaspati.237@ Visvaripa contains several prose quotations which from their context must have been taken from Brhaspati about the qualifications of a sena- pati, pratihara, dita, &c. It is somewhat strange that in this quotation the mantrin is required to be deeply conversant with the Sastras of Manu, Brhaspati and USanas. For similar prose quotations, vide शाखे च श्लोको निगदितः पुरा । ,.. क्षममाणं AT नित्यं नाचः परिभवेज्जनः । इस्ति- यन्ता गजस्यव शिर एवारषश्चति ॥ शान्त 56. 98-39; मरुत्तेन हि राज्ञा च गीतः श्लोकः पुरातनः । राजाधिकारे राजेन्दर बृहस्पतिमते पुरा ॥ गरोरप्यवारिप्तस्य ायीकार्य- मजानतः | उत्यथप्रतिपननस्य दण्डो भवति शाश्वतः ॥ शान्ति 57. 6-7. ४55 चतुर्विधा छयथंसिदिबहृस्पतिमते यथा । पारम्पर्यं तथा देवं काम्य Fone प्रभो ॥ शान्ति ® 170, 18. 86 प्रजापतिः प्रजाः सृष्टा तासां स्थितिनि्न्धन Rarer साधनमष्यायानां waage- णामे Te । तत्येकदेशिकं मनुः स्वायम्भुवो धर्माधिकारके gue जकार । बृहृस्पतिरेथोधिकारिकिम्‌ । 5-7 ST शहस्पतिनतिय इवादेवमातकाः | 975 वाका कृयेन मनसा मणम्य्गिरसं मुनिम्‌ । निशां पवश्यामि भृपतीनां सुखावहम्‌ ॥ 26. Brhaspatt me Visvaripa on Yaj. 1, 323, H. 154. That Brhaspati also wrote a 8809 work on vyavahara and other topics of dharma follows from the quotations contained in Visvariipa and Haradatta. For example, Viévardpa cites a prose passage from Brhaspati (on Yaj. IJ. 38) about the duty of the king to restore property stolen from his subjects if he could not recover it from the thief, about the rising scale of the rates of interest according to the castes, about the debts of a deceased man being payable by those who took his wealth, by his wife or by ` his son, about a surety being made to pay when the principal died, about the illegitimate son of a Sidra getting a share on his father's death and about his taking the whole estate with the king’s per- mission if there were no legitimate issue of the Sidra.73* Haradatta on Gautama 22. 18 quotes a prose passsage from Brhaspati on the prayascitta for killing acow. These quotations establish that Brhas- pati wrote a sitra work on dharma also ( 1. €. at least on vyavehara and prayascitta). ViSvaripa also quotes a few verses from Brhaspati on vyavahara and priyascitta and in one place at least indicates that the verse he attributes to Brhaspati occurred in the same work in which a prose passage quoted by him occurred.?39 From this it follows that the sitra work of Brhaspati on dharma contained verses also in Visvardpa’s time. Whether the two works on arthasastra and dharma were composed by the same Brhaspati cannot be determined. It looks probable that they were composed by different authors. Y4j. (I. 4-5) mentions Brhaspati among the expounders of dharma. He is probably referring to the sitra work on dharma disclosed by quotations from Visvarapa 238 तथा चं बुहृष्पतिः ATA त सर्वेभ्योन्विष्यापणीयम्‌। अल मे स्वकोशाहा | SAAT TT किष्बिषी स्यात्‌ । ` ०० याज्ञ. 11. 38; तथा च युदृ्तिः--पादोषयात्‌ कमेणे- तरेषाम्‌-इति ON यान्न. 77. 39; बुहृस्पतिश्य धनखीहारिपुश्राणां gine aia माधमण्यं तद्भावे erat रिक्थमाजाम्‌ । ० याज्ञ. 7.47; तथा च बहस्पतिः उपस्थाप्य विपत्तावुपस्थाप्यस्य पुनः प्तिभर्वाण्यः इति । ०० याज्ञ. 77.55; तथा च ब॒हस्पतिः-“कामतश्य शरू्रावरोधजस्य MTT समानमा प्रेते पितरि ददुः शश्र" TRY : इति । OD याज्ञ. 11. 138. 239 on याज्ञ. III. 262 विन्बद्धपं says । SPAT तु द्वादशाहेन, गोषाती तस्मा्याषाष्म- मुच्यते | erent भवेन्न क्षीरदष्यशनोपि वा ॥' तथेदुमन्यत्‌ "गायश्या aya &o. ( two verses )? | तथेदं THAT ‘STENT पथ्चैगव्याहृरः दूरान्न वा याब SE गोष्ठे वसेत्‌ । ... MOTT भोजयित्वा शुष्येदित्याह बृहस्पतिः ' इति। The words TAT TATA: ate attributed to TEENA by हदल also, we Fitstory of Dharmastetre In the Mit, and other commentaties and nibandhas over sevey hundred verses on vyavahira ‘and a few hundred more on Acara and , prayascitta are cited from Brhaspati. That seems to have been an independent work composed between 300 and 500 A. D., which will be discussed later on ( vide sec. 37 ). In Jivananda’s collection ( part I. pp. 644-651 ) and in the Anandaérama collection there is a Brhaspatismrti in 80 verses in which Brhaspati is represented as instructing Indra about gifts, Several mss. in the Deccan College Collection contain this smrti, but in an abridged form in 70 and 49 verses( No 130 of 1884-86 and No 147 of 1895-1902 ). Vide also I. O. cat. p. 386 No. 1324, 1325- 1328. Apararka quotes (7 1225 ) verse 7 of this smrti (in verse ) and the Danaratnakara quotes verses 6 and 7 as from Dana-Brhaspati. The Barhaspatya Arthagastra edited by Dr. F. W. Thomas (Lah&te, 1921 ) is a later work and does not deserve more than a passing notice. In six chapters it deals with the conduct, duties, studies of kings, omens, rules of policy &c 27, Bharadvaja and Bharadvaja There is a Srauta ऽता and a Grhya sitra attributed to Bharadvaja. The Ms. of the grauta in the Bombay University Library contains nine prasnas and a portion of the roth and begins ‘darfapaurnamasau vyakhyasyamah’. It quotes Alekhana and Aémarathya frequently. The Grhya has been edited by J. W. Salomons. It appears from quotations in Visvaripa and other early commentators that a sitra work on dharma attributed to Bharadvaja or Bharadvaja was in existence. The forms Bharadvaja and Bharadvaja probably refer tothe same work. On Yaj. (I. 15) Vigvarapa quotes a prose passage from Bharadvaja prohibiting the learning of mleccha tongues and calling upon the preceptor to teach his pupil pure words, observance of Sarhdhya and the kindling of fire ;7398 on Yaj. I. 32 Bharadvaja is quoted as prescribing a penance for even thinking of causing harm to beings;?39b on Yaj.1.185 a lengthy satra of Bharadvaja on the purification of certain things is quoted, wherein is cited the view of some that boys are purified by a mere bath ४39 तथा च मारदाजः- न म्टेच्छभा्षां erat । म्लेच्छो इ वा एष यद्पशष्द्‌ इति विक्ञा- यते । तस्माच्छिष्यमुपनीय साधुशब्दा्‌ शिक्षयेत्‌ सन्ध्योपासनाभ्रन्धनानि । $59b तथा ख माद्राज ;-- "मनसा पराणिहतायां निदंपदामावतंयेतु" बति । ` $7. Bharadviija and Bhtradetja ant when touched by antyajas; 74° on Yaj. I. 236 ४ prose passage of Bharadvaja forbids in graddhas the use of certain cereals as food.?4 Aparirka quotes a long prose passage (p. 1155) from Bharadvaja in connection with the prayascitta for cessation of grhya fires for various periods.: In the Smeticandrika, in Haradatta and in several other works verses of Bharadvaja are quoted, which appear to be taken from a smyti in verse. That Bharadvaja was an ancient writer on arthaéastra ‘follows from the Kautiliya, wherein the views of Bharadvaja are cited seven times and of Kaninka Bharadvaja once. Some of the views of Bha- radvaja as described in the Kautiliya are that a king should choose his ministers from amongst his fellow-students, that the king should consider his line of policy alone in secret, that the princes should be punished secretly when they manifest no love for the king their father, that the minister should set one prince against another when the king is on his death-bed, that when calamities befall the king and the minister, the former is the lesser of two evils, that one should bow down before the strong. This last view occurs in the Mahabharata in the same words.?42? The Santiparva (chap. 140) contains a dialogue between Bharadvaja and king Satrufijaya of Sauvira in which danda is said to be the most pre-eminent among the expedients. The same parva (chap. 58. 3) mentions Bharadvaja in a list of writers on rajasastra. The Yasastilaka243 (4th Asvasa p. 100, Nirnayasigara ed.) quotes two verses of Bhiradvaja from his trea- tise on the topic of the six guyas. This shows that Bharadvaja’s work on politics was available in the roth century and contained verses (probably intermixed with prose). 0 यत्तु CE ay शौचं शयनासनकटपरस्तरयानपस्तरगण्डोपधानकशिपुकम्यलकगृहषा- न्यमणिफलकशिलासदहृखरेम्णाभनिस्तानां च कष्टानां PISS कुमाराणामन्यन्न प्रक्चणादन्त्यस्पर्शने स्नानं कमाराणमेके' इति । Ml म।षाढकीमुद्रव्जं Raat न द्यात्‌~ इति भरद्राजः 9५ कौटिल्य says (12. 1) इन्द्रश्य हि स प्रणमति यो बलीयसो नमति-इति भारद्वाज शौन्तिपवं 61. 11. has न्द्राय स प्रणमते नमते यो बलीयसे I? . ४43 अवस्षेपेण हि सतामसतां sage च । तथा सत्वेष्वमिद्रोहादधर्मस्य च करणात्‌ ॥ विमाननाच्चं मान्यानां विश्वस्तानां चं घ।तनात्‌ । प्रजानां जायते ` छोपो मृपतेश्चायुष॑ः क्षयः ॥ इति कथमिदूमभाषत TTT मारद्राजः ॥ | 198 History of Dharmat&sira ` The Parasara~Madhaviya (vol. III. p. 231) quotes a verse of Bharadvaja which divides a pledge into four varieties. A few quota- .fions from Bharadvaja on matters of vyavahara are cited in other works. For example, the Sarasvati-vilasa cites a verse of Bharad- vaja that a compromise, an exchange and a partition, if fair and equal, could be annulled only for ten days, but could be annulled till the gth year, if unfair.44 It appears that the verses of Bharadvaja on vyavahara are taken from a work other than the aneient work on politics, 28. Satatapa Satatapa is enumerated among the expounders of dharma by Y3j. (1, 4-5 ) and by Paragara. ViSwaripa, Haradatta and Apararka quote several prose passages of Satatapa on prayascitta. Visvartpa ( on Yaj. HI. 236 ) tells us that Satatapa spoke of only eight upapatakas and that without dealing with Sriddha as a principal topic he spoke of some of the subsidiary details of Sraddha.245 The latter passage quoted from Satatapa is a half verse. So Visvardpa had a prose work of Satitapa before him, mixed with verses. Haradatta on Gaut. (Dh. S. 22. 18 ) quotes a prose passage of Satatapa about the penance for killing a cow. In the Mit., the Smrticandrika and other works numerous verses of Satatapa are quoted on acara and ériddha. This wotk of Satatapa in verse is most probably a different one from the sutra work. It appears that there are several smrtis ascribed to Satatapa. In Jivananda’s collection there is a smrti of Satitapa called Karmavipaka in six chapters and about 231 verses. Its contents are : certain diseases are concomitants of certain sins; gifts of land, cows &c.; eulogy of Brahmanas; penances for killing a Brahmana, a cow &c., penancesfor drinking wine, for incest and forbidden sexual intercourse of various sorts, for thefts; rites for those who meet with violent and accidental death. The last verse declares that the Smrti was promulgated by Satatapa to his pupil Sarabhanga. It is a late production. It prescribes the reading of the Harivarhsa ( II. 30 ) as a penance for infanticide. 24८ स्न्धित्य परिवृत्तश्च बिभागश्च समा यदि । आदशाहं मिवत विषमे भववत्सरात्‌ । SAAS pp. 314, 320, 3 यथा शातातपः MANTRAS तद्रत।भ्गुणानाह-“विना ज्ञोपर्वीतिन Tey TATE इति | easy on याष. I. 4-5. 28. Satdtava 129 No. 1362 of the J. 0. catalogue (and cat. of Madras Govt. mss. ‘vol. V. pp. 1994-96 ) is a Satatapa-smrti in twelve chapters dealing with prayascittas for mahapatakas, prayascittas fot injuries to various beings, marriage, vaiSvadeva, Sraddha, pitrtarpana, rules about taking one’s dinner, prayascitta for dogbites and similar matters; impurity on birth and death, rules of conduct (cara ). No. 1361 of the I.O. catalogue is a treatise in mixed prose and verse on prayascittas for the Mahapatakas and Upapatakas. Several verses of Manu (such as IIT. 8, 11, 171 ) occur therein. 1४ contains 139 verses. In Mitra’s Notices (II. p. 4) there is a ms. called Karmavipaka in 87 chapters and 2376 verses, of which the work in Jivananda’s collection seems to be a part or abridgment. Apararka in several places quotes the views of Satatapa immediately followed by quotations from Vrddha-Satatapa or vice versg ( €. g. on ५३}. I. 190, on III. 292 p. 1195 and p. 1201 ) No. 205 of A. 1882-83 of the Deccan College Collection is a Vrddha-Satitapa smrti in 64 verses on prayascittas for doing various things, on Sraddha, on washing the teeth. I. O. Cat. No. 1360 p. 398 is a Vrddha-Sitatapa-smrti in 97 verses on defilement and urifications. The Anandasrama collection contains a Vrddha- Satatapa smrti in 68 verses ( pp. 232-235 ) on prayacittas, purification from various defilements and other miscellaneous matters. There are two prose passages therein. Hemadri mentions a Vrddha-Satatapa along with several other smrtikaras ( vide note 232 above). In the Vyavaharamatrka of Jimutavahana ( p. 305 ) Vrddha-Satatapa is cited on the six kinds of uttara (defendants reply 2.२4 ‘This shows that Vyrddha-Satatapa wrote on Vyavahara also. The Mit. (on Yaj. III. 290 ) cites a Brhat-Satatapa. Hemadri ( III. 1. 801 ) speaks of a bhagyakara of Vrddha-Satatapa. 29. Sumantu. From Visvaripa, Haradatta and Apararka it follows that Sumantu composed a sitra work on dharma, particularly on acara and prayas- citta. Visvarapa quotes prose passages from Sumantu on upapatakas,*47 ead बृद्शातातपवचनं तु बहुक्ञजीणेरुतनिषन्धेस्माभिदृष्टं न TTT । „7 एष सुमन्तु; ' शीरजतगोस्तेन्यं गोभ्य गमनं नाशकं Brags erat ere परिषि- चिताबकी्णीता मतिडूपकृवातिम्यप्युपपातकानि › इति । दिन्बडप ०० याज्ञ, HL. 290-856, He 2, IZ. 130 History of Dharmatastra on prayascitta for Brahmana-murder (on शवर. III. 237), for drink- ing wine ( on ४३]. III. 250 ), for theft of gold (on Yaj. III 252), for incest (on ४2}. III. 253-54), for killing a cow and about atatayin (on Yaj. III. 261 ). In one quotation from Sumantu cited by Visvarapa the views of acaryas and of Angirasa are mentioned.*4® The prayaé- cittas for Brahmana-murder and for killing a cow contained in Visvarapa occur in Haradatta ( on Gaut. 22. 13 and 18). Most of the quotations cited by Visvaripa occur in Aparirka also. The Haralata ( p. 68 ) quotes sitras of Sumantu on asauca. One well- known sutra of Sumantu is ^ no prayasgcitta ( or blame ) is incurred by killing an Atatayin, except cows and brahmanas’.*49 Apararka quotes sutras from Sumantu condemning marriage with maternal uncle’s or paternal aunt’s daughter and recommending the gbandon- ment of a young wife in certain circumstances.?5° In the Sarasvati- vilasa a prose passage of Sumantu is cited on the seven constituents of 2] ४३.०४०. These quotations from Visvaripa and othersestablish that a prose work on dharma by Sumantu existed early enough. It appears however that the work was not a very ancient one. Neither Yajnavalkya nor Parasara mentions Sumantu among the propounders of dharma. Onthe other hand the name of Sumantu is an ancient one. In the Bhagavatapurana ( XII. 6. 75 and 7.1). Sumantu is said to have been a pupil of Jaimini and a promulgator of the Atha- tvaveda. Vide Santiparva 341. 19 for Sumantu and other pupils of Vyasa. In the daily tarpaya the name of Sumantu occurs along with Jaimini, Vaisampayana, Paila. a ee 248 न बराह्मणस्य पतनमिष्छन्त्याचायोः किल्विष्युपगतः पातभ्य इत्याङ्गिरसः--इति । विश्वद्प On याज्ञ. ILI. 297, 249 विन्वद्धप ०४ याज्ञ. IIL. 262 quotes it as (नाततायिवधे प्रायगयित्तमन्यन्न गोधाह्मणेभ्यः,” whilethe मिता, ० याज्ञ, IT, 21 quotes it as 6 नाततायिवधे धोषोभ्यश्र गोः ब्राह्मणात्‌ ’. the स्म्रतिमज्ञसी of गोषिन्द्राज ( 1, 0, ms. No 1736) has ‘gzrq- तायिन्यदोषोऽन्यन्र TATTIT. 250 मातक्कसतां पेतृष्वसेयीं BTA च परिणीय चन्द्रायण चरेत्‌ परित्यज्येनां बिम्‌- मात्‌ | अपरां ०८ याज्ञ. 1. 53; “न्या दुत्सितान्यजातिकर्मशीला भ्याभ्युपटता षरि णीता यथक्षतयोनिः स्वात्ास्यकतष्य!' अपरा OD ayer, 1. 65 2500 अतः सप्ताङ्गानि सदेथा संगस्याणीस्याह सुमन्तुः | स्वाम्यमात्मना VT । AANA संमानेन । वणोन्‌ रजनन । जनान्‌ वणधमरशनेन । बुर धनधान्यादिसिमरदभ्या | Pay areas । .दृ्डे स्वधर्मेण । ननं प्त्यमाषणेन । इति ।' सरस्वती ° P 46. MY 9 "नो कडि किक @ == = £9. Sumantu 181 Numerous verses on dharma are also cited from Sumantu by Apararka, the Smrticandrika and other works. This may probably be a different work from the sitra work of Sumantu. In one verse of Sumantu ( Apararka on Yaj. I. 223 ) occur the words ‘ Sankha- sya vacanath yatha’ and in another ( Apararka on Yaj. I, 217-218 ) the Kany4 sign of the zodiac is referred to. It is remarkable that the Mit. and Aparirka contain no verses of Sumantu on vyavahara. The Sarasvati-vilisais rich in quotations from Sumantu on vyavahara. A compromise, exchange or partition, if fair, could be annulled up to the tenth day, but if unfair up to the 9th year’ ( vide note 244 above ). ‘If even as much as a masa went from the buyer to the seller, that would support the sale of the land (sold) just as a small dose of poison permeates the whole body and when no purchase-money is paid or only a portion is paid, then the purchase is called avakraya and is liable to be set aside if the price is not paid in ( good time ).’ Sumantu prescribes a fine for selling and purchasing land without the consent of the neigh- bouring members of the family and says that in case of pre-emption, the neighbours on the east are preferred to all and those on the south come last. *52 Sumantu defines a mortgage by conditional sale ( called ‘uktalabhakraya ° ) and a sale for arrears of revenue by the king’s orders ( called ajfiakraya ).253 30. The Smrtis The word smrti is used in two senses. It is applied to all ancient orthodox non-Vedic works such as Pinini’s grammar, to the Srauta, grhya and dharma sitras, to the Mahabharata, to Manu, Yajiavalkya and others. In a narrower sense smrti and dharma- 251 माषमान्रमपि द्रष्य करेतुर्विक्रेतरि स्थितम्‌ । sala सकलां ममि कायमह्पं विष यथा ॥ अधदत्तमदत्तं तु क्रयमाहुरवक्रयम्‌ | अवक्रयो निवर्तेत यदि कले न दीयते ॥ सरस्वती ° P. 321. 992 ज्ञात्यादीनननुक्ञाण्य संमीपस्थानतन्द्रिनाम्‌ । कयविक्रयकतारो तत्संमं दण्डमर्हतः ॥ सरस्वती ° P. 922; “चतुःसामन्तसांनिष्ये प्राची दिग्यटवत्तरा । उदीची च प्रतीची च TTT तु दक्षिणा ॥ ४. 328. ५५० Sey द्रन्यमादाय कले दास्यामि ते कित्‌ । नो चेन्मलमिदं त्यक्तं केद्‌ःरस्येति यः क्रयः ॥ स THIN इत्युक्त उक्तक टेण्यनपणात्‌ ॥ सरस्वती ° P. 324; मूल्यस्य पाद्मर्धं वा मूल्यमाज्ञाक्रये स्थितम्‌ । मूल्यं तदातमसिलं gen at समाश्रयात्‌ ॥ भा श्रिभोगात्‌ ततः केतुः परतो इृढतामियात्‌ । ४. 828. 183 History of Dharmatastra 2504 are synonyms, as Manu says.?5+ The word smrti occurs in Taittirilya Aranyaka (I. 2). Gautama (Dh. S. 1. 2) and Vasistha (Dh. 5.1. 4) speak of smrti as one of the sources of dharma. Ap. Dh. S. (II. 6. 15. 25 >) employs the word smrti and has in view Gautama’s dharmasitra according to Haradatta. In the Parva- mimarhsa-sitra the word smrti occurs (vide VI. 8. 23 and XII. 4. 42 ).255 In the Vedantastitras the word smrti is employed in a wide sense, in one placc as referring cven to the sinkhya system.?5° In that work the word is used according to Sankara with reference to the Mahabharata or the Manusmnrti ( Vedantasatra II. 3. 47, Il. 1. 14 and 21, IV. 2.14). In ancient times the number of smrtis (i. e. works on dharma- Sistra ) must have been very small. Gautama mentions by name no smrtikara except Manu, though he speaks of dharmasastras (XI. 19). Baudhdyana names seven ( besides himself) authors on dharma, viz. Aupajanghani, Katya, Kasyapa, Gautama, Prajapati, Maudgalya and [प्रात Vasistha names only five authors, Gautama, Prajapati, Manu, Yama, and प्राता, Apastamba mentions a large number, viz. ten, some of whom like Eka, Kunika and Puskarasadi are no more than mcre names to us. Manu speaks of only six ( besides himself) viz. Atri, the son of Utathya, Bhrgu, Vasistha, Vaikhanasa ( or.rather Vikhanas ) and Saunaka. But in all these works the writers arc mentioned only casually and there is no regular enumeration or list of writers on dharma in one place. Apararka quotes (p. 7 ) a ऽप्य of Gautama (not found in the printed G. Dh. ऽ.) in which sixteen authors of dharmasastras including himself are enumerated.?57_ The same sitra with slight variations is ascribed to Sankha-Likhita in the Viramitrodaya ( Paribhasa- prakasa p. 16 ). Yajnavalkya is probably the earliest writer who enumerated in one place (I. 4-5 ) twenty expounders of dharma ( including himself and counting Sankha and Likhita as two distinct persons). It will be noticed that Yaj. omits Baudhayana. Parasara also gives a list of 19 expounders of dharma (excluding 254 श्रुति्तु वेदो विदेय) धर्मश तु वे समति; | मनु 7. 10. 255 स्मतेवां स्याद्‌ बाह्मणानाम्‌ । पू. मी. सु. र. 4. 48 ( "०978 ४० आसज्य ). 256 स्पृत्यनवकाशदोषपसङ्गे इति चेनान्यस्मृत्यनवकाशदोषपसङ्गात्‌ | वेदान्तसूत्र 7.1. 1. 257 ary गोतमः । स्मृतिध्मशाज्ञाणि तेषां प्रणेतारो मनुविष्ण॒दक्षङ्गिरोनिब्हस्पत्युशन- आपिस्तम्बगोतमसंवतेनत्रेयकात्यायनशङ्कलिसितपराशरब्यासशातातपभचेतोयाज्ञवल्क्याद्‌यः। $0. The Smrtis 18% himself), but his list differs slightly from that of Yaj. ParaSara omits Brhaspati, Yama, and Vyasa and adds Kaéyapa, Gargya and Pracetas. The Tantra-vartika ( p. 125 ) of Kumirila speaks of eighteen dharmasarhhitis. Visvaripa quotcs a verse of Vrddha- Yajiiavalkya, who adds ten names to the list of Yajfiavalkya (vide note 219 above ), The Caturvirhégatimata is a work which professes to give the views of 24 sages on dharmasastra, viz. all those listed by Yaj. (except Katyayana and Likhita) and six more, viz. Gargya Narada, Baudhayana, Vatsa, Visvamitra, Sankha (Sankhydyana ? ) Angiras as quoted in the Smrticandrika ( I. p. 1 ), Hemadri ( Danakhanda p. 528), the Sarasvativilisa ( p. 13 ) and other works mention Upasmrtis.759 There is a smrti called Sattrirnsan- mata quoted by the Mit., Apararka and other works. Paithinasi as quoted in the Smrticandrika, the Sarhskiramaytkha and other works enumerates 36 smrtis.26° Apararka says that the Bhavisyat- purina speaks of 36 smrtis and his enumeration of them is slightly different from that of Paithinasi.2¢* The Vrddhagautamasmrti ( Jivananda part IT. pp. 498-499 ) gives a list of 57 dharma-sastras. The Prayoga-parijita as quoted in the Viramitrodaya cnumerates 18. 258 वक्तारो धर्मशाखचाणां APA BTU: | वकिषठदक्षसंवतंशातातपपराशराः॥ अआपस्तम्बो- शनोभ्यासाः PAT ASeTA | गातमः Renae हारीतोच्रिरहे तथा ॥ याज्ञ. 1. 4-5 ( Trivandrum ed.). The Mit. reads the two verses differently though the names are the same, 259 ARE: पुलद्चे गार्ग्यः THT शोनकः करतः । बोधायनो जतकर्णो विश्वामित्रः पिता- महः॥ जावालिन।चिकेतश्च स्कन्दो कागाक्षिकश्यपो। ग्य।सः सनत्कृभार्च शन्तनजनक- स्तथा ॥ व्याघ्रः कत्यायनश्वेव जातूकर्ण्यः SAAS: वोधायनश्च Sonat विन्वमित्र- स्तथैव च ॥ पदीनसिर्गोभिलश्यत्युपस्म्ातिविधायकाः॥ qwoted as from प्रयोगप।रिनात by वीिमिन्रोदय ( परिभाषाप्र. p. 18 ), The वार्‌. adds that these upasmrtis were enumerated by the Madanaratna also 260 तेषां मन्वीह्गरोन्यासमीतमान्यशनोयमाः । वसिष्ठदक्षसंवतंशातःतपपराशराः ॥ विष्ण्वा- पस्तम्बहारीताः शद्धः कात्यायनो गुरः। प्रचेता नारदो योगी बोधायनपितामद्ो॥ सुमन्तु- काश्यपो बभ्रुः पेदीनो व्याघ्र एवं च ॥ सत्पवरतो भरद्वाजो गाभ्यः काष्णाजिनिस्तथा ॥ जाबालिजौमदभिश्च लोगाक्षिगेह्संभवः । हति धभप्रणेतारः TG स्मृताः ॥ quoted in the स्मति्चन्द्रिका and संस्कारमयसख 261 ताश्च मनुविष्णयमदक्षङ्गिःरोनिबरस्पत्यशनःपस्तम्बवसिष्ठकात्यायनपराशरव्यासशङ्लिसिं तरसवर्तगे।तमशातातपहारतयज्ञवल्क्यपवेतीबुधदेवलसोमजमदभिविन्वामिन्रनज.पनति- नारद्पेदीनससिपितामहबोधायनछागलेयजाधालिष्यवनमरौजिकश्यपा हति TANT स्मृत्यन्तरे पठिताः । अपराक ए. 7. 134 History of Dharmatisira principal smrtis, 18 upasmrtis and 21 other smrtikaras.26 If all the smptis cited in the later nibandbas such as the Nirnayasindhu, the Mayakhas of Nilakantha and the Viramitrodaya be taken into account, the number of smrtis will be found to be about 100, The smrtis thus relied upon are the products of different and and widely separated ages. Some of them are entirely in prose or in mixed prose and verse, while the large majority are in verse. A few of them are very ancient and were composed centuries before the Christian era. Such are the dharmasarras of Gautama, Apastamba, Baudhayana, and the Manusmrti. Some were composed in the first centuries of the Christian era such as the smrtis of Yajiavalkya, ParaSara, Narada. Most of the smrtis other than the above fall between the period from 400 A.D. to 1000 A. D. The chronology of all these smrtis presents perplexing problems. Some of the metrical smrtis are remodellings of older sitras as in the case of Sankha. There are sometimes as many as two or three different smytis going under the same name, e.g. Satatapa, Harita, Atri. Then the confusion is worse confounded by the fabrications of sectarian zeal, such as the Haritasmrti which is full of Vaisnavaite teachings. There are several works going under the names of well- known smrtikaras with the prefixes Vrddha, Brhat, Laghu. In many cases the works going under these names are different from the smrtis that are without these prefixes and this differentiation took place at a very early date in certain cases, for example, so early a writer as Visvaripa distinguishes between YaAjfiavalkya and Vrddha-Yajiiavalkya, Gargya and Vyddha-Gargya. Similarly Visvaripa quotes (on ४३}. I. 69 ) Vrddha-Manu and (on Y4j. I. 19) Vrddha-Vasistha, which latter probably was different from the Vasisthadharmasitra, as the latter does not contain the details given 963 The 18 principal समतिकार” according to the भयोगपाश्जित are मनु, बहु ह्यति, दक्ष, गोतम, यम, अङ्गिरस्‌, योगीश्वर, प्रचेतस्‌, शातातप, पराशर, संवत, उश- TY, शङ्कुः लिखित, अत्रि, विष्ण, आपस्तम्ब, हारीत. The उपस्म॒ति$ have been enumerated above (in n. 259). The other 21 smptis are : यु्िष्ठो ANAT सुम- ay पित।महः । विष्णः काष्णीजिनिः सत्यव्रतो dey देवलः ॥ जमदत्निर्मारद्वाजः पुलल्त्यः पुलहः क्रतुः । आत्रेयश्य Pay AOR एव च ॥ पारस्कर्ध- प्यशृङगो वेजवापस्तथेव च । TAA स्मृतिकतोर एकर्विशतिरीरिताः॥ वीरि ०, परिमाषाप° p. 18, $0, The Smrlis 16 by Visvarapa.*4s In some cases the works designated Vrddha or Brhat are larger and in all cases later than the works without those prefixes. For example, Parasara and Brhat-Parasara ( Jivananda part II. pp. 55-310), Gautama and Vrddha-Gautama ( Jivananda part Il. pp. 497-638 ). Some of the works with the prefix Vrddha are versified compilations of prose works, €. g. Mit. on Yaj. III. 267 quotes a verse from Vrddha-Visnu which is merely the versified equivalent of Visnu-dharmasitra chap. 50. 6, 12-14. It appears that sometimes the same work is cited with the prefix Vrddha or Brhat, €, g. the Mit. on ४३}. II. 135 quotes a passage from Brhad- visnu which is the same as the Visnudharmasttra 17. 4-7. As most of the writers of digests quote from memory and had recourse to mss. and not to standard editions, even well known verses are ascribed to different authors in different works. The verses ‘bhratrnam-aprajah’ &c. which are quoted as Narada’s ( Narada 16.25-26 ) in the Vyavaharamayakha are attributed to Sankha in the Madanaparijata (p. 680). The three verses about bandhus are ascribed to Baudhiyana by Madhava and to Vrddhasatatapa by the Madanaparijata ( p. 674 ) In spite of all these drawbacks, an attempt willbe made in the following pages to arrange some of the leading versified smrtis in chronological order beginning from the Manusmrti. All these smrtis are not cqual in authority. Most of them are obscure and are only rarely cited by ancient commentators. exclusive of the dharmasitras hardly a dozen smrtis have found commentators. If we are to judge of the authority of a smrti by the commentaries thercon, then the Manusurti stands pre-eminent. Next to it is the Yajiiavalkyasmru. 31. The Manusmrti So many editions of this work have been published in India since 1813 ( when the Manusmrti was first published at Calcutta ), that it is not possible to name them. In this work the Nirnaya- sigara edition with the commentary of Kullaka has been used throughout. Another edition of Manu well known on this side of India is that of the late V. N. Mandlik who published several com- 263 qeafemaang मध्ये साम्यमिति तु विशेषः, Vide afte. सू. 11. 64-68 for the five ती on one’s Land. 36 History of Dharmasastra ‘mentaries snch as those of Medhatithi, Govindaraja and others. The Manusmrti has been translated into English sevcral times. The best known translation is that of Dr. Buhler in the ऽ. ए. E. series (vol. 25 ). Dr. Buhler also added an exhaustive and very scholar- ly introduction to his translation and dealt with numerous problems connected with the Manusmrti. In the Rgveda Manu is spoken of as the father of mankind (Rg. I. 80. 16, I. 114. 2, II. 33. 13) and a Vedic poet prays that he .may not be led away from the ancestral path of Manu.?6+ Another Vedic bard says that Manu was the first to offer sacrifice ( Rg. X. 63. 7 ). In the Taittiriya Samhita and the Tandya-maha-brah- mana it is said ^ whatever Manu said is medicine.’ Taittiriya-Sarh- hita ( II. 1.5.6 ) also says that mankind is Manu’s (Manavyo hi pra- jah ). In the Taittiriya Sarnhita ( III. 1.9. 4-5 ) and the Aitareya Brahmana ( ४. 14 ) we have the story of Manu dividing his wealth among his sons and of the exclusion of his son Nabhanedistha, The Satapatha-brahmana (५, B. E. vol. 12 p. 216) gives us the story of Manu and the deluge. In the Nirukta (chap. III ) there is a discussion about the rights of sons and daughters. One of the views there propounded is that children of both sexes take their father’s wealth and a 7k and Sloka are cited in support of that position.6° The loka refers to the opinion of Manu Svayarhbhuva. Itis noteworthy that that sloka is opposed to a rik, which means that the gloka is not Sruti but is Smrti. So before Yaska wrote there were smrti texts in verse in which Manu was spoken of as a law- giver. We have scen how Gautama and Vasistha quote the views of Manu and how Apastamba connects Manu with the promulgation of $raddhas (II. 7. 16. 1 ). The Mahabharata in numerous places speaks of Manu, sometimes as Manu simply, sometimes as Svayath- bhuva Manu (Santi21.12) and also as Pracetasa Manu (Santi $7- 43 ). Inthe Mahabharata (Santi. chap. 336. 38-46 ) we are told how the supreme being composed a hundred thousand Slokas 264 मा न॑ः पृथः पित्य॑न्मानवादाधे' दूरं नेष्ट परावतः । ऋष्ेद्‌ VILL. 30.3. 265 यद्रे कं च मनुरवदत्तद्रेषजम्‌ । ते, स. 71. ४. 10. 2 ; “मनुँ यक्किचावदत्तद्रेषजं भेषज. ताये" ताण्ड्य ° 23. 16. 11. 266 अविशेषेण मिथनाः पुत्रा दायाद्‌ हात | तदेतदृकूष्लोकाभ्यामुक्तम्‌ । अङ्गादङ्गात्तंमवसि हृदयादधिजायसे । अत्मा वे TTA स जीव शरद्‌ः शतम्‌ ॥ हाते । अविशेषेण त्राणां Sagat धर्मतः । मिथुनानां विसगोदौ मनुः स्वा्य॑मुवोऽमर्वत्‌ ॥ $1. The Manusmrti 137 on dharma, how Manu Svayarhbhuva promulgated those dharmas and how Uéganas and Brhaspati composed sastras based on the work of Manu Svayambhuva.*6” In another place the account is slightly different and Manu does not figure therein. Santi-parva ( chap. 59. 80-85 ) describes how the original work of Brahma on the three, Dharma, Artha, and Kama, in 100000 chapters was successively re- duced to 10000, 5000, 3000 and 1000 chap. respectively by Visalaksa, Indra, Bahudantaka, Brhaspati and Kavya ( Usanas ). The prose introduction to the Narada-smrti says that Manu composed in 100 > glokas, 1080 chap. and 24 prakarayas a Dharmasastra and imparted it to Narada, who abridged it into 12000 verses and taught ` it to Markandeya, who in his turn compressed it into 8000 slokas and passed it on to Sumati Bhargava, who again reduced it to 4000 Slokas. The Narada-smrti then gives the first ४८1७६२6४ of that work which is a combination of the extant Manu I. 5-6 and says that vyavahara was the gth prakarana cut of 24 in the original work of Manu. It will be noticed how this version differs from that ot the Mahabharata wherein Narada is altogether ignored. The extant Manusmrti ( I. 32-33 ) narrates how from Brahma sprang Viraj, who produced Manu, from whom were born the sages including Bhrgu and Narada, how Brahma taught the gastra to Manu, who in his turn imparted it to the ten sages (I. 58 ), how some great sages approached Manu and sought instruction in the dharmas of the varyas and the intermediate castes and how Manu told them that his pupil Bhrgu would impart to them the Sastra (1, 59-60 ). This appearance is kept up throughout the work. The sages interrupt Bhrgu’s discourse in several places ( ४5 in V. 1-2 and XII. 1-2). Manu is said to be omniscient ( II. 7) and Manu is mentioned by name dozens of times in the work with the words ^^ Manuraha” ( IX. 158, X. 78 etc ), or ‘“‘Manur-abravid” or ‘“‘Manor-anugasanam”. 91 ऋषीनुवाच तान्सवानदृश्यः Teta: | Ba शतसहस्रं हि श्ोकानामिदूमुत्तममू Nate तन्त्रस्य GAT THY Wa । ... तस्मात्मवक्ष्यते THT मनुः स्वायैयुबः स्वयम्‌ । ... ayy धर्मेषु wet चोरानसे st । य॒हृस्यतिमते चेव लोकेषु मतिचारिते ॥ | 98 तन्रायमादयः sere: । आसीदिदै तमोमूतं न प्रा्षायत et) ततः स्वयैभूर्मगवा- ग्पावुरासीष्चतुर्मसः ॥, Manu I. 5 is quoted as theverseofa स्म॒तिकार्‌ by कृमलशीङ्छं in his comment on शम्तरक्षित ° तस्वसमरह ( कारिक $118 ) in the middle of the 6th century A.D. Vide सूरे ७ बृहद्‌ रण्यकमाभ्यवार्तिक Po 487, ० २, 18, 138 History of Dharmatistra ( VIII. 139, 279, IX. 239, etc). That the introductory words in the Narada-smrti are not spurious or a later addition follows from the remark of Medhatithi that, according to the Naradasmrti, Prajapati composed a work in 100000 glokas which was abridged by Manu and others.*2 No one should take very seriously these varying accounts even in the Mahabharata and in the Naradasmrti, as they are intended to glorify some particular text or texts. According to the Bhavisya-purana as quoted in Hemadri, the Sarhskara-mayakha and other works, there were four versions of the Svayarhbhuva Sastra composed by Bhrgu, Narada, Brhaspati and Angiras.27° So early a writer as Visvartipa cites verses from Manusmrti as those of Svayath- bha ( vide com. on Yaj. II. 73, 74, 83, 85, where Manu 8. 68, 70-71, 380 and 105-6 are respectively quoted as Svayarhbht’s), while quotations from Bhrgu cited by Visvaripa (on Yaj. I. 187 and 252 ) are not found in the Manusmrti. In the same way most of the verses quoted from Bhrgu by Apararka are not foundin the Manu- smrti. One verse which Apararka quotes from Bhrgu (on Yaj. II. 96) speaks of the view contained therein as that of Manu.?7! It is almost impossible to say who composed the Manusmrti. It goes without saying that the mythical Manu, progenitor of mankind even in the Rgveda, could not have composed it. What motives could have induced the unknown author to palm it off in the name of the mythical Manu and to suppress his identity it is dificult to say. One motive may have been to invest the work with a halo of antiquity and authoritativeness. Buhler following Max Miller says (SBE vol. 25 p. XVIII ) that the Manusmrti is based on or is a recast of an ancient dharmasatra, viz. that of the Manavacarana. The question whether the Manavadharmasiatra existed has been discussed above (sec. 13, pp. 79-85). Buhler himself candidly admits ( SBE vol. 25, p. XXIII ) that the recovery of the writings of the Manavas has not only not furnished any facts in support ofthe alleged relation between the Manavadharmasitra and the 0 TN PT an Ale 269 नारदश्च स्मरति । UTA म्रन्थः प्रजापतिना Ba: स मन्वादिभिः क्रमेण Sere इति । मेधातिथि on मनु 1. 58 210 arden नारदीय च बादृस्पत्याङ्गिरस्यपि । स्वाथमवस्य. शाञ्जस्य तख; संहिता मताः ॥ चतुवेग °, दानसण्ड P- 528, संस्कारमयुख 0. 2 $71 येषु ण भ्वानि परिशुद्धानि यत्नतः । कारयेत्सप्णनेस्तानि नामिशस्तं ego: ॥ $1, The Manusmrit 189 Manusmrti, but on the contrary has raised difficulties as the doctrines of the Manavagrhyasitra (edited by Dr. Knauer) differ very considerably from those of the Manusmrti. To take only a few examples, Manava Gr. S. II. 12. 1-2 are opposed to Manu 3. 1; Manava Gr. ऽ. I. 4.7 to Manu 4. 95 ; Manava Gr. ऽ. I. 20. 1 to Manu 2. 34 ; Manava Gr. S. I. 21. 1 to Manu 2. 35; Manava Gr. ऽ, I. 22. 7 to Manu 2. 36 ; Manava Gr. S. II. 12. 1-2 to Manu 3. 84-86. Besides there is nothing in our Manu corresponding to the Vinayakaganti in the Manavagrhya (II. 14) nor to the tests for selecting a bride prescribed in Manava Gr. S. I. 7. 9, which corresponds to Aévalayana Gr. ऽ. I. 5. 5-6. Dr. Caland points out (९. und ऽ. p. 17 ) that though single verses of the Manusmrti tally with the Sraddhakalpa of the Manava School, yet the descriptions of funeral rites widely differ in the two works. There are no doubt some parallels as pointed out by Bradke ( in ZDMG, vol. 36, pp. 417-477 ). There 15 one circumstance about the authorship of the Manusmrti that deserves to be noted. The Mahabharata seems to distinguish between Svayarhbhuva Manu and Pracetasa Manu. The former is said to be the promulgator of dharmasastra and the latter of arthaSastra (or politics). For example Santi 21. 12 speaks of Svayrhbhuva Manu and Santi 57-43 and 58-2 speak of Pracetasa as an author on rajasastra or rajadharma. In some places Manu alone without any epithet is associated with rajadharma or arthavidya. It is not unlikely that originally there were two distinct works, one on dharma and the other on arthaSastra attributed to Manu. When the Kautiliya speaks of the Manavas, he probably refers to the work on politics attributed to Pracetasa Manu. It is extremely doubtful whether Rajasekhara, when he mentions the several views on the number of vidyas (including that of the Manavas that they were three ), had the Arthagastra of the Manavas before him or only copied a passage from Kautilya ( vide Kavyamimathsa p. 4 ) It is not unlikely that the work on dharma attributed to Manu may have contained general directions on _ the duties of kings. It is therefore (i.e. because there were two different works on dharma and arthagastra attributed to Manu ) that the views ascribed to the Manavas by the Kautiliya are not found word for word in the extant Manusmrti. One may 98 rade राजवमन्यथा & मनुरमवीत्‌ । वनपर ॐ. 9; वेदं eae वेदाहमथवियां च मानवीम्‌ ॥ द्रोणपवे ?. 1. {40 History of Dharmatistra hazard the conjecture that the author of the Manusmrti, whoever he might have been, combined in his work the information contain- ed in the two works on dharma and arthasastra and supplanted both the earlier works and that this result had not been either accompli- shed at the time when the Kautiliya was composed or was then quite recent. In the extant Manusmrti, the work is ascribed to Svayarh- bhuva Manu and then six other Manus of whom Pricetasa is not one are enumerated (I. 62 ). The extant Manusmrti is divided into twelve adhyayas and con- tains 2694 Slokas. Dr. Jolly’s cdition ( published in 1895 ) prepar- ed after collating numerous mss. and printed editions contains only one gloka more. The Manusmrti is written in a simple and flowing style. It generally agrees with Panini’s system, though it con- tains some deviations from it asin the verse ‘ saksinah santi mety- प्रप्र ` (8.57). The foregoing pages have sufficiently shown how it agrees closely with the doctrines contained in the Dharmasitras of Gautama, Baudhiyana, Apastamba. We have also seen how numerous verses are common to the dharmasitras of Vasistha and Visnu and the Manusmrti. 11८ Kautiliya also exhibits remarkable agreement with the Manusmrti in phraseology and doctrines.?73 What conclusions are to be drawn from this will be discussed later on. Some verses are repeated, e. g. ४. 164-165 are the same as IX. 30 and 29. The contents of the Manusmrti may be briefly summarised as follows :--( I ) Sages approach Manu for instruction in the dharmas of the varuas; Manu describes the creation of the world from the self-existent God more or lessin the Sankhya manner ; the creation of Viraj, of Manu from Viraj, of ten sages from Manu; creation of various beings, men, beasts, birds etc. ; Brahma imparts dharmasastra to Manu, who tcaches the sages ; Manu bids Bhrgu to instruct the sages in dharma ; six other Manus sprang from Svayath- bhuva Manu; units of time from nimesa to year, the four yugas and Oe RR ee EY — IS 273 Compare aaeqarial ठब्धपररक्षणी रक्षितविवधनी वृद्धस्य तीर्थष प्रतिपादनी च । alter (1. 4) with मनु 7. 101 अलब्धमिच्छेदरण्डेन aod रसषेदवक्षया | रक्षित वर्धयेद्‌ वध्या वृद्धं पत्रेषु निक्षिपेत्‌ ॥ ; '^तस्माह्ठोकयात्रार्थी नित्यमु्यतदषण्डः स्यात्‌ कौटिस्य (7. 4) with मनु 7. 162 नित्यमुयतदृण्डः स्यात्‌; “अरसंमाष्ये देशे साक्षि- भिर्भिथः संभाषते ' कोटिल्य (7.1) with मनु 8.55 (असंभाष्ये साक्षिभिश्य देशे । a मिथः ' } 'साहसमन्वयवलसमकमं! कौटिल्य ( 177. 17) with मनु 8. 39 त्साहृसं त्वन्वयवत्‌ पसम कमं यत्‌ रुतम्‌. 81. The Manusmrti 141 their twilights ; one thousand yugas equal a day of Brahma ; extent of Manvantara, pralaya ; successive decline of dharma in the four yugas ; different dharmas and goals in the four yugas ; the special privileges and duties of the four varnas ; eulogy of Brahmanas and of the astra of Manu ; acara is the highest dharma ; table of contents of the whole Sastra ; ( II ) definition of dharma, sources of dharma are Veda, smrti, acara of the good, one’s own satisfaction; who has adhikara for this sastra ; limits of Brahmavarta, Brahmarsidega, Madhya- १6६2, Aryavarta ; why sarhskaras are necessary ; such sarhskaras as jatakarma, namadheya, chidakarma, upanayana ; the proper time of upanayana for the varyas, the proper girdle, sacred thread, staff and skin for the Brahmacari of the three varnas ; duties of the Brahma- cari and his code of conduct ; ( ) Brahmacarya for 36, 18, 9 years; samavartana ; marriage ; marriageable girl; brahmana could marry a girl of any of the four varunas ; eight forms of marriage defined ; which form suited to which caste ; duties of husband and wife ; eulogy of women ; the five daily yajiids ; praise of the status of householder ; honouring guests ; madhuparka ; sraddhas ; who should not be invited at Sraddhas; (IV) mode of life and means of subsis- tence for a house-holder, the code of conduct for a snataka; occasions for cessation from study; rules about prohibited and per- missible food and drink; (४) what vegetables and meat are allowed ; period of impurity on death and birth ; definition of sapinda and samanodaka ; purification from contact with various substances in various ways ; duties of wife and widow ; (VI) when one should become aa forest hermit ; his mode of life; parivrajaka and his duties ; eulogy of grhasiha; (VII) rajadharmas, eulogy of danda ( the power to punish ); the four vidyas fora king; the ten vices of kings due to kama and eight due tokrodha; constitution of council of ministers; qualities of a data; forts’ and capital; purobita and superintendents of various departments; code of war ; the four expe- dients, sama, dana, bheda, and dauda; hierarchy of officers from the village headman upwards; rules about taxation ; the constitution of a circle of twelve kings ; the six gumas, peace, a state of war, march against an enemy, asana, taking shelter and dvaidha ; duties of victor ; (VIII) king’s duty to look tothe administration of justice; the 18 titles of law ; the king and judge ; other persons as judges; consti- tution of sabha, king’s duty to look after minors, widows, helpless people ; treasure trove ; king’s duty to restore stolen wealth ; credi- tor’s means of recovering his debt; grounds on which the claimant 144 History of Dharmatiira - may fail in his suit ; qualifications of witnesses; who were not proper persons as witnesses; oaths; fines for false witnesses ; methods of corporal punishment; Brahmana to be free from corporal punish- ment ; weights and measures ; lowest, middling and highest fines ; rates of interest ; pledges; adverse possession does not affect a pledge, boundary, minor’s estate, deposit, king’s estate etc. ; rule of damdupat; sureties; what debts of the father the son was not liable to pay; fraud and force vitiated all transactions; sale by one not the owner; title and possession ; partnership; resumption of gift; non-payment of wages; violation of conventions; rescission of sale; dispute between owner and herdsman; pastures round villages; boundary disputes ; abuse, libel and slander ; assault and battery and mischief ; whipping only on the back ; theft; sahasa i. €. offences in which force and hurt are an element, such as robbery, homicide etc; right of private defence ; when even a Brahmana may be killed; adultery and rape ; no sentence of death, but of transportation fora Brahmana; parents, wife, children must not be forsaken ; tolls and monopolies; seven kinds of 00505; (IX) legal duties of husband and wife, censure of women ; eulogy of chastity; to whom does the child belong, to the begetteror to him on whose wife it is begotten ; niyoga described and condemned ; supercession of the first wife when allowed ; age of marriage; partition, its time, eldest son’s special share ; putrika ; daughter’s son ; adopted son; rights of Brah- mana’s son from a sudra wife; twelve kinds of sonship ; to whom pindas are offered ; nearest sapinuda succeeds; sakulya, teacher and pupils as heirs ; king ultimate heir except as to Brahmana’s wealth ; varieties of stridhana ; succession to stridhbana; grounds of exclusion from inheritance ; property not liable to partition; gains of learning ; reunion ; mother and grandmother as heirs ; impartible property ; gambling and prize fighting must be suppressed by the king ; the five great sins ; prayascittas for them; open and secret thieves; jails ; the seven avgas of a kingdom; duties of Vaisya and ९०५५; (X) Brahmana alone to teach; mixed castes; mlecchas, Kamboyjas, Yavanas, Sakas; rules of conduct common to all; privileges and duties of the four varyas; modes of subsistence for a Brhamana in adversity ; what articles should not be sold by Brahmana ; seven proper modes of acquisition and the means of livelihood; (XI) eulogy of gifts; different views about prayascitta; various seen results, diseases and bodily defects due to sins in former lives ; five mortal sins and prayascittas for them ; upapatakas and _prayascittas 1, The Manuemrt 143 for them ; prayascittas like Santapana, Paraka, Candrayana ; holy mantras for removing sin ; (XII) disquistion on karma; ksetrajiia, bhatatma, jiva; tortures of hell; the three guyas, sativa, rajas and tamas ; what brings about nibsreyasa ; knowledge of the self is the highest means of bliss ; pravrtta and mivrtta karma; the latter is karma done without an eye to reward; eulogy of Vedas; place of tarka; sistas and parisad ; reward of studying the Manava Sastra. The extent of the literature known to Manu was considerable. He mentions the three Vedas and the Atharvaveda is spoken of as the Atharvangirasi Sruti ( XI. 33). He refers to Aranyaka (IV. 123). The Vedangas are said to be six (III. 185) and they are often referred to without stating the number (II. 141, IV.98 ). He speaks of dharmasastra (II. 10 ) and also knew many dharmasastras (Ill. 232). By dharmapathaka ( XII. 111 ) he probably means one who has studied dharmasastras. He mentions several authors on dharmasastra, viz. Atri, the son of Utathya (i. €. Gautama according to commentators ), Bhrgu and Saunaka (all these in III. 16), Vasistha (on the rate of interest in VIII. 140 which agrees with Vasisthadharmasttra II. 50 ), Vaikhanasamata (in VI. 21 ) He mentions Akhyanas, Itihisas, Puranas and Khilas (III. 232) He speaks of brabma as described in the Vedanta ( in VI. 83 and 94 ) and is probably thinking of the Upanisads. That he knew some generally accepted works opposed to the teaching of the Vedas is quite clear from his reference to ‘Vedabahyah smrtayah’ ( XII. 95 ). He is probably referring to the writing of the Bauddhas, Jainas and others. He speaks of heretics and their guilds (IV. 30 and 61 ) He refers to atheism and calumny of the Vedas (IV. 163) and of various tongucs spoken among men (IV. 332). He frequently refers to the views of others in the words “‘kecit”, ‘‘apare”, ‘‘anye” (as in IIL. 261, X. 70, IX. 32). Numerous interesting and difficult problems are connected with the Manusmrti. Buhler in his elaborate introduction (SB E vol. 25 ) exhaustively deals with these problems. It is not possible to go at great length into those questions here. A separate volume would be required to deal with the problems raised by Buhler and to examine the arguments of Bithler, Hopkins and others who have written on them. Only a brief discussion of some of these problems can be attempted: 144 | History of Dharmatisira Buhler takes considerable pains to refute the claims ot Manu to be regarded as the first legislator ( S.B. E. vol. 25 pp. XXIII-XXX ), But no serious refutation of the claim is really needed. The very extent of the literature known to the Manusmrti and the mention of several writers on dharmasastra by name are sufficient to negative that claim. | Buhler devotes a great deal of space to the consideration of the question as to what circumstances led to the substitution of a universally binding Manava-dharmasastra for the manuals of the Vedic schools (S. B. E. vol. 25 pp. XLVI-LVI ) and as to why the special law schools selected just the Manavadharmasitra among the large number of similar works for the basis of their studies (ibid. pp. LVII-LXV ). Buhler then considers the question how the Manavadharmasttra was converted into the present Manusmrti. Buhler concedes that the last is a problem of great difficulty and admits of an approximate solution only. The discussion of all these questions by Bihler is extremely thought-provoking and brilliant in many places, though it must be said with great respect that the arguments are often 4 priori and savour more or less of special pleading. AsI question the very foundation of Bihler’s edifice (viz. the actual existence of a Manava-dharmasitra ), it would be futile for me to enter into a discussion of the problems referred to above. I shall now address myself to the discussion of the age of the Manusmrti from external and internal evidence. That question is bound up with other problems, viz. whether there are earlier and later strata in the extant Manusmrti, whether the Manusmrti was recast several times or once only, what relations exists between the. Manusmrti and the Mahabharata. First the external evidence may be takenup. ‘The bhasya of Medhatithi is the earliest extant commentary on the Manusmrti and was composed about 900 A. D. as will be shown later on (sec.36). The text commented upon by Medhatithi was the same (barring ४ few various readings ) as the one we now possess. Therefore long before 900 A. D. the Manusmrti was the same as now. Viévardpa in his commentary on Y4j. quotes over two hundred verses of the Manusmyti either wholly or in part from all the twelve chapters beginning with the very first verse. The text that Visvardpa had before him was the same as the present Manusmrti and the verses 81. The Manusmrtt 145 were arranged in the same order as at present. Visvartipa quotes eight verses ( Manu XI. 108-115 ) from Manu (on Yaj. III. 262 ) Sankaracarya in his Vedantsatra-bhisya quotes the Manusmrti very frequently. For example, he quotes Manu J. 5 and 21 ( on V.S.1. 3. 28), 1.27 (on V.S. IV. 2.6 ), Il. 87 Con V. S. Il. 4. 38 ), X.4 and 126 (on V. S.J. 3. 36), XII. 91 and 105-6 ( on V.S. I. rand rz). In his bhasya on the Br. U. he quotes Manu dozens of times and calls the Manusmrti27+ ‘Manavam’ ( on Br. U. I. 4. 72). He looks upon the Manusmrti as one of the authorities on which the author of the. Vedantasatra relies.?75 The Tantravartika of Kumirila stands in a special relation to the Manusmrti. Vide JBBRAS for 1925 pp. 98-100. He places Manu at the head of all smrtis, even higher than the dharma- siitra of Gautama. He cites numcrous quotations from the first chapter of the Manusmrti to the last. He looks upon all parts of the extagt Manusmrti as equally authoritative and regards the Manu- smyti as the highest authority on matters of dharma. The Mrecha- katika?76 ( 9. 39 ) refers to the ordinance of Manu that a Brahmana sinner was not to be sentenced to death, but was to be banished. An inscription of the Valabhi king Dharasena dated in the year 252 of the Valabhi era (i. €. 571 A. D. ) speaks of a king as one who obeyed the rules composed by Manu?77 (I. A. vol. 8. p. 303 = Gupta Inscriptions p. 165 ). Vide 21501. A. vol. IV. p. ros where the same words occur in an inscription from Valabhi dated 216 of the Valabhi era (1. e. 535 A. D.). Sabarasvamin, the bhasyakara of Jaimini’s sutras, who cannot be placed later than 500 A. D. and may be a few centuries earlier still, says “‘ Manu and others have given ४५ मानवे च सवौ प्रवृत्तिः कामहेतुक्येवोति, Vide मनु. 7. 4 275 On the sutra स्मरन्ति च (वेदान्तसुन्र II. 1. 14 ) 8०६४९०९ adds “भनुष्यासममृतयः शिष्टः °. | 96 अवं हि पातकी विप्रो न वध्यो मनुरत्रवीत्‌ । राष्टरादस्मात्त॒ निवीस्यो विभवेरक्षतेः सह ॥. Compare मनु 8. 880 न जातु meet हन्यात्स्ैपापिष्वपि स्थितम्‌ । Tee बहिः कूुयोत्तमप्रधनमक्षतम्‌ |, The words Uy and अक्षत ocourring in both may particularly be noted. aU मन्वादिपिणीतविधिविधानकमी, 25 De 19. 146 © History of Dharmatiatra instruction?78 ” and quotes a verse as a smfti passage which is prac- tically the same as Manu IX. 416 and similar to Udyoga-parva?79 33. 64. Apararka and Kullika point out how the Bhavisyapurana expounds passages of the Manusmyrti( vide Kullaka on Manu XI. 72, 73, 100 and Apararka pp. 1071, 1076 ).28 It will be shown below that Brhaspati must have composed his work before 500 A.D. Brhaspati says that the Manusmrti occupies a pre-eminent position because it correctly represents the sense of the Veda and that asmpti which is in conflict with Manu is not esteemed.?®* Byhaspati in numerous places pointedly refers to the present text of the Manu- smrti. One such quotation about niyoga has been cited above (note 172). Brhaspati says ^ Manu has spoken of quantities ( units of weights ) beginning from the mote in the sun-beam to the karsipana.?®? ” This is obviously a reference to Manu 8. 132-136. Brhaspati says ^^ Manu enumerated thirteen sons and just as in the absence of clarified butter, oil is a substitute, so in the absence of an aurasa son or a puirika, the cleven kinds of son are a subst 16.283 ” This has in view Manu 9. 158-160, 180, 127-130, wher® Manu speaks of the twelve sons, out of whom eleven are substitutes and 278 उपदिष्टवन्तश्च मन्वादयः ० पृवेमीमांसा 1.1. 2 (vol. 1.7. 4). 279 एवं च स्मरति । भाथा दासश्च पृच्रश्च निधनाः सरव एव ते । यत्ते समधिगच्छन्ति यस्य ते तस्य AAT ॥. ४४१०० ९९०० मायो पुत्रश्च दासश्च चय एवाधनाः शृताः, While उयोग ० "०३५७ त्रय एवाधन। राजन्भार्या द्‌सस्तथा सतः 280 On aq XI. 73 कल्कं says ‘ मनुश्लोकमेव किखित्वा यथा sara ( तं { ) भवि- पय्पुरणि ' ; On मनु 21. 100 “अत एव मन्वरथन्याख्यानपरे भविष्यपुराणे ” 281 वेद्‌(्थोपनिबन्द्रत्वात्राधान्यं तु ATTA | मन्वथेविपरीता या समातिः सा न THETA ॥ ( quoted by अपराकं On Y8)j II. 21 and by BIE ०० मन I. 1. who adds one more verse from ageqia ‹ तावच्छख्चाणि श्लोभन्ते तकेन्याकृरणानि च । धमाध मोक्षोपदेष्टा मनु्यावन्न दृश्यत wv)’. 282 संख्या ररिमिरजोमूला मनुना ATTA । काषापणान्ता स। दिव्ये नियोज्या विनये तथा ॥ quoted by अपराकं OD याज्ञ, II. 99 and by the WAT o ( sq, ए. ४1 ). ४83 पुन्न स्योदश प्राकता मनुना येन Ta: । संतनकारणं तेषामोरसः पुत्रिका यथा ॥ आज्यं विना यथ। तेल सद्भिः MANNS: स्म्रतम्‌ । तथैकादश ॒पुतरारतु पुश्रिकोरसयो- “ बिना ॥ quoted by अपराकं on याज्ञ, 1..128-19४ and the दु्तकैमीमां्ता (P- 5%). 81. The Manusmrts 147 advocates that a sonless man should appoint a daughter ( putrika, who then is the 13th kind of son). In another place Brhaspati declares ^^ Manu forbade gambling as it destroys truth, purity and wealth ; but others allowed it provided a share was given to the king ( in the gains of gambling?* ).” This very aptly describes the attitude of Manu ( 9. 224) and of Yaj. (II. 201-203), Brhaspati says “‘ Ifa mankills a cow with a weapon &c., he should perform the penance laid down by Manu, but if he kills a cow by forcible restraint, then he should perform the penance [भव down by Angiras or Apastamba.” The reference is to Manu XI. 108-115, Apastamba Dh. S. I. 9. 26. 1 and Angirasa verse 27 ( Jivananda, part I p. 556 ). In one place Brhaspati seems to criticise Manu (9. 219 ) when he says ‘‘ those who declared clothes and other things to be impartible have not considered the position that the wealth of the rich may consist of clothes and ornaments.?*5 ” In another place Brhaspati says “‘ Bhrgu spoke of sale without ownership after deposit; listen to it attentively, I shall speak of it with more details.28° ” This keeps in view Manu 8. 4 and clearly shows that Brhaspati was well aware of Bhrgu’s connection with the extant Manusmrti. Angiras as quoted in the Smrticandrika (I. p. 7 ) speaks of the dharmaéastra of Manu. In the Vajrasici of Asvaghosa ( ed. by Weber ) several verses are quoted as from the ‘ Manavadharma’ which occur in the extant Manusmirti,?®7 though it must be admitted that there are others that ४8५ यूतं निषिद्धं मनुना सस्य-( त्य ! )शीचधनापहम्‌ । तत्परवर्तितमन्येस्तु राजभागसम- न्वितम्‌ | सभिकाधिष्ठितं कार्यं तस्करज्ञानहेतुना |, It is striking that ayjq, uses the word तस्करक्षानकारणात्‌ in II. 208. 985 व्ञाद्‌योऽविभास्या aes aa विचारितम्‌ । धनं भवेत्समद्वानां ae AAT ॥ + quoted by अपराकं ON याह, II. 119 and by the व्यवहारमयुख. 286 निक्षेपानन्तरं प्रोक्तो मूगणास्वामिविक्रयः । श्रूयतां ते यत्नेन सविशेष अवीम्यटम्‌ ॥ विवाद्रत्नाकर्‌ 9. 100. The words of मनु are तेषामादयमृणादूनं निक्ेपोस्वामिविक्रयः. 287 ०.४. उक्तं हि मनवे धर्मै-- सयः पताति मांसेन लाक्षया लवणेन वा । यहाच्छुद्रश्च मवति ब्राह्मणः क्षीरिक्रयात्‌ ॥ ( thisis मनु >. 98) ; उक्तं हि मानवे धर्म ‘ वृषलीफेनपीतस्य निःन्वासोपहतस्य च । तन्नेव च प्रसूतस्य निष्रतिर्नापलभ्यते ॥ › ( this is मनु 77.19 ) } उक्तं हि भानवे धर्मे “ अधीत्य चतुरो वेदान्‌ MATT तत्वतः RTARTA ATEN जायते सरः \ लरो द्वाद् जम्भनि षरि जम्भनि सूकरः 1 AKT सप्ततिजन्मानि इत्येवं ATTA ॥ ° ( this cannot be traced in the extant Manusmrti ) ; इ हि मानषधर्ममिहितम्‌ | अर्णागभ- 148. Eitstory of Dharmatastra do not occur. In the Ramayana also there are verses cited as from Manu which occur in the extant Manusmrti; vide Kiskindha 18.30-32 (Gujarati Press, 1915-1920) where two verses are quoted as ‘sung by Manu’ which correspond to Manusmrti VIII. 318 and 316 respectively. The foregoing discussion of the external evidence shows that writers from the 2nd century onwards (if not earlier) looked upon the extant Manusmirti as the most authoritative smrti. This position it could not have attained unless several centuries intervened between it and these writers. Therefore it must be presumed that the Manusmrti had attained its present form at least before the 2nd century A.D. Even the Mahabhisya contains a verse which is Manu II. 120.288 But as the verse occurs also in the णद sana ( 104. 64-65 ) no chronological conclusion can be drawn therefrom, The Pratimanataka (after V. 8 ) speaks of ‘“‘manaviya- dharmasastra’ and ‘Pricctasa sriddhakalpa,’ but as it 15 in controversy whether that work. can be ascribed to the ancient Bhasa, this reference will serve no useful purpose. The next question is whether the Manusmrti contains earlier and later strata. There can be no doubt on this point. On nume- rous points the Manusmirti contains conflicting doctrines. In Manu III. 12-13 a Brihmana is allowed to have a Sadra woman as wife, while in III. 14-19 it is emphatically asserted that a sadra woman cannot be the wife of a Brahmana and heavy disabilities are prescrib- ed for him who breakstheinjunction. In III. 23-26 there are contra- dictory statements about the appropriate forms of marriage for the several castes. In one breath Manuscemsto permit niyoga (9. 59-63) and immediately afterwards he strongly reprobates it (9. 64-69). The lengthy discussion on flesh-cating in Manu V. 27-56 discloses different mentalities. At several places the work seems even to recommend flesh-cating in sacrifice, sraddhas and madhuparka ( V. 31-32, 35, 39,41 ), while clsewhere it recommends _ total abstinence from meat on all cccasions whatever (V. 48-50 ). In संभूतः कटो नाम मह्यमुनिः । ATA बह्मणो जातस्तस्माज्जातिर कारणम्‌ ॥ This is ६ llowed by several verses citing instances of व्यास, वसिष्ठ, ऋष्यशृङ्ग, eat, नारद्‌ and others who though born of women of low class ecamo sages. These verses also are not found inthe extant मनस्मति, = © 988 उद्वे प्राणा स्यत्कामन्ति यूनः स्थविर आयति । मत्युत्थानामिवादाभ्यां पुनस्तान्माति- परे ॥ मह्मभाष्य Vol. ITT, p. 58. This verse occurs also in the दुद्योगप्वं (38. 1). $1. The Manuemrti 149 one sloka ( Manu II. 145 ) the father is saidto be equal to a hundred aciryas, while in the next verse the atarya is said to be superior to the father. In V. 1 Bhrgu is said to have sprung from fire, while in I. 35 he is said to be one of the ten sons of Manu Svayarhbhuva. Vide also IX. 32-56. Buhler devotes considerable space to this question (SBE vol. 25. pp- LXVI-LXXIII ). He arrives at the conclusion that the cosmological and philosophical portions in the first and rath books, the philosophical disquisition in II. 89-100, the classifications of pitarah in III. 193-201, the means of subsistence for Brahmana in IV. 1-24, verses 1-4 of the fifth book, the rules about mixed castes ( X. 1-74 ) and the duties of castes that are repeated in X. ror-131 were put in when the work was versified from the Manavadharma- sitra. Though one may not agree with all the details of Buhler’s examination and with his theory about the versification of the Manavadharmasitra, it may be admitted that most of the passages pointed out by him have rather the flavour of comparative moder- nism about them. My own position is that the original Manusmrti in verse had certain additions made in order to bring it in a line with the change in the general attitude of people on several points such as those of flesh-eating, niyoga &c. But all these additions must have been made long before the 3rd A. D., as the quotations from Brhaspati and others show. Another problem is whether the Manusmyti has undergone several recasts. This does not seem likely and the evidence adduced in support of the theory that the Manusmyti suffered several recasts is quite inadequate for the purpose. The occurrence of several con- flicting passages can as well be explained on the theory of a single recast and it has also to be borne in mind, as Buhler points out, that Sanskrit writers down to the most recent times are in the habit of placing side by side conflicting opinions without actually preferring a particular view to others. The tradition of the Niaradasmrti that the Sastra of Manu was successively abridged by Narada, Markandeya and Sumati Bhargava is, as has been observed above, not worth much, since it is merely intended to glorify Narada’s work. The other traditions given above either ignore Narada altogether or assign him 4 secondary position. The present Manusmtti is put into the mouth of Bhrgu. Narada’s smrti is clearly based upon Manu, though the former diverges from the latter on many points. Brhaspati 180 Fiisory of Dharmatistra generally takes Manu as his text and amplifies the dicta of the Manu- smrti (as the verses quoted above in notes 281-86 show) and so his work may by analogy be regarded as a Vartika on Manu, as Dr. Jolly puts it, Angiras also looks upon Manusmrti as most authorirative. It is therefore that the Pauranic account ( note 270 above ) regards Bhreu and other works as the redactions of the original Manusmrti. The quotations cited from Vrddha-Manu and Brhan-Manu do not establish that the original Manusmrti underwent many recasts. Quotations cited under these names are later than the Manusmrti. Visvarapa ( on Yaj. I. 69 ) quotes the views of Vrddha-Manu on niyoga, who allows it only to Sadras. The Mitaksara quotes a verse from Vrddha-Manu about the widow of a sonless man being entitled to all her husband’s wealth, while Manu is silent on that point.289 The Mitaksara quotes a verse from Brhan-Manu also (on Y4j. III. 20 ). Madhave quotes a verse from Brhan-Manu about sapinda and samanodaka relationship which are expansions of Manu?% ( ४. 60). The fact that many quotations ascribed to Manu in several works are not found in the extant Manusmrti is explicable in several ways and not only by the theory of several recasts. For one thing the authors quoting from memory may be found tripping. For example, in an inscription of the Badami Calukyas of the 7th century two verses that occur in most grants of lands are ascribed to Manu, but are not found in the extant Manusmrti.29! No one- can for a moment doubt that the extant Manusmrti was an authc- ritative work inthe 7th century. Therefore there is hardly any reliable evidence to support the theory that the Manusmrti suffered several recasts. Turning now to the internal evidence, the extant Manusmpti seems to be much older than YaAjiiavalkya, since the rules of judicial procedure are incomplete and awkward in Manu as compared with Yaj., since there is no reference to documents as evidence in Manu, 289 sagan शयनं तुः पालयन्ती बते स्थिता । Teta दुयात्तविण्डं Beart लमेत च ॥ मिता ०० याल्ञ, 11. 135. 290 ages बहन्मनुना-- सपिण्डता तु Tet सप्तमे विनिवर्तेते | समानोदकभावस्तु निवर्तेता- ATU । जन्मनामस्मतेरेके तत्परं गोत्रमुष्यते ॥ पराशरमाधवीय Vol. 17, part 2, p. 528. 291 मनुगौीतं श्कोकमुदाहरन्ति--यहमिवेसुधा मक्ता राजभिः सगरादिभिः । 82d सवदा बरदुततां वा यो हरेत वसुन्धराम । &०.1. A: vol. ४71. p, 97, $1. The Manuemrti 18d as ordeals are not treated of in Manu, as legal definitions are almost absent in Manu, while frequent in Yaj. and as Manu is silent about the widow’s rights, while Yaj. gives her the first place among the heirs of a sonless man. So the Manusmyti will have to be placed some centuries earlier than the third century A. D., the latest date to which the Yajiavalkya smrti can be assigned with any show of reason. In X. 44 Manu mentions the Yavanas, Kambojas, Sakas, Pahlavas and Cinas?9* and in X. 48 Medas and Andhras. ‘This shows that the extant Manusmrti could not be much earlier than the jrd century B.C. The Yona, Kamboja and Gandhara people are mentioned in the sth rock edict of Asoka. Manu forbids Brahmanas to dwell in the kingdom of a Sadra (IV. 61) and condemns the appointment of a Sidra as a judge ( VIII. 20-21 ) The former is possibly a reference to the Mauryas, though one cannot be certain of it. Mr. Jayasval ( Calcutta Weekly Notes, vol. 15, p. CCC ) goes too far in supposing that in the word < senapatya ’ occurring in Manu ( XII. 100 ) there is a reference to Senapati Pusyamitra. The extant Manusmrti in its arrangement and doctrines is much in advance of the ancient dharmasitras, such as those of Gautama, Baudhayana and Apastamba. Taking all these things into consideration Buhler (S BE vol. 25 p. CXVII ) was certainly right in saying that the extant Manusmrti was composed between the second century B. C and 2nd century A. D. But the question of the date when the original Manusmrti to which additions were made between the 2nd century B.C. and 2nd century A. D. was composed presents very great difficulties. That question is largely bound up with the relation of the Mahabharata to the Manusnrrti. This question is an extremely intricate one. The late V.N. Mandlik ( Intro. to the Vyavaharamayakha XLVII ) held that the Manusmrti borrowed from the Mahabharata. Buhler after an elaborate examination of the question (S B E vol 25, pp. LXXIV- (शा ) came to the conclusion that it was indisputable that the 12th and 13th parvans of the Mahabharata knew a Manavadharma- Sastra which was closely connected with but not identical with the present Manusmrti. Buhler expresses himself very cautiously and it seems to me that the great scholar was unduly prepossessed_ eee ee => ~~~ ॥ a ० Or Ae = ee । 208 पोष्ठकाम्योडद्रिडा; कान्बोज यवना; शका; । पारदाः Gee किराता दरदाः संशाः tt 4152 Hiatory of Diarmasastra in favour of the Mahabharata as against the Manusmrti. Buhler somewhat contradicts himself when he says that the author of the epic only knew the dharmasttras( SBE vol. 25, p. XCVIII ) Hopkins ( Great Epic of India p. 21-22 ) seems inclined to hold that the 13th book which alone, according to him, recognises the Sastra declared by Manu, knew the present Manusmrti, though the earlier books cannot be held to have known a Sastra of Manu even when they employ such expressions as ^ Manu said.” He thinks that there was a floating mass of verses containing philosophical and other lore attributed to the mythical Manu on which the earlier books of the Mahabharata and the Manusmrti both drew and that the matter that is common to both works was not borrowed from any systematic treatise. Bihler accepts this view with the slight modi- fication that the floating mass of verses was not all attributed to Manu (SBE vol. 25 p. XC). Before giving my individual views on this vexed question as against the array of such eminent scholars as Buhler and Hopkins some facts must be clearly set forth. The Mahabharata is nowhere mentioned by name in the Manusnmnrti though the word ^ itihisa ”( in the plural ) occurs in Manu (III. 232). The Manusmyti mentions many historical and legendary personages, about most of whom the Mahabharata contains similar stories. The following are the persons so mentioned in the Manusmirti. Angirasa (in II. 151-152, addressing his elders as ‘ putrakah ° ), Agastya ( V 22, in connection with sacrificing animals ), Vena, Nahusa, Sudas Paijavana and Nimi (all in VII. 44, coming to grief through insolence ), Prthu, Manu, Kubera and the son of Gadchi ( VII. 42, benefiting by their gaod conduct), Vasistha (in VIII. ric, taking an oath before king Paijavana), Vatsa (in VIII. 116, under- going fire ordeal ), Aksama and Sarangi ( in FX. 23, though of low birth respectively were united to Vasistha and Mandapala ), Daksa (in IX. 128-129, gave his daughters to Dharma, Kagyapa and Soma), Ajigarta( in X, 105, who was ready to sacrifice his own son ), Vamadeva (in X, 106, desired dog’s flesh to save his life ), Bharad- vaja ( in X. 107. who accepted the gift of many cows ), Visvamitra (in ॐ. 108, who took from a candala’s hand a dog’s leg ). Prthu is also mentioned (in IX. 44) as the husband of the earthand in IX. 314 Brahmanas are credited with having made fire all-devourer, the ocean undrinkable and the waning ( pthisical ). moon to wax. Most of the names mentioned here go far back into Vedic antiquities. $1. The Manusmrit 1§3 For example, Vasistha’s oath occurs in Rgveda (VII. 104. 15293) and the Brhaddevata ( VI. 32-34), Ajigarta figures in the Aitareya- brahmana ( VII. 16 ) and Angirasa’s story occurs in the Tandya- maha-brahmana ( 13. 3. 24 2). Besides the Manusmrti does not say that the stories are taken from the great epic. The Mahabharata also was not the first to originate these stories but is only a storehouse and encyclopaedia of the numerous popular traditions that were current in ancient India. When our Manu ( 9. 227 ) says that gambling was seen to have produced in former ages deep-rooted enmities, it is unnecessary to suppose that there is a reference to the Mahabharata, for from Vedic times the evil effects of gambling were known (vide Rgveda X. 34) and even the Mahabharata contains the same verse ( Udyoga 37. 19 ), though this fact was not noticed by Buhler. On the other hand there are numerous passages in the Mahabharata scattered over almost all the parvans, where occur such expressions as, ‘ Manur-abravid, ’ ‘ the rajadharmas of Manu, ’ ^ the Sastra of Manu’ etc. Some of these passages agree with the extant Manusmrti, while some do not. Besides there are hundreds of verses in the Mahabharata that are identical with the verses of the Manusmrti, though they are not expressly attributed to Manu. Dr. Buhler says that in the Vana, Santi and Anuésasana parvans alone he could identify either wholly or partly 260 verses with those of our Manu. What then is the conclusion ? Prima facte it should be, on account of all these abovementioned facts, against the Mahabharata and in favour of the Manusmrti being the earlier of the two. Hopkins at all events holds that the Anusasana-parva knew a Manusmrti essentially the same as we have now. Bithler expresses himself more cautiously and says that the Santi and AnuSasana parvans knew a Manava-dharmaégastra closely connected with the extant one, though not identical. Both are agreed that the earlier books when they speak of Manu are either referring to the Manava-dharmasatra or to the floating mass of popular verses, but not to our Manu. We must now closely examine the data. The Anusasana-parva distinctly speaks of ‘a §Astra declared by Manu.’ In the Santiparva ॐ भया मुरीय GQ! यातुधानो अस्मि &०. ॐ मनुनाभितितं शासं यच्चापि कुङगन्दन । भगु. 47, 38. He Ds 204 | {54 History of Dharmatistra are quoted two slokas ‘ sung by Manu in his own dharmas,’ one of which is identical with Manu95 ( 9. 321 ). In another place the Santiparva speaks of the ‘ rajadharmas of Pracetasa Manu’ and quotes two verses therefrom.?9§ In the Dronaparva (7. 1) ‘ Manavi artha- vidya ’ is referred to ( vide note 272 above ) and in Vanaparva the rajadh ae as proclaimed by Manu are referred to ( vide note 272 above 9, In another places, the words ‘ Manu Svayarhbhuva said ’ occur ( ९, g. Santi 21. 12, Anugasana 114. 12, Vanaparva 180. 34-35, Adiparva 73. 9, 120. 32-36, Udyoga 37. 1-6). In most cases the words ‘ Manu said occur’ without the appellation ‘Svayarhbhuva’ or ‘Pracetasa’ ( €. ह. Santi 78. 31, 88. 14-16, 121. 10-12, 152. 14, 152. 30, 266. $ ; Anugasana 44. 18 and 23, 65. 1 and 3, 67. 19, 68. 31, 88. 4, 115. 52-53 ; Vanaparva 32. 39, Udyogaparva 40. 9-10, Adiparva 41. 31, 74. 39 ). The words ‘ Manor-anusasanam’ occur in a few cases as in AnuSasana 61. 34-35. Hopkins says that the words ^ the astra of Manu ° occur only in the AnuSasana-parva and so only that parvan knew the Manusmrti, while in the other parvans we have the expression ‘ Manu said,’ and therefore these other books did not know the Manusmrti but are only referring to floating verses attri- buted to the mythical Manu. This, however, is not a reasonable conclusion. The words ‘ sastra of Manu’ occur only once even in the Anusasana, while in about ten places in the same parvan we come across only the words ‘Manu said’. If the words ‘ Manu said’ in the AnuSasana indicate in the AnuSdsana a reference to the extant Manusmrti, there is no cogent reason why the same words 1n other parvans should not be regarded as referring to the Manusmrti. Besides in the Santiparva also we meet with the words ‘ Dharmas or rajadharmas of Manu ° and in Adiparva the word ‘dharma-darSane’ (120. 32). That 15 obviously a reference to some*work of Manu. Hopkins further says ( Great Epic of India, p. 21) that all the EEE RE ee क~ te गि ति 1 71 295 मनुना चेव राजेन्द्र गीनौ श्लोको महत्मना । धर्मेषु खेषु कोरष्य इदि तौ कर्तुमर्हसि ॥ अद्भ्योभिबेह्यतः are sears तेषां सर्वगं तेजः स्वासु योनिषु शाम्यति ॥ अयौ हन्ति यदूश्मानमभ्निना वारि हन्यते । बह्म च क्षत्रियो ae तदा सीदन्ति ते अयः ॥ शान्ति ० 56. 28-25. 996 प्राचेतसेन मनुना श्लोको चेमावुदाहृतौ । राजधर्मेषु राजेन्द्र॒ तादिहेकमनाः शृणु । षडेतान्पुरुषो जद्याद्विननां नावमिवाम्मलति । अप्रवक्तारमाचायैमनधीयानमृत्विजम्‌ A अरक्षितारं राजानं भार्या चाप्रियवादिनीम्‌ । प्रामका्मं च गोपालं वनकामं च नापितम्‌ ॥ शान्ति, 57. 43-45, - $1. The Manusmrii 155 express citations of Manu in the Anugasana, except one, agree very closely with our Manu, while in the other parvans the citations agree only up to one-third or one-half. In the first place I demur to the latter statement. The agreements of the citations in the other books are as close and almost as frequent as in the AnusSasana, €. g. excepting Santi 21. 12 and 57. 43-45 all citations of Manu therein, referred to above, agree closely with Manu 7.89, 9. 225-26, 9. 17-19 and 27, 6. 33 and 81, 71. 259-60, 5. 43 and 45 and 48-49. The same is the case with the few citations of Manu in the Vanaparva. Bithler says that the Mahabharata knew only of the dharmasatras. But there is positively not one express citation attributed by name tothe well-known writers of dharmasitras, such as Gautama, Baudhiayana, .Apastamba, Vasistha or Sankha-Likhita. That the Mahabharata knew several dharmafastras is clear from over a dozen references to dharmaéastras, often in the plural ( e. g. Santi 167. 4, 298. 40, 341. 74; AnuSasana 19. 89, 45. 17-20, Vanaparva 207. 83, 293. 35, 313. 105 ; Adiparva 3. 32 and 77 etc. ). The only place where a sitra- kara is cited on matters of dharma is Anu. 19.6; but no name is mentioned.?9?7_ Hastisatra, ASvasitra are mentioned in Sabha 5. 20, but no‘dharmasitra or Nitisitra occurs any where. On the other hand Buhler is: not” prepared to admit that the views expressly attributed to Manu in the Mahabharata are taken from a treatise and refers them to a floating mass of verses the authorship of which was unknown and?was fathered upon the mythical Manu. Distrust of ancient Indian authors could-go no further. Bithler’s assumptions are, to say the least,.gratuitous and are prompted by his unwilling- ness to assign an early date to a versified smrti of Manu. Not only are there identical verses in Manu and the Mahabharata, but some verses of the latter ( e.g. Udyoga 35. 31 and Santi 111. 66 ) occur in the Naradasmrti: (pp. 103 and 26 respectively ). In my humble opinion the following seems to be the relation of the Maha- bharata and the Manusmrti. I must state frankly that it isa mere theory, a conjecture which’ may. be taken for what it is worth. Long before the 4th century ए. C., there was a work on Dharmasiastra composed. by or attributed to Svayarhbhuva Manu. This work was most probably in*verse. There was also another work on Raja- dharma attributed to Pracetasa Manu, which also was prior to the [नी ब EE 1 + णीती 297 अनृताः fata इत्येवं सूत्रकारो SAAT | aye 19.6; compare मननु 9.18. निरिश्वरिया छमन्त्राश्च ज्ियोनृतमिति स्थितिः | 146: History of, Dharmatigira 4th century B. C. It is not unlikely that instead of there being two, works there was one comprehensive work embodying rules on, dharma as well as politics. There is one circumstance that points in this direction. The Mahabharata quotes a saying (vacana) of, Pracetasa whicn is almost the same as our Manu?9* (3. 54). It is to these works ( or work ) that Yaska, Gautama, Baudhayana, and Kautilya refer whenever they cite the opinions of Manu or the. Manavas. The Mahabharata also ( particularly in the earlier, portions ) probably refers to the same. This work was the Original kernel of the present Manusmrti. Then between. 2nd century 2. C. and 2nd century A. D. the Manusmrti was finally recast, probably by Bhrgu. That work must have compressed the older works in some cases and expanded it in others. This hypothesis would explain why some of the verses and views quoted as Manu’s occur in the extant Manusmrti and why some do not.?99_ In my opi- nion the extant Mahabharata is later than the extant Manusmrti. When Narada mentions the tradition that Sumati Bhargava compressed the vast work of Manu into 4000 verses, he is somewhat obscurely. hinting at the truth. The extant Manusmpti contains only about. 2700 verses. Narada probably arrives at the larger figure by including. the verses attributed to Vrddha-Manu and Brhan-Manu. The in- fluence of the Manusmrti spread even beyond the confines of India. In A. Bergaigne’s ‘Inscriptions Sanscrites de Campa et du. Cambodge’ (p. 423 ) we have an inscription in which occur verses,?9* one of which is identical with Manu (II. 136 ) and the other is a summary of Manu ( III. 77-80 ). ४98 प्राचेतसस्य वचनं कीतयन्ति पुराविदः । यस्याः Raa ज्ञातयो न स विक्रय; । अहेणं तक्कृमारीणामानेक्ंस्यतमं हि तत्‌ ॥ अनुशासन. 46. 1-2, 299 It is to be noted that so early a writer as शुन्तरक्षित in ४15 qraqyag ( कारिका 3584, ©. 0. 8.) expressly attributes the verse ( पुरणं मानवो धमः साङ्गो Feber । आज्ञासिदानि चत्वारि न इन्त sala हेतुभिः ) to मनु which was not commented upon by मेधातिभि and later commentators. शान्तरक्षित flourished about 750 A. D. i. ®, a century earlier than मेधाोधि, 2998 आचायैवदर गृहृस्थोपि माननीयो qua । अभ्यागतगुणानां च परा वियेति. मानवम्‌ ॥ वित्तं बन्धुर्वयः कमे विया भवति पञ्चमी । एतानि मान्यस्थानानि गरीबो यदयदु्तरम्‌ ॥ . The latter is मनु II. 136 and the former summarisee TII. 77-80. मनु 80 The Burmese are governed in modern times by the dhammatbats; which are based on Manu. Vide Dr. Forchhammer’s essay on the. sources and development of Burmese Law ( 1885, Rangoon ) Dr. E. C. G. Jonker ( Leyden 1885 ) wrote a dissertation on ap. ald Javanese lawbook compared with Indian sources of law like the. Manusmrti ( which is still used as a lawbook in the island. of Bali.), Manu had numerous commentators. As to Medhatithi, Govindaraja and Kullika, vide below sections 63, 76, 88: Besides these Narayana, Raghavananda, Nandana and Ramyr candra also wrote commentaries on Manu. Mr. Mandlik: published all these commentaries. Dr. Jolly published (in 1885 for Bengal Asiatic Society ) extracts from all these commentaries (except Kullika’s and Raimacandra’s ) and from an anonymous ixashmirian commentary on the first three chapters. Asahdya seems. to have written a commentary on Manu ( vide below section 58 ), The Vivadaratnakara quotes a commentary on Manu by Udayakara. (pp. 455, 560, 583, 590). The same work seems to suggest that Bhaguri wrote a commentary on Manu.3°° For the predecessors of: Medhatithi vide sec. 63. Kullaka on Manu 8. 184 tells us that Bhojadeva arranged the four verses of Manu 8. 181-184 in a particular manner and therefore suggests that Bhojadeva probably. commented on Manu. He also names a commentator Dharanidhara, on Manu 2. 83 and says that he was later than Medhatithi. He is also referred to elsewhere by Kullaka (on Manu 4. 50 ). The commentator Narayana is certaigly earlier than 1600. A. 0, as his commentary is cited by Bhattoji in his commentary on the: Caturvirnsgatimata ( vide p. 61 of the Benares Sanskrit Series edition, 1907 ). A ms. of Narayana’s commentary was written in 1497 A. D.. and he appears to have been quoted by Rayamukuta in 1431 A. D. (Jolly in R.und.S. p.31). He is later than Govindaraja and flourished between 1100 and 1300 A.D. Raghavananda mentions by. name Medhatithi, Govindaraja, Narayana, and Kullaka and so is later: than about 1400 A.D. When Nandana flourished it is difficult to say. But he is a late writer. There are several other commentators, 300 On मनु 8. 198 the विवादुरत्ताक्रर ( P- 104) remarks कृट्पतर्कारस्त्‌ भपसरत्य- . नेन स्वामिनः सकाशादनामति प्रति्रहादिर्धनोपायः अपसरः स न वियते यस्व तथा । एतस्च भागुरिमेधातिधिदृततिकाराणामनुमतमिम्या। 158 History of Dharmattsira mentioned in the catalogues of mss. who may be passed over for want of space. Vigvaripa (on Yaj. I. 69), the Mitaksara, the Smpticandrika, the Parasaramadhaviya and other works quote dozens of verses from Vrddha-Manu on ahnika, vyavahara, and prayascitta. The Mitaksara (on ४३}. III. 20 ) and other works cite a few verses from Brhan- Manu. No independent works going under these names have yet been unearthed. Those works, if they ever existed independently, appear to have been later than our Manu. For example, our Manu is silent about the widow’s right to inherit to her husband, but Vrddha- Manu recognises the right of a chaste widow to take the entire wealth of her husband ( Mit. on ४४]. II. 136); similarly Brhan- Manu (according to the Mit. ) seems to refer to Manu’s view about the meaning ^ samanodaka’ ( Manu 5. 60 ) and modifies it. It is not unlikely that those verses which were not recognised as Manu’s by ancient commentators like Medhatithi and were yet found in the mss. of the Manusmrti were regarded as Vrddha- or Brhan- Manu. 32. The Two Epics The two epics, particularly the Mahabharata, contain in numerous places passages bearing on dharmasastra and are relied upon as authoritative Smrtis in later works. The Mahabharata is styled a dharmasastra in the Adiparva ( 2. 83 ). The Ramayana is pre-eminently a kavya; yet on account of its noble ideals it was almost 4 popular as the Mahabharata and is relied upon as a source of dharma in the nibandhas though muci less frequently than the other great epic. The Ayodhya-kanda (canto 100 ) and the Aranya-kinda ( 33 ) contain: disquisitions on politics and state administration. The Smrticandrika (I. p. 57 ) quotes the well-known verse of the Ramayana (Sundara 59. 31) about cessation of study on the first day of a month.s°" The Smpticandrika (I. p. 193 and III. p. 416 ) quotes two verses on tarpaya and sraddba from the Ramayana.’°? The Haralata ( pp. 64 and 152 ) quotes SO) सा amare तन्वङ्गी तद्धियोगास्च कर्शित । प्रतिपत्पाठशीलस्य वियेव aqat गत। ॥ $08 पाद्शोचमनभ्यङ्गं Reet च ATT सर्वे नत्र जले तुभ्यं यश्च ॒शादुमदुक्िणम्‌ ॥ शदेयदरो्ष्ये रामस्तपैयते पितृन्‌ । यदन्नः पुरषो भवति तदुश्ना्तस्य देवताः ॥ The second verse is almost the same as Ayodhy& 103, 30 and AyodhyS 104. 15 calls it लोकिकी भ्रति 8%. The Two Epics 189 verses from the Ramayana. Apararka on Y4j. III. 8-10 quotes four verses from the Ramayana on sorrow for the dead. For considerations of space it is impossible to enter into any discussion as to the age of these two epics, as to the earlier and later strata in them and other allied questions. These questions are passed over here as more appropriate to separate treatises on the epics. The following works will give some idea of the problems connected with these two great heirlooms of Indian antiquity :— Das Mahabharata seine Entstehung, sein Inhalt, seine Form, by Oldenberg ( Gottingen, 1922); Das Mahabharata als Epos und Rechtsbuch, by Dahlmann (Berlin 1895 ) ; Zur Geschichte und Kritik des Mahabharata by Holtzmann ( Kiel, 1892-94); Maha- bharata, acriticism by Mr. €. V. Vaidya (1903); das Ramayana, Geschi- chte und Inhalt, by Dr. Jacobi ( Bonn 1893 ); The Riddle of the Ramayana by Mr. C. V. Vaidya (1906, Bombay ). In these pages the Bombay oblong edition of the Mahabharata with the com. of Nilakantha has been used. In the following table an attempt is made, though not exhaustive, to indicate where dharmasastra topics occur in the Mahabharata. Abbiseka (coronation)—-Santi 40. ' Arajaka (evils of anarchy)--Santi 67. Abimnsa—Santi 264 and 266. Asrama-dharmas. - Santi 61, 243- 246. dcara~-Anusasana 104. Asvamedhika 45. Apad-dharma --Santi 131 ff. Upavasa—Anu. 106-107. Gostuti—-Anu. 51 and 73. Tirthas—Vanaparva 82 ff, Anu- Sasana 25-26, Salya. Dandastuti—Santi 15, 121, 268, 295. Dana—Vanaparva 186, Santi 235, __ Anu. 57-99. Dayabbaga—Anu. 45 and 47. Putras (of several kinds)—Anu. 48-49. Prayascitta—Santi 34-35, 165 (338). Brahmana’s means of subsistence- Santi 76-78 Bhaksyabhaksya—Santi 36, 78 ; Rajaniti—Sabha 5, Vana 150, Udyoga 33-34, Santi 59-130 and 298, Asramavasika 5-7. Varnadharma—Santi 60 and 297, mixed castes—Santi 65, 297 and Anu. 48-49. Vivaha—Anu. 44-46. Sraddha—Striparva 26-27, Anu. 87-95- SH History ‘of Dharmattiira The following table will give some idea of the topics of dharma- Sastra that are dwelt upon in the Ramayana, though briefly. The Gujarati Press Edition ( 1915-20 ) is referred to— ~~ ^ ERR Ty -०७०२० ० ert 8 तिथ 6704192 15, ,„ 4० (0-14) Yuddha 128. » 4 (-6) Arajaka—Ayodhya 67. Yuddha 17-18 and Patakas—Kiskindha 17 (36-37), » $3. | 18 (22-23) &c. Sraddha—Ayodhya 77 Rajadharma—Bala 7, | is 103 Ayodhya 100, a III (104-120) Aranya* 6 (11-14) = Satyaprasamsa—Ayodhya 109. » 9(2-9) — Stridharma—-Ayodhya 24, 26-27, 33 29, 39, 117-18, 33, The Puranas. The Puranas as a class of literature existed from very ancient times. Tai. Ar. (II. 10) speaks of ^ Brahmanas, Itihasas, Puranas, and Naragarhsi gathas.”3°) In the Chandogya Upanisad (VII. 1. 2 and 4 ) “ itihasa-purana” is spoken of as the fifth Veda and the Brha- daranyaka (IV. 1. 2) speaks of ‘ Itihasa and Purana.” The Gau- tama Dh. ऽ, (8. 6 and 11. 19) refers to “ itihasa” and ‘ Purana. ” It is not unlikely that there was originally a single work called Purana. The words of the Matsya that in former ages there was a single Purana probably embody a tradition that has a substratum}* of truth. The Mahabhasya of Patafijali (vol. I. page 9.) speaks of Purana in the singular. The Ap. Dh. S. quotes the views of a Purana, twice cites two verses froma Purana, and summarizes the view of a Bhavisyat-purana.}°s The quotations show that the Purina or [111 1 । ~~~ » +~ mer epee 903 ब्राह्मणानीतिहर..¶ पुराणानि कल्यान्गाथा नाराशंसी; Ke. 304 पुराणमेकमेवासीत्‌ तद्‌ कस्पान्तरेनघ | मत्स्यपुराण chap. 53 ( 21800887: 171५ ed.). 905 यो ह्विसाथममिक्रान्तं हस्ति मन्युरेव मन्य स्पृशति न॒ तस्मिन्‌ दोष इति पुर णे । आप. ध. सू. 1. 10. 29. 7; अथ पराणे श्लोकावुदाहन्ति । उयतामाहृतां भिक्षां १ स्नादपवेदिताम्‌ । भोज्यां मेने परनापतिरपि दुष्छतकारिणः ॥ न तस्य पितरोश्नन्ति दश वषाणि प्च च।न च हृष्य वहत्यमि्स्नामभ्यधिमन्यते ॥ इति । आप. ध,च. I. 6.19. 15; अथ पुराणे श्छोकवुदाहरन्ति । अश्टाशीतिसहल्लाणि ये प्रजामीषिरषेयः | द्षिणिनार्यम्णः पन्थानं ते श्मशनानि भेजिरे ॥ अष्टशी.„. sont नेषिर्षयः । Te dives पन्थानं तेऽमृतत्वं हि कल्पते ॥ आप. ध, दु. 11. 9, 88. $ पुनः सरग वाथा भवन्तीति मविष्यशुराणे । आप, ध, सु, 1, 9.४५. 6. [29 17 षि) 7 18 भत 1 97) eee et 1 $3. The Puranas 161 70191025 contained verses and were composed in a somewhat archaic language. The extant Puranas are recasts made of the ancient Puranas during the first centuries of the Christian era, when there was a revival and restatement of the ancient Brahmanical religion, philosophy and literature after the onslaughts of Buddhism and Jainism had abated in their strength and fury. The Mahabharata (Vana. 191. 16) speaks of the Purana promulgated by Vayu (i. e. the Vayupurina). Bana in his Harsacarita refers to the recitation of the Vayupurana. Kumiarilabhatta in his Tantravartika(vide J. ए. B. R. A. S. for 1925, p. 122) refers to the subjects dealt with by many of the extant puranas and quotes passages that occur in the Visnu and Markandeya puranas. Thus it is clear that at any rate some of the extant purinas, if not all, are much earlier than the 6th century A. D. The orthodox number of the principal purinas is 18 and there are 18 Upapuranas also. There is considerable divergence about the names of the 18 principal puranas. For example, the Matsya- purana (chap. §3 ) enumerates them as follows :—Brahma, Padma, Visnu, Vayu, Bhagavata, Naradiya, Markandeya, Agneya, Bhavisya, Brahmavaivarta, Linga, Varaha, Skanda, Vamana, Karma, Matsya, Garuda and Brahmanda. The Visnu-purina (3.6) on the other hand omits Vayu from the above list and adds Saiva. The Sarasvati- vilasa ( p. 14 ) follows the Visnu-purina. Vide Bhagavata-purana XII. 13. 4-8 and commentary thereon for the Puranas and Upa- puranas. Among comparatively early commentators and writers of digests, itis Apararka, Ballalasena and Hemadrithat quote most profusely from the puranas as sources of dharma. We saw above (p. 146) that Kullaka describes passages of the Bhavisya-purana as glosses on Manu. The Matsya-purana is pre-eminently a work containing much dharmasastra material. For example, chapters 16-22 deal with Sraddha, chapters 55-57 and 59-82 with vratas, chap. 54, 83, 278 with gifts, chap. 93 with Santis, chap. 102 with tirthas. Similarly in chapters 216-243 the Matsya speaks of rajadharma. The Visnupurana ( in III, chap. 8-16) contains a good deal of information on the duties of the varnas and asramas, nitya and naimittika acts, good manners for a house- तला, the five great yajfias, Jatakarma and other sathskaras, impu- on death, éraddha &c. Visnudharmottara (VenkateSvara Press) 2 and khanda contains several chapters dealing with matters of 9 De 21. 62 History of Dhatmatisira dharma, €. g. chap. 24 gives the qualifications of state officers, chap. 65-72 speak of rajadharma, expedients of policy, punishments, 73-74 deal with prayascittas, 75 with impurity on death and birth, 79 with purification of dravyas, 80-81 with the four varnas and mixed castes, 60 with various purely legal matters. The Agni- purina also in chapters 220-225, 227, 233-242 contains a disquisi- tion on rajadharma. Almost the whole of the vyavahara section in the Yajiavalkyasmfti occurs in chapters 253-258 of the Agnipurana ( Anandagrama edition ) and many verses in chap. 253 are identical with verses of the Narada-smrti. The Garudapurana (chap. 93-106) contains about 400 verses that are taken from the first and third sections of Yajiavalkya though not in the same order. The chronology of the puranas is, like that of the epics, a subject full of perplexing problems and is hence passed over here. The annexed table will give an idea as to what topics of dharmasastra are dealt with in the principal puranas. The constitution of the original text of the puranas is a Herculean task which has not yet been attempted. Not only is there difference of opinion among the purinas about the names of the 18 Maha- Puranas, but there is divergence as regards the extent of the several puranas. For example, the commentator Visnucitta of the Visnu- purana says (on III. 6. 20-22 ) that the extent of the Visnupurana is variously given at 8000, 9000, 10000, 22000, 24000, but that he comments on a text of 6000 glokas only. The Agnipurana (272. 10-11 ) says that it contains 12000 Slokas, while the Bhagavata ( XII. 13 ), the Brahmavaivarta, the Padma (Adi. 62 ) say that it contains 15400 Slokas and the Skanda (V. 3) and the Matsya 53 give the extent of the Agni as 16000. The, Karma, according to the Bhagavata contains 17000, according to the Matsya 18000 and only 8000 according to the Agni ( 272. 19). Though there is a remarkable continuity in India as to religious thoughts and practices, yet the popular religion of‘modern Hindus is pre-eminently pauranic. The puranas contain thousands of slokas on dharmasastra matters, they are a rich mine awaiting exploration by careful students of social and religious questions and shed a flood of light on the development of feligious beliefs and practices in medieval and modern India. The, > fore the re-constitution of the text of the puranas is a problem जुखरे- wil] have to be tackled in the near future. Besides the several पनः सगे 88. The Purduas 168 एप) 25, eighteen Upapuranas also are enumerated in some of the Puranas. Vide Garuda (223. 17 ff), Skanda ( V. 3. chap. I. 45-62 and VII. I. chap. 2 ), Padma ( Patala-khanda chap. 111. 95-98 ) and Matsya (53.59 ff) for Upapuranas.3°5* Besides the Mahapur4nas and Upapuranas, there are other works of the purana class such as (०६066, Maudgala, Devi, Kalki &८ The Padmapurana ( Uttara- khanda chap. 263) divides the 18 purdnas into three groups, sativika, rajasa and tamasa, and says that the Visnu, Naradiya, Bhagavata, Garuda, Padma, and Varaha are sativika. The Matsya (53) also speaks of this division. The Lingapurana (39. 63-66) speaks of the twenty expounders of dharma just as Yajiavalkya does and quotes the two verses in the form in which the Mit. presents them (and not Visvarapa ), while the Padma ( Uttarakhanda 263. 86-89) divides the eighteen smrtis into three groups of sattutka, 1214504 and tamasa.3°s* [ए would be quite clear to any reader of the purinas and the smrtis that most of the former in their extant form are later than the smptis of Manu, Yajiiavalkya, Parasara, Narada &c. The following table will give some idea asto how the eighteen principal puranas are rich in dharmagastra material. Besides the eighteen principal puranas, the Kalika-purana ( Venkatesvara press ed.) and the Saura-purana ( Anandagrama ed. ) have been drawn upon. The Anandasrama edition of the Agni and Padma, the Nirnayasigara edition (1905 ) of the Bhagavata, the Poona edition (1870 Jagaddhitecchu Press) of the Matsya have been referred to here and the Venkatesvara editions of all the other puranas. 9055 अन्यान्युपपुराणानि मुनिभिः कथितानि तु । आयं सनत्कुमारोक्तं नारसिंहमथापरम्‌ # तृतीयं स्काम्द्‌-( नान्द्‌ { ee Sater तु भाषितम्‌ । चतुर्थं शिवधममाख्यं स्यान- न्दीश्वरभाषितम्‌ ॥ इरयाससोक्तमाश्यर्य नारदोक्तमतः परम्‌ । कापिलं वामनं चव तथेवोशनसेरितम्‌ ॥ बह्माण्डं वाणं चाथ कालिकाह्वयमेव च । मवरं तथा साम्बं सोरं सर्वार्थसंचयम्‌ । पराशरोक्तमपरं मारीचं भागेवाह्वयम्‌ "॥ गङ्ड. 225. 17-20. 305४ anes चेवं ह्रीत ध्यासं पाराशरं तथा । भारद्वाजं कश्यपं च सारिवका मुक्तेदाः शमाः ॥ याल्लदल्क्यं auld HAL दाक्षमेव च । कात्थायनं Ford च राजसाः स्वगेदुाः शुमाः ॥ गोतमं eee च सावत च यमं स्मृतम्‌ । शाङ्खं चोरानसं देवि तामसा निरयमदुः ॥. 164 Acara—Brahma 113 ; Garuda 50; Kalika 88 ; Karma ( uttarar- dha) 13; Linga (parvardha) 89 ; Markandeya 31 ; Narada (purvirdha) 26 ; Padma (Adi 52-56, patala- khanda 9, srstikhanda 46) ; SkandaI (Kaumarika 41), III. ( dharmaranya 6 ), IV. I ( parvardha 38, 40); Siva (kailasasarhhita) chap. 18-20 (on वत्वा of yati, making of a disciple ; yogapatta); Vayu 16; Visnu III. r1r-12. Abnika—Agni 155 ; Brahmavai- varta ( Brahmakhanda ) 26 ; Garuda 50 and 213-217; Karma (uttarardha) 18-19; Linga 26; Markandeya 27 ; Narada ( pirvardha ) 27 ; “ Padma (sfsti 46, uttara 233); Skanda IV. I ( purvardha ) chap. 35 and III. 2 ( dharma- ranya-khanda ) chap. 5. Asanca—Agni 157-158 (both kinds, on death and birth); Brahma 113 (on birth ); Garuda (preta-khanda)chap.5, Karma (uttarardha chap. 23); Linga ( purvardha 89). . Asramadharmas——-Agni 160-161 ; Bhagavata VII. 12 and 13, XI. 17 ; Brahma 114 ; Garuda | 49; Karma ( uttarardha )। 14-16 (brahmacarin and gr- hastha) and 27-28 ( vanapras- tha and yati); Markandeya 25- 26; Narada (parvardha 27 and 43); Padma (adikhanda 58-6 9 History of Dharmatastra for vanaprastha and yati, bhamikhanda 59 for grhastha, srstikhanda 15 ); Saura 17, 20 ( vanaprastha and sarhnya- sin >); Skanda IV. I (pirvar- dha) chap. 41 (vanaprastha and yati); Visnu III. 9. Bhaksyabhaksya— Brahmavaivarta ( brahmakhanda 27, 4th khanda, uttarardha chap. 85); Kurma (uttarirdha chap. 17); Padma (adikhanda 56). Brahmiana—vide under varua- dharmas ; greatness of -Padma (brahma- khanda chap. 14 and _sfsfi- khanda chap. 45 ); duties of -Kirma (uttarardha chap. 12 and 19); Saura 18 ; who is a worthy-Padma ( srsti1s ); means of liveli- hood for -Kurma (uttarirdha 25 ), Padma (srsti 45 ) Dana—vide under pratistha and utsarga. Agni 209-213 ( mahadanas ); Bhavisya IV. 150 ff ; Brahma 109 ( specially annadana ); Brahmavaivarta ( prakrti- khanda 27); Garuda 51; Kuarma,uttarirdha 26 (4 kinds, nitya, naimittika, kamya, vi- mala); Linga, uttarardha 28 (16 mahadanas); Matsya 81-91, 205-206, 274-289 ( 16 maha- danas); Narada (purvardha 13 and 31, uttarardha he a Padma (adi 57, bhamikhay 39-40 and 94, brahmakh at 99, The Purnas 4s 24, अ 45 on godana and 75, | uttara 27 on annadana, 28 | and 33 );Saura 9-10; Siva (Umasarhhita chap. 11 and 14); Skanda I (Kauméarika-khanda 2 for names of famous do- nors), III]. 2 (dharmaranya 34), VIE. I. 5 and 208; Varaha 99-111. Dravyasuddhi—Agni 156; Bha- gavata XI. 21; Brahmarz3 ; Litga (parvardha 89) ; Mar- kandeya 32. Gotra and Pravara—Matsya 194- 201 ; Skanda III. 2 (dharma- ranya-khanda) 9. Kalisvarnpa—vide under Yuga- dbarmas. Brahma 122-123 ; Brah- manda ( anusangapada chap. 31 ); Brahmavaivarta ( pra- krtikhanda7 ); Karma 30; Linga 40; Naradiya (parvar- dha 41 ); Skandal (Kauma- rika-khanda chap. 40 and 218- 248), II (purusottamamaha- tmya chap, 39 ), VI. 272; Vayu I. 58. Kalivarjya—Narada (parvardha chap. 24). Karmavipaka—Brahma_ 108 ; Br- ahmavaivarta ( prakrtikhanda 26 and 28 and 4th khanda uttarardha 85); Markandeya 15; Padma (Brahma-khanda 5, patalakhanda 48); Vamana 12. ukas—vide under pétakas. Agni 203 and 371; Brahma 20 (25 names given), 105 (22 names); Brahmavaivarta, prakrtikhanda 29 (for names of 86 narakakundas) and 33; Padma (uttara, chap. 227 for names of 140); Siva (uma- samhita chap. 8 for 28 nara- kas and chap. 16); Skanda I (kaumarika-khanda 39 ), VI. 226-227, Visnul. 6. and II. 6. Niti—vide under rajadharma. Garuda 108-114 (summary of Brhaspati-niti ) and 115 (summary of Saunaka). Patakas—vide under prayascitea Agni 168 (mahapatakas and lesser sins); Brahma 20 and 105-106 ; Markandeya 12-14; Narada (pirvardha 15); Siva (umasamhita 5 for mahapa-~ takas and 6 for upapatakas). Pratistha—Agni 38-106 (build- ing and consecration of tem- ples, idols of Visnu &c); Garuda 45-48, Padma (utta- rakhanda chap. 122 and 127 for Salagrama) ; Matsya 258- 270 ; Siva (vidyesvara~satn- hita chap. 11). Prayascitta—Agni 170-174; Bra- hmanda ( upasamharapada chap. 8); Garuda 52 (special- ly for mahapatakas) and 222; Ktrma, uttarardha 30-34; Linga 90 (for lapses of yatis); Narada, purvardha 14 and 30; Padma (brahma-khanda_ 18- 19); Saura 52; Vardha 68 6 History of Dharmattatra (for agamyagamana), 131-136 (for various lapses), 179; Vayu (parvardha 18 for lapses of yati). Rajadharma—Agni 220-242; Ka- lika 87; Markandeya 24; Matsya 216-227, 240 Samskara—vide under Vivaha also. Agni 153-154 and 166; Bhavisya 1 ( Brahmaparva chap. 3-4 and 7); Narada, pirvardha 25-26; Skanda IV. “J (parvardha 36 and 38); Visnu III. to. Santi—Agni 149, 164, 167, 259- ` 268, 290-91, 320-324; Bha- visya IV chap. 141 ff; Brah- mavaivarta IV (uttarardha chap. 82); Matsya 92-93 and 228-239 Sraddhus—Agni 117 (according to Kityayana ) and 163; Brahma 110-113, Brahmanda ( upodghatapada 9-20 ) ; Kirma, uttarairdha 20-22 ; Markandeya 27-30 ; Linga, uttarardha 45 (jivat-sraddha ); Matsya 16-22 ; Narada, pirvardha 128; Padma (‘patalakhanda 107, srsti 9-11 and 47 ); Siva ( kailasasa- samhita 21-23 ) ( about after- death rites of yati) ; Saura 19; Skanda VI. 215-225 and भा. I. chap. 205-207 ; Varaha 13-14 and 187-188 ; Vayu ( uttarardha chap. 10- 21); Visnu Hl. 13-16, Stridharma—Bhagavata VII. 11; Bhavisya I chap. 11-15; Brahmavaivarta ( brahma- khanda 9 about greatness of pati, 4th khanda, uttarardha 83 (about patt- vrata); Padma (bhamikhanda 47, patala 102, srsti 47 and 49, uttara 234 (duties of wife and co-wives); Siva ( rudrasarhe hita, Parvatikhanda 54 ); Skanda IIT. 2. (dharmaranya- khanda 7 ) Tirtha-—Agni 109-1 16 ; Bhaga- vata VII. 14; Brahma 23, 26 (Konarka in Orissa), 39 (Ekamra),".40-48 ( Jaganna- tha), 54 (Mahakala at Ujja- yini); Garuda 81-86; Kirma, pirvardha 31-35 (Benares), 36-38 (Prayaga), uttarardha 35-44; Linga, purvardha 92; Matsya 179-183 and 188-193; Naradiya, uttarardha 39-40 (Gangisnana), 45-47 (Gaya), 48-49 (Benares), 50 (Siva- lingas), 52-61 (Jagannatha), 62-81 (numerous tirthas ) ; Padma JI. 13-49, Padma, bhamikhanda 90. and 92, srstikhanda 14-15 and 18-19, 60, uttarakhanda 2, 20-25, 113, 129 (numerous tirthas named), 130-169, 195 ; Saura 67; Siva I. 12 ( kotirudra- 54111010 1-2, 8-33); Skandy 2 ar. (arunacala-mahatmya, sardha 2 ), II (purugotta gapma- $4. The Purtipas 167 mahatmya I-49 ); II. Badari-| Vivaha—vide under sarhskara. ka-mahatmya 1-8; ITT. 1; IIT 2. 31; V. 3 (Revakhanda is full of tirthas in 232 chapters ) and also VI and VII; Va- mana 33-42 and 50; Varaha 141-176 ; Vayu, _ uttarardha 43-50 ( Gaya ). Tithi—vide under vratas also. Brahma 120 (ekadaéi ); Narada, pirvardha 29 (what tithi should be taken, paravi- ddha or purvaviddha); Narada, uttarardha 2; Padma, brah- makhanda 13 (janmastami ), 15 (ekadasi); Saura 51; Varaha 23-35 (all tithis from Ist to 21112252). ‘Utsarga—(works of public uti- lity such as tanks and wells, parks, prapas &c.)--vide under dana and pratistha. Bhavisya II ; Narada, purvar- dha 13 ; Padma, srsti 54-56, uttara 28 ; Siva ( Vidyesvara- sarhhita 11 ) Varnadbarmas — Agni 151 ; Bhagavata VII. 11. and XI. 17; Brahma 114-115 3; Garuda 49; Markandeya 25; Narada, purvardha 24, 43, 59, 70; Skanda VI. 242; Visnu III. 8. mixed castes-Brahmavaivarta ( Brahmakhanda 10). Vyavahara — Agni aa Padma, uttara 223 and 232; Skanda IV, parvardha 38. Vrata—Agni 175-200, 204 (upavasa); Bhavisya I. 17 ff, IV (several hundred vratas ); Brahma 27 (upavasa) ; Brahmavaivarta ( 4th khanda, puirvardha 8 and 26 ); Garuda 116-137, Linga, parvardha 83-84; Narada, parvardha 17- 22, 110-124; Matsya 54-80, 94-100; Padma (bhami 87, brahmakhanda 3-4, 7, 11, 13, 15-16, 21-23, patalakhanda 86- 96, 108, srsti 20-24, 31, 76, 79-82, uttara 26, 31-32, 35- 65, 66-71, 78, 85, 97,125, 170, 240-41, 262; Skanda I. ( kedara 33 ), IT. 4. 1-36, IU. 5 and 7, V. I. 60-61, VI. 232- 241; Siva ( Kotirudrasamhita 38-40, Umasamhita 51 ): Varaha 39-65. 253--258 ; Skanda I. (Kaumarikakhanda) 44( eight ordeals described ) Yugadharmas—vide also under Kalisvarapa. Garuda 223; Linga 39; Matsya 141-143, 164 ; Narada, purvardha 41; Skanda VI. 272; Vayu I. 32 and 58. ` 168 History of Dharmotistra 34. The Yajnavalkyasmrti This Smrti has been published dozens of times. In the following the Nirnayasagara edition edited by Sastri Moghe ( 1892 A. D. ) has been used and the Trivandrum edition when speaking of Visvarapa. The name of Yajiavalkya is one of the most illustrious among Vedic sages. He is credited with having promulgated the White Yajurveda. In the Santiparva( chap. 312 ) we are told that there was a rupture between Vaisampayana and his pupil Yajfiavalkya and that by worshipping the Sun the latter received the revelation of the White Yajurveda, the Satapatha &c. The accounts in the Visnu ( 3. 5 ), the Bhagavata (XII. 6. 61-74) and other puranas differ somewhat from the one in the Mahabharata, but all agree on the fact of the strained relations between Yajfiavalkya and his teacher. The Satapatha Brahmana in several places alludes to the dialogues of Yajniavalkya and king Janaka of Videha on agnihotra (S. B. E. vol. 44 p. 46 ). Vide Satapatha ( ed. by Weber) XI. 6. 2, Atthe end of the Satapatha we are told that Vajasaneya Yajnavalkya promulgated the bright Yajus formulz from the Sun.3° In the Brhadaranyaka Upanisad Yajfiavalkya appears as a great philosopher teaching the recondite doctrines of Brahma and immortality to one of his two wives, the philosophically minded Maitreyi (II. 4 and IV. 5). In the same Upanisad Yajfiavalkya is represented as carrying away the one thousand cows set apart by Janaka for the most learned Brahmana (III. 1. 1-2 ) and Yajiavalkya is said to have imparted to Janaka the knowledge of the destiny of the soul after it is released from the bonds of flesh and worldly affections. Katyayana in his Vartika on Panini (IV. 3. 105 )3°7 speaks of the Brahmanas of Yajiavalkya and very heated controversies have raged round the correct interpretation of the Vartika and the Mahabhasya thereon ( vide Max Miiller’s Ancient Sanskrit Literature p. 360, Goldstticker’s Panini, p. 132 ff and S. B. E. vol. 12 pp. xxxv-xxxvir). It is to be noted that in the Yajnavalkyasmrti itselfs°® (III. 110) the He a ea tema eee य 806 आदित्यानीमानि URNA THY वाजसनेयेन याल्नवत्क्येनाख्यायन्ते | शतपथ XIV. 9. 4. 33. 807 पुराणपरोेषु ब्राह्मणकल्पेषु । पा. 111. 3. 105. 308 ज्ञेयं ारण्यकमहं यद्‌दित्यादवाप्तवान्‌ | योगशाशं न Ait ज्ञेयं योगमभी | याज्ञ, पा. 110. ~ 44. The Yajiavalkyasmrti | 169 author, whoever he may be, claims the authorship of the Aranyaka that he received from the Sun and the Yogasastra composed by him. This is simply put in to glorify the Yajiiavalkya-smrti as the work of a great and ancient sage, philosopher and yogin. From the style and the doctrines of the smrti it is impossible to believe that it was the work of the same hand that gave to the world the Upanisad containing the boldest philosophical speculation couched in the simplest yet the most effective language. Even orthodox Indian opinion was not prepared to admit the unity of authorship in the case of the smrti and the Aranyaka. The Mitaksari says at the beginning that a certain pupil of Yaj. abridged the dharmasastra in the form of a dialogue.3°9 It will be shown later on that, though the sage who promulgated the Aranyaka and the author of the smrti cannot be identical, yet the Yajnavalkya-smrti is much more closely connected with the White Yajurveda and the literature particularly belonging to it than with any other Veda. The Yajiavalkyasmyti contains (in the Nirnayasagara ed. of 1892 ) 1070 verses, while the ‘Trivandrum edition with the commentary of Visvartipa contains 1003 verses and Apararka gives 1006 (Anandasrama edition). The difference in the number is mostly due to the fact that Visvaripa in the first section on Acara omits five verses that occur in the Mitaksara.3'° As regards one of them (the verse ‘rathyakardamatoyanr J. 197 according to the Mit.) Vigvaripa notices it and says that some read it after the verse ‘mukhaja viprusa” and that it adds nothing to what precedes. Apararka explains that verse. In the second section on vyavahara Visvaripa reads verses}?! which do not exist in the Mitaksara nor in Apararka. On the other hand Visvartipa seems to doubt the authenticity of the well-known verse on re-union and reads it also | 309 याज्ञवल्क्यशिष्यः कम्वित्नश्नोत्तरखूपं याज्ञवस्क्यप्र्णीतं Taney संक्षिप्य कथयामास | 310 Viz. the verses आज्ञासप।दिनीं (1, 76), रथ्याकदेमतोयानिं (1. 197), यावद्त्सस्य पादी (1.207), ४७० 0811 १९8०8 तथाच्छाद्नद्‌ानं च (1, 2४४) and अपहृता इति तिलान्‌ (I. 234), दध्यन्नं (1. 289). 311 For example, the verse आगमेन विशुद्धेन भोगो याति प्रमाणताम्‌ | अविशृद्धागमो मोगः प्रामाण्य नाधिगच्छति । ( 7५. ०. 71.29 ) and कानि जातयः Beat गणान्‌ जनपदानपि । स्वधमोर्चितान्‌ राजा विनीय स्थापयेत्पाधे ॥ (Tri. ed. IL २4 ) do not occurin the Mit. The first is नारद ( ऋणादान 85 ) and also occurs in the अभिपुरण 258. 56-57. प्र, 2, 22. 170 History of Dharmatastra differently3'? ( anyodaryasya sathsrsti). Not only this but in some cases the arrangement of verses is not the same in both Visvarapa and the Mit.. For example, verses 14-29 of the prayascitta section present very different sequences in both. What is verse 29 in the Trivandrum edition is verse 19 in the Mit. Besides the Mit. reads one verse (III. 23 4 dantajanmanah &c. ) which is wanting in Vigvaripa and is also not commented upon by Apararka. Visvarapa adds two half verses,}*3 which do not occur in the Mit. and Apararka. There is further a good deal of variance in the readings adopted by Vigvarapa and the Mit., though the meaning is not often affected. For example, the two verses enumerating the names of writers on dharma are differently worded in एग. + But Medhatithi favours the reading of ViSvartpa.3's Visvaripa reads “‘asvattarh lokavidvistam” (I. 155 ) and notices a reading ‘“‘asvantam”, while the Mit. reads ‘‘asvargyam loka:‘&c.”. Both the Mit. and Apararka read “pita pitimaho bhrata &c.” (I. 63), while Visvaripa reads *‘pita matamaho bhrata”, remarks that “‘maitamaha” is put in earlier as a guardian for marriage for metrical reasons and then notices *¢pita pitamaho bhrata” as a various reading. Even in the days of Visvarupa there were various readings in Yaj. ( Vide com. on I. 1, 2, gr, II. 119, 179 etc. ) The Agnipurana affords an excellent check for the consideration ‘of the text of the Yajfavalkyasmrti. A good-sized monograph will be required to deal exhaustively with the questions raised by the comparison of the vyavahara portion of the Agnipurana with Yajiiavalkya’s vyavahara-kanda. I shall only briefly examine the materials and state the conclusions at which I have arrived. We know that Visvartpa, the first extant commentator of Yaj., flourish- ed about 800-825 A. D. The author of the Mitaksari flourished about 250 years later. Interesting results follow by a comparison of tle text that these two commentators had before them with the ‘12 samt पूर्ोकविवरणस्थानीयमिम श्छोकं पठन्ति अन्योदुर्यस्य संसृष्टी &०. (71. 143), 813 The two 811 ९ 6868 are बाह्वणक््य दशाहं तु भवति मरेतस्रूतकमु | (19a) and पासानारकशच्चाभ्निविषायर्डिढितां स्वयं ( 24) in Tri. ed. 814 Vide note 258 above. ॥ 815 अतः स्मतपरिगणना AZM हति xe तथा हि पे्ठनसि-वौधायन- शिष्ेरेंरप CHAT ~ भवि परचेतःपभमतयः : समयन्ते । न चं परिगणनायामन्त्माविताः । मेधा on अनै IT. 6, w 84. The Yasfavalkyasmrtt 171 Agnipurana. I shall select chap. 256 of the Agnipurama for a detail- ed examination. It contains 36 verses which all occur in Yaj. II. (verses 118-153 of Tri. ed. and verses 114-149 of the Mit. ). It is found that the Agnipurina agrees with the text of 12 verses word for word as contained in Visvaripa and 19 verses as contained in the Mit. Visvariipa puts three verses between the two verses ‘pitrdravyavinasena &c’ and ‘kramadabhyagatarh dravyarh’, while the Mit. brings the two verses together. Agnipurana agrees with Vis, In several cases the readings of the Agnipurana agree with Visva- ripa’s text and not with that of the Mit. For example, Agni. reads ‘karyah patnyah samarhsikah * with Vis. (119), reads ‘ bharya... dravyam-eva va ...putrasya cobhayoh’ with Vis. (124), reads ‘pitrdravyavinasena’ (and not ‘ °vyavirodhena’ as Mit. does ) with Vis. (122), reads ‘dadyat-cipaharec-caihSath ’ with Vis.( 142 b ), reads ‘ patitas-tatsutah klibah’ with Vis. ( 144 a), reads ‘ aprajayi- matitayiam’ with Vis. (148 ). The Agnipurina however in a far larger number of cases agrees with the readings of the Mit. Agni (256. 8) reads with the Mit. (122) ‘vibhaktesu sutojaitah savarnayarh vibhagabhak,’ Agni. (256. 10) reads ^ mataipyarhSarh samath haret’ with the Mit. (123), while Vis. (127) reads ‘ mataipyarhsarh अवात pnuyat.’ Visvaripa’s reading leaves it undecided as to what the share of the mother is to be, while the Mit. makes it definite by stating that it is equal ( to that of ason ). Agni ( 256. 12) reads ^ catus: tri-dvyeka-bhigah syuh ’and ‘vidjastu dvyekabhaginah’ with the Mit. (125); Agni. (256. 21) reads ‘-rdhabhagikarh’ with the Mit. (134). Agni. ( 256. 27 ) reads ‘ andho’cikitsyarogady4 ’ with the Mit. (140), while Vis. (144) reads ‘ rogi ca.’ The reading of the Mit. makes provision by the word ‘adya’ for other persons like deaf-mutes mentioned in other smrtis as not entitled to inherit, while Vis. has to put a forced interpretation on ‘ca’ as including such persons. The Agni (256.33) rcads ‘vyayath dadyic-ca sodayam’ with the Mit. (146 ), while Vis. (150) reads ‘dapyag-ca sodayam’. Agni (256. 36 ) reads ‘vibhagabhavana jieya grha-ksetrais-ca yautakaih’ with the Mit. (149), while Vis. ( 153 ) reads ‘°bhavanideyagrha-ksetrakayautakaih’. Here the former reading is easy and gives a complete sentence. With Vis. we have to separate ‘ °bhavana’ and ‘adeya &c.’. Besides no predicate (like jiieya or karya ) is expressly mentioned in the verse if we take the reading of Vis. and the ‘ka’ in ‘ksetraka’ is a redundancy. We find that the tendency of the readings of the Mit, is to smooth dowa 172 History of Dharmasdatra harsh or invélved constructions and that the Agnipurina presents most of the changes in the text found in the Mit. but not found in Vig. In the same direction points the fact that Agni (256. 35) reads ‘na dattarh stridhanarh yasyai’ with the Mit. (148 ) and not ‘yasy@ as Vis. (152) docs, as ‘yasyai’ is grammatically more regular than ‘yasyih’ with the form ‘dattarh’. But as against this we may note that both Vis. and Agni rcad ‘aprajiyamatitayim’, while the Mit. reads ‘atitayamaprajasi’. The reading ‘aprajasi’ is correct according to Panini( V. 4. 122) and not ‘aprajayam’. Therefore the conclusion that follows is that the text of Yaj. preserved in the Agni- puriina is intermediate between the text of Visvarapa and that of the Mitaksari. As Visvardpa flourished about 800-825 A. D., the Agni- purina represents a text of Yajiiavalkya current somewhat later 1. e. about 900 A.D. In my ‘History of Sanskrit Poetics’ ( pp. III-V ) I established, from the fact that the extant Agnipurina quotes Dandin and Bhamaha and knew the theory of dhvani, that it was composed about 900 A.D. That date is strikingly corroborated by the evidence derived from the chapters on vyavahara discussed above. It is no doubt truce that the Agni presents some readings that are found neither in Vis. nor in the Mit. For example, it reads (256. 4) ° tabhya rte ’rpayet’, while both Vis. and Mit. read ‘tibhya rte’nv- yah’. It 15 probable that this is an error of the copyists or the reading may be duc to the difficulty of understanding the meaning of ‘anvayah’ there. Agni reads ( 256. 5 ) ‘svayam-arjayet’ for *svayam ~ arjitam ' (of Vis. and Mit.), and ‘jatopi dasyarh Sidrasya’ (256. 20) for ‘Sidrena’ (of Vis. and Mit.). A detailed exa- mination of the other chapters on vyavahara will yield the same results. But it cannot be undertaken here. A few examples may however be cited. Vis. (II. 167) reads ‘palo yvesim ca te mocya daiva- rijapariplutah’, Agni (257. 14) ‘palo yesam tu te mocya daivarajapariplutah’, while Mit. ( 163 ) reads ‘palo yesim na te... tah’. Similarly Vis. (II. 179) and Agni (257.26) read ‘svakutumbavirodhena deyam’ while the Mit. (175 ) reads ‘ svam kutumbavirodhena’. Vis. (II. 203 ) reads ° galat - sabhikavrddhistu’, while both Agni (257. 49 ) and Mit. ( 199 ) read ‘ glahe Satikavrddhestu’, which certainly is an easier reading. Agni 258. 45 occurs in Mit. ( 255 ), but is wanting in Visvartipa. Yj. 1. 228 in Vis. becomes in the Mit, verse 263, Agni. following the order of Visvarapa. | 84, The Yajfavalkyasmrtt 178 The total number of verses on vyavahara in Agnipurana, chap. 253-258, 15 315. Out of this the first 31 are not taken from Y4j. All of them except the first half verse and verse 31 (chap. 253 ) occur in Narada. Of the remaining 284 verses, only 414 (Agni 253. 35, 255. 43a, 255. 49b and 50, 258. 83 ) do not occur in Yaj. (in both Vis. and Mit. ). There are also a few verses that occur in the Agnipurana and in Visvarupa, but not in the Mit. and also a few verses that are common to the Mit. and Agni but are not found in Vis. The first three verses of Yaj. Ilare compressed by the Agni- purana into 114 verses. The Garudapurina affords, like the Agnipuraina, material help towards examining the authoritativeness of the text of the first and third sections of Yij. The Agnipurana does not expressly say that it drew upon Yaj., but the Garudapurana is explicit on the point. In chap. 93. 1. it is expressly said that the dharma formerly pro- mulgated by Yajnivalkya is being narrated ‘ Yajiiavalkyena yat (yah ? ) pirvam dharmam (dharmah 2) proktam ( गद) 2) katharh Hare t tan me kathaya kesighna yatha tattvena Madhava w. Chapters 93-106 contain dharmasastra material more or less taken from the Yajiavalkysmrti. There are 376 verses in these chapters. Considera- tions of space forbid any detailed examination of this material. A few salient facts only are brought out here. Chapters 93-102 deal with the several topics ( prakaranas ) of the first kinda in the same order, the only exception being the topic of rajadharma (I. 309-368), which is omitted in the Garudapurina. Chapters 102-106 treat of topics that occur in the third kanda of ४३). and contain 121 verses only. In these chapters the order of the prakaranas in Yj. is not observed at all, but Garuda speaks of them in the following order, vinaprastha-prakarana, yati, karmavipaka, prayascitta, 4gauca and aApaddharma (the last two being the first two prakaranas in Yaj.). A feature which strikes one as regards the Garudapurina (particularly chap. 102-106) is that a few verses only of Y4j. are repeated word for word, that very often the Garuda- purana gives only a summary by omitting and transposing the words and phrases of the original and that sometimes it adds verses of itsown. This may be illustrated by what the Garuda says on vanaprastha and yati (chap. 102-103, 12 verses in all). Chap. 102 begins ‘ vinaprasth’gramarh vaksye tac-chrnvantu§ maharsayah | putresu bharyam niksipya vanam gacchet sahaiva yvau,’ The latter 174 Fitstory of Dharmafastra . half isa paraphrase of Yaj. TI. 45a. Then III. 45b-46 (+) Garuda 102. 2-3a (with slight variations), II. 47 = Garuda 102-4 b-sa; III. 48 = 3b-4a; III. 49-50 = Garuda 5b ( ‘ pakse masetha va- Sniyad-dantolakhaliko bhavet, which summarises and retains some words of the original ), IJI. 7 1 = Garuda 102. 6a (candrayani svaped+ bhumau karma kuryat phaladina, which includes a few words of III. 49b also ), III. 52 = Garuda 6b-7a (the last pada in Garuda is ‘yogabhyasat dinam mnayet’, while in Yaj. it is ‘ Saktya vapi tapas caret’), III. 53 = Garuda 02. 7. Chap. 203 contains only five verses. III. 56, 58-59 = Garuda 103. tb-ga (with variants) and then Garuda adds 144 verses which are not found in Yaj. ( viz. ‘bhavet-paramaharnso vi ekadandi yamaditah ॥ siddha-~ yogas-tyajan deham-amrtatvam-ihapnuyat | datatithipriyo jfani grhi Sraddhepi mucyate u’ ). The mere fact that a prakarana is omitted in the Garudapurana should cast no doubt on the existence of that prakarana in the original Y4j. We do not know on what principles the borrowing took place. Besides we find that such prakaranas as Vinayakasinti and grahaSanti are included in the Garuda (chap. roo-1o1 ), while rajadharma-prakarana is omitted. We know that ‘rajadharma’ figures in the sitras and Manu, but none of the ancient dharmasitras, nor the Manusmrti speaks of Vinayaka. Hence conclusions must be drawn only from what positively occurs in the Garudapurina and not from the absence of any topic in it. The Garudapurana sometimes follows the arrangement and form of the verses presented in Vis., sometimes it agrees with the Mit. and sometimes it is independent. For example, the two verses enume- rating the authors of dharmasastras (४३). 1. 4-5 = Garuda 93. 4-5) follow the readings of Vis., but not those of the Mit. In the 3rd kanda, verses 14-19 of the Mit. are differently arranged by Vis., and Vis. omits (as does Apararka also) one verse found in the Mit. (III. 23) as said above, while the Mit. omits two half verses that are found in Vié. ( vide note 313 ). The verse ‘4 danta &c.’ occurs in the Garudapurana and the two half verses in Vis. omitted by the Mit. are also omitted in Garuda. So far the Garudapurina agrees with the arrangement preserved in the Mit. But it does not agree entirely with the Mit. The verse ‘adanta &c’ is III. 23 inthe Mit. and occurs before ‘ahastvadatta® ’ but in the Garuda it occurs before ‘triratram dasaratram va’ (which is IIT. 18 in the Mit.). Besides verse 92 of the Mit. is read differently in the Garuda ( dasa dvadaga varna- $4. The Yajnavalkyasmrti 175 ham tatha paficadasaiva ca ॥ trimSad dinani ca tatha bhavati preta- sitakam ). It must therefore be said that the Garudapurina represents an intermediate stage of readings between Vis. and the Mit. As the Garudapurina was a popular work read by and recited for the benefit of slightly educated or illiterate people, it often introduces changes to suit their understanding. For example, the Mit. (I. 296 ) reads (as also Vis. ) ‘stryah somo mahiputrah soma- putro brhaspatih ’, while Garuda reads ( chap. ror. 2 ) ‘saryah somo mangalas ca budhas caiva brhaspatih,’ thus substituting the well- known words Mangala and Budha for mahiputra and somaputra. The verse ‘krtagnikaryo bhunjita’ (I. 31 in the Mit. ) is placed by Vis. after ‘ ekadesam = upadhyaya,’ while the Mit. places it three verses earlier. The Garudapurina here agrees with the Mit. In some cases Garuda strikes an independent path. For example, in व]. I. 171 Vis. reads ‘ mase’to jatakarmaca,’ the Mit. reads ‘ masyete jatakarma ca’ while Garuda ( chap. 93. 11) gives the easy reading ‘prasave jatakarma ca’. Mit. reads ( Yaj. I. 76 b) ‘ tyajan dapyas- trtiyarhsam--adravyo bharanarh striyah ’; Vis. omits the whole verse, while Garuda omits I. 76a (of Mit.) and reads the other half as ‘Suddhim tyajarhstrtiyarngam dadyadabharanath striyah ` ( 95. 23b). Verses I. 91-92 of the Mit. on the offspring of mixed marriages ‘are differently read by Vis. (I. 90-91), while the Garuda ( 96. 1b) has the same half verse as the Mit. I. 91a and the same half verse (96. 3a) as Vis. ( 917 ) and reads the two half verses between them as ‘jato’mbasthastu sudrayath nisidah parvatopi va ॥ mahisyah ksatriyajjato vaigyayarh mlecchasarhjfiitah ’. The foregoing makes it clear that the text that the Garudapurana had before it could not have been older than that commented upon by Vigvarapa and that it represents a stage intermediate between Vis. and the Mit. The above gives rise to an important question whether one can detect several strata in the Yajfiavalkyasmrti. From the fact that the sdtra of Sankha-Likhita cites Yajfiavalkya among the promul- gators of dharmasastras (vide note 137), while Yaj. himself includes Sankha-Likhita among the propounders of dharma (note 258), it may be plausibly said that Sankha-Likhita refer to an earlier Yajfiavalkyasmrti than the extant one. Beyond this there is no evidence to establish that there was an earlier version of the present अणु, A comparison of the readings of Visvaripa and the Mit, 176. History of Dharmagasira with those in the Agni and Garuda puranas has established that the text of the smrti no doubt underwent slight verbal changes between 800 and 1100 A. 9. and that a few verses were added and also omitted during these centuries. But the text remained in the main the same from 700 A. ४. What the original smrti contain- ed, whether it was in prose or verse or both and whether it dealt with only acara and prayaégcitta sections are questions on which conjectures thay be advanced, but there are no substantial materials for arriving at even tolerably certain conclusions. Yajiiavalkya’s work is more systematic than that of Manu. He divides the work into three sections and relegates all topics to their proper positions and avoids repetition. He treats of almost all subjects that we find in Manu, but his treatment is always concise and he makes very great and successful efforts at brevity. The result is that for the 2700 verses of Manu, he requires only a little over a thousand. He often compresses two verses of Manu into one, e.g. Manu II. 243, 247-248 are equal to ४}. I. 49, Manu III, 46-48 and 50 are concisely put in one verse by Y4j. (I. 79); vide also Manu IV. 7-8 and Y4j. I. 128 (contain almost same words also), Manu IV. 84-85 and Yaj. 1. 141. Ina few cases Manu and ४३). convey the same meaning in one verse without compression, ९ g. Manu III. 70 and Yaj. I. 102, Manu III. 119 and Yaj. I. r10, Manu VII. 171 and ४३). I. 348, Manu VII. 205 and Yaj. I. 349. The correspondence of Yajiavalkya’s words with the text of Manu is in most cases very close, so much so that one cannot help feeling that Yaj. had the Manusmayti before him and purposely made an attempt to abridge the somewhat loose expressions of Manu. The passages set forth above as examples of compression will also serve as illustrations of this fact. The word Kaya (from Ka) is used by both in the sense of ^ prajipatya form of marriage’ ( Manu III. -38 and Yaj. 1. 60); vide also Manu IJ. 109 and Yaj. I. 28, Manu III. 43-44 and Yaj. I. 62, Manu V. 26-27 and Yaj. I. 178-179, Manu VII. 56 and ४३). I. 312 for further close agreement in phraseology. Yaj. adds some subjects which have either no counterpart in our Manu or which are only noticed in passing by Manu. The Manu- smyti contains nothing corresponding to the Vinayakaganti and Grahaganti of Yaj. (I. 271-308 ). ४३]. gives a detailed treatment of five kinds of ordeals (II. 95-113), while Manu makes only a cursory reference to the ordeais of fire and water ( VIII. 114 ). Yaj. $4, The Yajfavatkyasmrti 177 contains considerable anatomical and medical matter (III. 75-108 ), which is wanting in Manu. On the other hand there are some subjects on which Y4j. is silent though they are dealt with in detail by Manu. This is the case with the account of the origin of the world. The whole of the Yajiiavalkya-smrti is written in the classical Anustubh metre. Though the author’s great aim has been to be concise, his verses are hardly ever obscure. The style is flowing and direct. There are not many un-Paninian expressions, though he employs ‘ pijya’ in I. 293 and ^ disya’ in II. 296. In the latter case both Visvaripa and Apararka avoid the fault by reading differently. The verse ‘kulani jatayah Srenyo’ is ungrammatical ( Tri. ed. II. 34 ), as ‘jati’, and ‘sreni> must be in the accusative case. According to the Mit. Yajfiavalkya addressed his words to Samaéravas and other sages ( vide com. on I. 1. 178 and 330-333). In this the Mit. is probably drawing upon the Br. Up. (III. 1. 2 ) where Yaj. asks Samasravas to take away the 1000 cows. The sages interpose (vide III. 118, 129) as in Manu, while the great teacher is passing in review one topic after another. The teacher himself addresses his auditors ( as in I. 178 ‘Srunudhvam’). It is said that the sages approached Yajiavalkya in Mithila and requested him to impart to them the dharmas of the varnas, 4sramas and others. The contents of the work may be briefly summarised as follows :—- Kanda I. fourteen vidyas 3; twenty expounders of dharma, sources of dharma ; constitution of a parisad, the samskaras from Garbhadhana to marriage, upanayana, its time and other details, every day duties of brahmacari, persons fit to be taught, what things and actions a brahmacari was to avoid, period of studenthood ; marriage, qualifications of girl to be married, limits of sapinda relationship, intercaste marriages; the eight forms of marriage and the spiritual benefits therefrom, guardians for marriage, Ksetraja son, grounds of supercession of wife, duties of wife ; principal and intermediate castes, duties of householder and keeping sacred domestic fire, the five great daily yajfias ; honouring a guest, madhuparka, grounds of precedence, rule of the road, privi- leges and duties of the four varnas, ten principles of conduct common to all, means of subsistence of a householder, and solemn vedic Sacrifices ; duties of snataka, days of cessation from study; rules H. ०, 23. i78 History of Dharmatistra about prohibited and allowed food and drink ; rules about flesh-eat- ing ; purifications of various materials, such as metal or wooden vessels ; gifts, who is fittest to accept them, who should accept gifts, rewards of gifts, gift of cow, rewards of other gifts, highest gift is knowledge ; sraddha, proper time for it, proper persons to be invited at it, unfit persons, the number of Brahmanas to be invited, proce- dure of Sraddha, various sraddhas such 25 parvana, vrddhi, ekoddista ; sapindikarana ; what flesh to be offered at 5244112, reward of offer- ing Sraddhas ; propitiatory ceremonies as regards Vinayaka and the nine grahas ; rajadharma, king’s qualifications, ministers, purobita, royal edicts, king’s duties of protection, administration of justice, taxation and expenditure, allotment of the day to various duties, constitution of mandala, the four expedients, the six gunas, fate and human effort, impartiality in punishment ; units of measure and weight, grades of fine ; Kanda II. members of hall of justice, judge, definition of vyavaharapada, rules of procedure, plaint, reply, taking security, indicia of a false party or witness, conflict of dharmagastra and arthasastra; means of proof, documents, witnesses, possession; title and possession, gradation of courts, force, fraud, minority and other grounds of invalidity, finding of goods; treasure trove; debts, rates of interest, debts of joint family, what debts of father son need not pay; devolution of debts; suretyship of three kinds, pledge; deposit ; witnesses, their qualifications and disqualifications ; admi- nistering oaths, punishment for perjury ; documents; ordeals of balance, water, fire, poison and holy water; partition, time of it, wife’s share on partition, partition after father’s death, property not liable to partition, joint ownership of father and son ; twelve kinds of sons ; illegitimate son of Sadra, succession to a sonless man, re-union, exclusion ; husband’s power over wife’s stridbana ; boundary disputes ; dispute between master and herdsman ; sale without owner- ship ; invalidity of gift, rescission of sale; breach of contract of service ; slavery by force; violation of conventions ; non-payment of wages; gambling and prize fighting; abuse, defamation and slander ; assault, hurt etc.,; sahasa; partnership; theft; adultery ; miscellaneous wrongs; review of judgment ; Kanda III. cremation and burial ; offering of water to various deceased persons ; for whom no mourning was to be observed and no water to be offered ; periods of mourning for various persons; rules for mourners; impurity on birth; instances of immediate purification on death or birth; means of purification, such as time, fire, ritual, 84. The Yajiavalkyaemrti «199 mud etc; rules of conduct and livelihood in distress ; rules for forest hermit ; rules fora yati ; how the individual soul is clothed in a body; various stages of the foetus, number of bones in the body, the various organs such as liver, spleen etc. ; the number of arteries and veins ; reflection over 4tman, use of music in the path of moksa ; how the originally pure 4tman is born among impure surroundings ; how some sinners are born as various kinds of animals or inanimate things ; how yogin attains immortality ; three kinds of actions due to sattua, rajas and tamas + means of atmajiana ; the two paths, one to immortality and the other to heaven ; the various diseases from which sinners suffer ; purpose of prayaScittas; names of 21 hells ; the five mortal sins, and other acts similar to them ; upapatakas ; prayascittas for Brahmana murder or for killing other persons; prayascittas for drinking wine, for other mortal and venial sins and for killing animals of various sorts ; greater or lesser expiation accord- ing to time, place, age, ability; ostracising the non-conformist sinner; secret expiations; ten yamas and niyamas; Santapana, mahasantapana, taptakrcchra, paraka, candrayana and other exe piations; rewards of reading this smrti. Besides the four vedas, Yaj. refers to the Vedatigas as six and enumerates fourteen vidyds ( four Vedas, six 2125, purina, nyaya, Mimarhsa, dharmasastra ). He refers to the Aranyaka and Yoga- astra composed by himself. Aranyakas in general are spoken of in I. 145 and Sukriya Aranyaka in III. 309. The Upanisads are mentioned in III. 189, where puranas are mentioned in the plural. Itihasas, Purana, Vakovakya, and NaraSarhsi gathids are mentioned in I. 45 (also I. ro1 for purana and itihadsa ). He enumerates at the commencement nineteen authors on dharma besides himself. But it is remarkable that in the body of the work not one individual author of a dharma-Sastra is mentioned by name. He speaks of Anviksiki ( Metaphysics >) and Dandaniti(I. 311). He lays down the dictum that where dharmagastra and arthasastra conflict, the former shall prevail (II. 21). He speaks of smrtis in general (1. 5 and I. 154). In III. 189 he speaks of sitras and bhasyas. What works are intended it is most difficult to say; the only extant bhasya which can be said with certainty to be older than the extant Yaj. smpti is that of Patafijali. He refers to other writers on dharma in the word ‘ eke’ (I. 36). The view referred to there occurs in Baud. Dh. S. 1. 2. 4. 180 History of नन्वत Yajiiavalkya agrees very closely with the Visnudharmasatra. What conclusions are to be drawn therefrom has been discussed above (see sec. 10). Similarly there is close correspondence between the Kautiliya and Yaj. If there is any borrowing at all, it must follow from the date above assigned to the Kautiliya that it is ४४, who borrows. There are numerous passages in Yaj. that show remarkable agreement with the text of Manu. But there are several points on which Yaj. differs from Manu and shows in general a more advanced state of thought and feeling than the Manusmrti. The following are the principal points wherein Yaj. differs from Manu. Manu seems toallow a Brahmana to marry a Sadra girl (III. 13), while Y4j. emphatically states it as his opinion that this is wrong (I. 59); Manu first describes the practice of niyoga and then severely condemns it (9. 59-68), while Yaj. does not condemn it (I. 68-69). Manu enumerates eighteen vyavaharapadas; रवर, does not expressly enumerate them in one place, though he defines vyavaharapada and adds verses of a miscellaneous character (prakirnaka) in his section on vyavahara. Manu is silent about the rights of inheritance of the widow of a sonless man and gives only a vaguely expressed order of succession, while Yaj. places the widow at the head of all heirs and enumerates several classes of heirs in a regular order. Manu condemns gambling outright (9. 224-226), while Yaj. brought it under state control and made it a source of revenue to the king (II. 200-203). There are several other matters which Y4j. treats at much greater length and more systematically than Manu, e. g. ordeals (as indicated above), means of proof in courts (Manu altogether ignoring documentary evidence, though he knew documents 8. 51-52 ), rules of procedure in courts (compare Manu 8. 53-56 with Yaj. II. 5-11 and 16-21), the doctrine of possession and prescription ( Yaj. II. 24-29 and Manu 9. 44 and 54). All these points tend to show that the Yajnavalkya आप is much later than the extant Manusnnrti. The Yajiiavalkya-smrti seems to-have tahen the section on Vinayakasanti from the Manavagrhya-sadtra (II. 14); verses 281- 283 of Yaj. (1) occur in the Manavagrhya II. 14, but in a different order.}'® The'Manavagrhya takes the Vinayakas to be four, while Yj. says that there isa single Vinayaka, whose appellations are Mita. &c. 316 spar विनायकान्‌ व्यारूयास्यामः | शालकङ्कटश्च कूष्माण्डराजपुत्रश्चोस्मितश्य (पुरश मिकभ्य ) देवयजनन्येनि । मानवगृह्ध 7. 14. 1-8; विनायकः कमेविप्रसिदुधर्थं विनियोजितः। 84. The Yajfavalkyasmrti 181 ’ बल details of information about Vinayaka in Y4j. (I. 272-276 ) appear to be versified from the prose37 of the M. Gr. ऽ. The details of worship also and the mantra ( Yaj. I. 291 ) are taken from the same work (vide M. Gr. S. II. 14. 30 for the mantra). Atone time the section on Vinayakasanti was thought to be a sure indication of the late date of Y4j. But since the discovery of the Manavagrhya that position had to be given up. In the Baudhayana-dharmasttra (II. $, 21) we have Vinayaka and his several appellations (in the tarpaya). Aparirka on Yaj. I. 275 quotes a Jong passage from the Baijavapa grhya which bears a very close correspondence in phraseology to the passage from the M. Gr. S. quoted above and which gives the names of the four Vinayakas as Mita, Sarhmita, Salakatankata and Kusmainda- rajaputra. The Yajiiavalkya-smyti stands in a very intimate relation to the white Yajurveda and the literature that clusters round it. Most of the mantras quoted (in part ) or referred to by Yaj. occur in the Rgveda as well as in the Vajasaneya-samhita ( €. g. in Yaj. I. 22, 24, 229, 230, 238, 239, 247). But there are a few mantras that do not occur in the Reveda, but only in the Vajasaneya-sarhhita or other samhitas ( €. g. ‘yavosi’ in Yaj. I. 230, which is Vaj. ऽ. $. 26, ‘ye samana in Yaj. I. 254 which is Vaj. S. 19. 45, ‘imam deva’ and ‘udbudhyasva’ in Yaj. I. 300 which are Vaj. S. 9. 40 and 15. 54, ‘annat parigrutah’ and ‘kandat’ in Yaj. I. 301 which are Vaj. S. 19. 75 and 13. 20). Verses ( व}. IIT. 191-197 ) are a paraphrase of certain passages of the Brhadaranyaka Upanisad, so much so that the very words of the latter are used throughout in the former, as the aoe PRCT संमितन्येव तथा साटकरङ्कृटो | कूष्माण्डराजपुत्रश्च जपेत्‌ स्वाहमसमन्वितान्‌ । AAW SASSI नमस्कारसमन्वितेः ll याज्ञ. I. 267. 281-82 (Tri. ed.). The Mit. seems to have read; ‹०कटङ्कृटो | कुष्माण्डो UAHA. 317 एतेरधिगतानामिमानि emit भवन्ति । लोष्टं मद्राति । वृणानि छिनति । अङ्गेषु टेखान्‌ लिखति । अपः eat पश्यति । मुण्डान्‌ पश्यति । Ser पश्यति । काषायवाससः पश्यति । ST सूकरान्‌ गदेमान्‌ दिवाकीस्यादीनन्यांयाश्रयतान्‌ स्वभ्रान्‌ पश्यति ॥ अन्तर्हि क्रामति | अध्वानं ्रजन्मन्यते पृष्ठतो मे कश्िदनुधजाति | एतेः सलु विनायष्- राविष्ट राजपुत्रा लक्षणवन्तो राज्यं न लभन्ते । न्याः पतिकामा लक्षणवत्यो भतन कमन्ते । ... रूषिकराणां रुषिर्ल्पफला मवति । MATa . 71. 14 ‰ { ed. by Knauer ) 18% History of Dharmatisira quotations given below will show.3"® Then again Yaj. very closely agrees with the Paraskaragrhyasitra as was pointed out by Dr. Stenzler in his introduction to the edition of Yaj. (1849, Berlin ) and in the journal of the German Oriental Society (VII. 527). Visvaripa points out that Yaj. 1. 142-143 are based upon Paraskara. The mantra ‘ayarh me vajrah’ in Yaj. I. 135 (Trivandrum ed. ) is given in Paraskara-grhya II. 7.7. In the following also there is close verbal correspondence’?° between Yaj. and the P. Gr. ऽ ; Yaj. III. 1-2 and P.Gr. S. III. 10. 1, $, 8-9 and 12; Yaj. III. 3 and P. Gr. S. I. Io. 16 and 19-20; Yaj. IIT. 4 and P. Gr. S. III. 10. 46-473 Yaj. WY. 16 and P. Gr. ऽ. ITI. 10. 26-27. Similarly the verses of Yaj. on Sraddha (1. 217-270 ) offer many points of contact with the $riddha-kalpa of Katyayana edited by Dr. Caland (pp. 127-130 of his work ‘Ahnencult &c.’ From these facts Dr. Jolly concludes that Yajnavalkya’s work goes back to a dharmasatra of the White Yajurveda (R.u. S.p. 21). In another place Dr. Jolly hazards another conjecture based on the close correspondence between Yaj. and the Visnudharmasttra that he pro- bably belonged to the Kathaka sohool of the Black Yajurveda (Journal of Indian History, 1924, p. 7). ४३). also shows great similarity to the Kautiliya and borrows the Vinayaka-santi from 318 स ह्याश्रमर्विजिज्ञास्यः समस्तेरेवमेव तु । द्रष्व्यसत्वथ मन्तव्यः श्रोतव्यश्च द्विजातिमिः ॥ याज्ञ, 111. 191 ; compare ब्वहृद्‌रण्यक 1. 4. 5. and IV. 5. 6 (आत्मा वा अरे दरष्व्यः श्रोतव्य; &०. › ; य एनमेवं विन्दन्ति ये चारण्यकमाधिताः | उपासते द्विजाः सस्यं श्रद्धया परया युता; ॥ क्रमात्ते समवन्त्यचिरहः ye तथोत्तरम्‌ 1 अयन देद- लोकं च सवितारं सवेय॒तम्‌ ॥ ततस्तान्‌ पुरुषोभ्येत्य मानसो ब्रह्मो किकात्‌ | &e याज्ञ. 171. 192-194 ;compare बुहृदूरण्यकं 7.2. 15 ते य एवमेतद्विदुर्ये ant अरण्ये श्रद्धां सत्यमुपासते तेचिरमिसंभवन्ति ... तान्‌ वेदयुतान्पुरुषो मानस एत्य ब्रह्म लोकान्‌ गमयति, The next three verses of शह]. summarise यहृद्‌ारण्यक VI. 2. 15 using the last words of the latter¢ कीटाः पतङ्गा यदिदं दन्दुथूकम्‌, 319 पोषमासस्त्य रोहिण्यामष्ट्कायामथापि वा । जलान्ते छन्दसां कुयदुत्सर्गे विधिवद्‌ दविजः ॥ ae. 1. 142 ; compare पारस्कर II. 12. 1-2. ( Venkateévara press ed.) ८ पोषस्य राटिण्यां मध्यमायां वाष्कायामध्यायानुत्सृजेरन्‌ । उदकान्तं Tea & ०. ' $20 ०. &.सपमाद्‌ दशमाद्व।पि ज्ञातयोभ्युपयन्त्यपः। अप नः शोशुचदघमनेन पितदिद्धपखाः ॥ याज्ञ. Ul. 3; ' सरवे ज्ञातयोपोभ्यवयन्त्य।सपमासुरषादुकशषमाद्वा |... सव्यस्यानामि- SQUAT नः UDA = TAG निमज्नान्त। पारस्कर IIT, 10. 16 and 19-20, $4. Tne Yajfavalkyasmrti 188 the Manavagrhyasitra. From these facts one may argue at least with as much logicand force as underlies Dr. Jolly’s guess-work that Yaj. probably belonged to the Manava school of the Black Yajurveda or to the school of Kautilya. If Yaj. knew his business as a writer on Dharmaéastra, he must have consulted the works of his predecessors and his work is bound to show traces of that fact. One may conclude at the most that the author of the YaAjnavalkya- smrti may have possibly been a student of the White Yajurveda and so the mantras of the White Yajurveda and the Grhyasuatra of Paraskara were far more familiar to him than the other Vedas, sutras, smrtis, and other works. Nosuch conclusions that there was adharmasitra of the White Yajurveda and that the Yajnavalkyasmyti was based thereon are warranted by the facts so far discovered. For settling the date of Yaj. we need not consider the evidence after the 9th century. For in the first quarter of that century (as we shall see later on ) Viévaripa wrote his extensive commentary on Yaj. That he was separated from Yaj. by many centuries follows trom several considerations. Not only had numerous various readings arisen in the text of Yaj. when he wrote, but various interpretations of the same words and verses of Yaj. had arisen. For example, he gives several meanings of the words ‘putronanyaéritadravyah’ ( in ४३}. I]. 47 ), ‘simudrah’ (11. 41); he gives different interpretations of I. 265, II. 160, Il. 173 &c. He refers to the interpretations of his predecessors in several places by the’ word ‘anye’ (I. 3, 25, 155, 169; II. 21, 119, 121; III. 201, 209, 246 &c.). In several places he appears to be referring to two other interpretations than his own (vide on III. 250, the words ‘kecittu’ and ‘anye tu’ and the same words on If]. 261 and 264), That Visvarupa had before him actual commentaries on Yaj. and was not merely giving scholastic interpretations started by himself is made very clear in several cases by. his actually citing certain portions from those works. On I. 252 Visvartipa says ‘others take from somewhere the following Sloka ( then the loka is quoted ), but this sloka is of no help, as its origin is not known’.}* Similar words occur in the 821 अन्ये तु कुतश्िद्‌ागमय्येमं श्लोकं Telrd—“a: सपिण्डीकृतं प्रेतं पथक्पण्डेन योजयेत्‌ | विधिध्नस्तेन भवति पितृहा चोपजायते ॥ इति । अयं त्वस्पष्टमृषत्वाद्‌किंनित्करः। विश्वद्धप on या, I. 252, 184 ` भंग of Dharmasasira comment}? on Y4j. III. 222. On II. 193 he styles some predecessor as ‘panditarnmanya’ and on III. 257 he ridicules a predecessor who regards the verse of Manu IV. 222 as an arthavada by saying that that commentator wanted to show off that he knew the technical term arthavada.3?) It isnot unlikely that Visvarapa in this last passage refers to some ancient commentator of Manu such as Asahaya. In the Prayascittamaytkha,}*4 Nilakantha ( Benares edition of 1879 ) says that Sankara in his Bhasya on Brahmasatra (III. 4. 43 ) explained the application of Y4j. ITI. 226. Unfortunately in the printed editions of Sankara I could not find this. But from the Bhamati where Yaj. IIT. 226 is explained, it is clear that the passage must have occurred in the text of Sankara used by the Bhamati. Dr. Jolly lays great emphasis in assigning a late date to Yaj. on the fact that Kumarila, who cites Manu, Gautama, Apastamba, Baudhayana frequently, ignores the Yajiiavalkya-smrti altogether. But this silence of the great mimarhsaka can only mean that he did not assign the same pre-eminent and venerable position to ४३. that he assigned to Manu, Gautama and others. Dr. Jolly himself is prepared to place Yaj. three or four centuries earlier than Kumiarila. It will be shown hereafter that Narada and Brhaspati cannot be placed later than 500 A. D. and may have flourished two or three centuries earlier still. Ona comparison of their doctrines with those of Y4j. it will have to be conceded that they represent a far greater advance in juristic principles and exactitude than Yaj. So the latter cannot be placed later than the 3rd century A.D. As Yaj. is shown above to have followed the Manusmrti and the Kautiliya his smrti cannot be placed earlier than the first century B. C. We shall not be therefore far from the truth if we place his smrti somewhere between the first century B. C. and the third century of the Christian era. In the Lankavatarasitra (ed. by B.Nanjio, 1923, eee one ee ~~ [क 1 i 322 अन्ये तु कुतश्रिद्‌।गमय्येमं श्लोकं पठन्ति--रागाद्‌ द्वेषात्‌ प्रमादाद्वा स्वतः परत एव षा । यो इन्याद्‌ ब्राह्मणं कश्वित्‌ स॒ स्वां mee भवेत्‌ ॥ इति । तस्वदवि्षातमूलत्वादू विश्वाम्‌ । विश्वडूप ०० था. IIT. 222, 323 अन्ये तु मुक्वातेन्यतमस्यान्नमित्येवम।दीन्यथेवाद्त्वेन भ्थाचक्षते । ,.. न चात्र छिंचिदथवादसारुप्यमस्य स्यात्‌ । अतोधेवादो नाम वाक्षयप्रकारोस्ति तमध्यहं जाना. मीत्येतावनिवाभिप्रायः । इत्युपेक्षणीयम्‌ | विश्व ० OM याज्ञ, IIT. 257. | 98८ श्रीश ङ्कराचाय॑स्तु कामतोव्यवडर्यस्तु TIES याक्नवल्क्यवचो बहिस्तभयथा स्मतेराणाराश्यति TT रुतमायग्यिलनेष्ठिकनह्यचयादिपरम्‌ wae, ४.7, $4. The Yajnavalkydsmrti 18§ Kyoto) gathas 814-816 are ‘Katyayanah sitrakarta yajfiavalkastathaiva ca... Walmiko Masuraksagca Kautilya Asvalayanah t...’. From the context it appears that the author of the smrti is referred to as Yajnavalka. Dr. Jolly (९, ४. S. p. 21 ) following Dr. Jacobi (ZD MG ३०, p. 306) thinks that Yaj. shows an acquaintance with Greek astro- logy. Dr. Jacobi’s position amounts to this that the naming of the week days after the planets was established among the Greeks towards the end of the 2nd century A. D. and as the names of the week days and the arrangement ofthe planets in correspondence with them was borrowed by the Indians from the Greeks, no Indian work which enumerates the week days or arranges the planets in the well-known sequence ( of Sun, Moon, Mars &c. ) could have been composed before the third century after the Christ. As is very often the case with Western Sanskrit scholars in matters of Indian chronology, this grand generalisation is based upon very slender data. The premises are mere assumptions without hardly any evidence worth the name to support them. No one knows exactly when the week-days were named and who were the people that first employed the current names of the week-days, It is well- known that as far back as the days of Herodotus the Egyptians had a presiding deity for each day and that in the times of Julius Cesar there were days of Saturn (ण्व 1. A. vol. 14, p. 1, General Cunningham’s article for the Indian origin of week-days ). At least from the third century B. C., as vouched for by the 13th edict of Asoka, India was in close touch with Syria and Egypt, where Buddhist missionaries had been sent by ASoka while Antiochus and Ptolemy ruled in the two, countries respectively. Therefore, if Indians at all borrowed the week-days and the arrangement of planets from foreigners,.there is nothing to prevent us from holding that they borrowed them from the Egyptians. The earliest dated Indian record wherein a week-day is mentioned is the Eran Inscription of 484 A. D. (Gupta Inscriptions p. 89) where we have ° Suraguror divase. ” It is tobe noticed that Yaj. does not mention the week-days. In I. 296 he mentions the nine grabas in order as the Sun, the Moon, Mars (the son of the earth ), Mercury (the son of Soma ), Jupiter, Venus, Saturn, Rahu, Ketu. No one can gainsay that at least the Sun, the Moon, Brhaspati and Venus were known to the Rgvedic India. Brhaspati in the highest heaven is प, 2, 24. 186 History of Dharmasdstrda spoken of in the Rgveda}*5 and the conjunction of Jupiter and Tisya (constellation of Pusya) is spoken of in the Tai. Brahmana.}#6 We know so very little of the ancient astronomical science in ancient India that one must think twice before dogmatis- ing. Yaj. nowhere mentions the zodiacal signs ( 7615 ) and pro- bably did not know them. Not only so, in his day the naksatras were still arranged from Krttika to Bharani as was the case in the Tai. ऽ. IV. 4. 10. Vide Yaj. I. 268 ( Krttikadi bharanyantam ) We know from Varahamihira that in the 5th century A. D. the signs of the zodiac and the arrangement of Naksatras from Aévini to Revati were established facts in all parts of India. Therefore Yaj. who uses the ancient arrangement of Naksatras cannot be placed so late as the 4th century A.D. When Yaj. (I. 80) speaks of ^ susthe indau ” we should not, following such commentaries as the Mit., connect the words with the signs of the zodiac or the houses of the horoscope. Visvaripa does not speak of rasis in this connection, but of Naksatras only. From very ancient times certain’ Naksatras had come to be regarded as auspicious or suitable for par-~ ticular acts. The Tai. 32’Br. directs that one should not finish a thing or begin to sacrificeona naksatra with an evil name. The same Brahmana says that ploughing was to be begun on the Maitra asterism (Anuradha) and consecration of ‘fire on the Aditya naksatra. Even the Rgveda speaks of auspicious days3?9 and the Tai. Br. speaks of Deva-naksatras and Punydhas, and says that a daughter should be given away in marriage on the Svati naksatra if she was desired to be her husband’s favourite.33° Vide Baudhayana Grhya (I. 1) for the marriage naksgatras; also Ap. Gr. ऽ. II. 15. 12-14, Gobhila Grhya 4. 4. 28 and 2.1.1. Therefore, when एव]. speaks of planets being badly placed (I. 307), or of Vyatipata, Gajacchaya and the passing 885 बहस्पतिः प्रथमे जाय॑मानो महो ज्योतिषः परमे व्योमन्‌ । ऋग्वेषु 4. 50. 4. 826 घहृ्पतिः प्रथमं जायमानस्तिष्यं नक्षजममिसंबमव । ते, बा. 3.1.1.5 997 तस्माद्न्लीलनाम श्ित्रे TWIT यजेत यथा पापाहे कुरुते तादृगेव तत्‌ | ते. आ, 1.5.2.6 828 Heyer wued ,.. आदित्येन आदधते । ते, बा. 1.8. 4.2. 829 स्तोतारं विः सुदिनत्व अहम्‌ | mag ४71. 88. 4. 830 aay देवनक्षत्राणि तेषु कुवीत यत्कारी स्यात्‌ पुण्याह एव कुरुते । ते. भा. 1. 8.8.9; at कामयेत दुहितरं प्रिया स्यादिति तां निषटधाधां दुभ्यात्‌ । ते, भा, 1. 6. 8. 3, $4, The Yajfravalkyasmrli 187 (sarhkrama) of the Sun (1, 218), we have no right to connect this with the rasis. In III. 171 and 172 he speaks of only the conjunce- tion of planets and of the passage (of them) through 1/4; and naksatras. The Baud. Dh. S. II. $. 23 speaks of the nine grabas in the same order as that of Yaj. Therefore there is hardly any evidence to show that Yaj. knew more astrology than was current in the days of the Brahmanas and the Grhyasitras. Yaj. (in IL, 240-241) speaks of the fine to be imposed on those who counter- feited ^ nanakas” (coins) and on those examiners of ‘“‘nanakas” who falsely declared a good coin to be counterfeited and vice versa. Mr. Jayasval ( Calcutta Weekly Notes, vol. 17, p. CLIX ) says that nanaka is the gold coin of the Kushans bearing the picture of the Goddess Nanaia and that the Kushans did not rise to importance before 78 A.D. This would place Yaj. after 100 A. D. But it must be remembered that this connection between the Goddess Nanaia and the word “‘ nanaka ” is quite conjectural and that the chronology of the Kushans is far from being settled. १}. speaks of the sight of yellow-robed people as an evil omen (1. 273 ), which is probably a reference to the Buddhists; though it has to be remembered that he prescribes old yellow (kasaya ) robes for his seeker after moksa (III. 157). He speaks of the founding of monasteries of Brahmanas learned in the Vedas (II. 185). The philosophical doctrines contained in the third section ( verses 64-205 ) approach that phase of the Vedanta that was taught by Sankara. Vide particularly III. 67, 69, 109, 119, 125, 140. He employs in elucidating the philosophy of 4tman the well-known examples of ghatakasa and of the reflection of the Sun in water (III. 144 ), of the various ornaments made from gold, of the spider spinning webs out of his own body ( both in III. 147), of the actor representing various parts ( II]. 162). All these illustrations frequently occur in Sankara’s Sarirakabhasya (6. g. ghatakasa on II. 1. 14, spider on II. 1. 25). All these points, however, are of very little use in arriving ata definite age for the smrti of Yaj. The foregoing discussion has established that Dr. Jolly’s date (viz. 4th century A. D. in R. u. S., p. 21) is much later than the data warrant. There is nothing to prevent us from holding that the extant smrti was composed during the first two centuries of the Christian era or éven a little earlier, 188 History of Dharmatisira Besides the Yajiiavalkyasmrti we have to reckon with three other works connected with the name of Yajiiavalkya, viz. Vrddha Yaj., Yoga-Yaj., and Brhad-Yaj. All these three works are comparatively ancient. Visvaripa quotes (vide note 219 above ) two verses of Vrddha-Yajfiavalkya saying that many writers on dharma have been born and will be born and enumerating ten such writers. The Mit. and Apararka quote Vrddha-Yajfiavalkya frequently. One quotation cited from Vrddha-Yaj. by Madhava refers to the means of proof in case of doubt whether there was a partition.33' So Vrddha-Yaj. wrote also on Vyavahara. Most of the quotations occur in the priyascitta section. It is interesting to note that one of these quotations in Apararka}3* regards the touch of Parasikas as on the same level with that of Candalas, Mlecchas and Bhillas. The Dayabhaga35; says that Jitendriya cited the words of Brhad-Yajfiavalkya (viz. ‘‘sodaro nanyamatrjah”). The Mit. cites Brhad-Yajiavalkya on prayascitta. So this also isa work that must be held to be earlier than 1000 A. D. Yj. himself is styled Yogisvara by the Mit. and other works, but Yoga-Yajiavalkya is a different work from the Yj. smrti and existed probably prior to the Jatter work. ४३). (in IJ. 110 ) claims the YogaSastra to be his own work. So either Yaj. the author of the smrti composed such a work or the author of the smyti in order to glorify it claimed that he was the same as the author of a well-known YogaSastra ascribed to a Yajnavalkya. At all events Yoga-Yajiiavalkya existed certainly much earlier than 800 A. D. Vécaspatimisgra in his commentary on the Yogasatrabhisya quotes a half verse from Yogi-Yajiiavalk ya.334 Vacaspati wrote his NyAyasacinibandha in 898 (of the Vikram era ) 1, € 841-42 A.D. Apararka quotes profusely from Yoga Yajavalkya. One of the quotations ( on III. 198-201 ) is an Arya a ॐ 1 ५ १8 | a == = त) econ = अ 331 विभागधमसन्द्ह अम्धुसश्ष्यमिलेितेः । विभ।गभावना कायां न वेद्‌ देविकी क्रिया ॥ पराद्ारमाधवीय ITI, part 2 p. 571 compare याज्ञ TI, 149 $32 खण्ड।लपुक्कुसम्टेच्छमिष्ठपारसिकादिकम्‌ । महापातकिनश्भेव यषा स्नायात्सचेलकम्‌ ॥ oD याह, III. 29-30, $83 संसृष्टपदमेव वा ACA | अत एव यहयाल्नदल्क्यवचनं सोदरो नाम्यमात॒ज हति जितेनद्धिषेण लिखितम्‌ । दायभाग ४, 298 ( ed. of 1829). 934 ag हिरण्यगभे। योगस्य TH नान्यः पुरातनः — इति योगियाल्ञवल्क्यस्परतेः कर्थं पतअलेर्योगशल्लकतेत्वमित्याशङ्क्य &०, The words हिरण्यगर्भो &०. occur in the me. of मृयोगियाह्ञवरक्य XII. 5 $4. The Yajfavalkyasmrti 18¢ (on the duration of a matra335). The quotations refer to pranayama, Gayatri, bathing, tarpana and jana. His position is that even a householder becomes mukta by performing his duties, by contem- plating on aman and by knowledge of the Vedanta, that the highest goal is reached by a combination of jiiana and karma and that the view that moksa results from knowledge alone is a sign of indolence.33¢ The Parasaramadhaviya quotes a verse from Yogi-Yaj. saying that only the Brahmanas can pass through the four asramas, the Ksatriya through three (excluding the last ), the Vaisya through two and the Sadra only through one ( viz. that of householder 3.37 Kullaka on Manu (3. 1) quotes the view of Yogi-Y4j. that Brahmacarya extended to twelve years or five for cach of the four Vedas.33® In the Deccan College Collection there are two mss. of Yogi- Yajnavalkya (Nos. 91 and 388 of 1899-1915 ) in twelve chapters and about 495 verses. The colophon at the end of the first chapter in the latter ms. describes it in the style of the Bhagavadgita.339 Yajiiavalkya 15 said to have learnt Yogasastra from Brahma and expounds it to his wife Gargi. The whole work deals with the eight angas of yoga, their divisions and subdivisions. Out of the several quotations cited above from Yoga-Yaj. only one .was found in this work. It contains a verse (I. 68 astau grasé munch proktah &c ) which is practically the same as Baud. Dh. S. II. 7 Oy, CS Beat oe he 0 ति [9 अ 1 7 1 109 7 त ke rn os ee 1 7 1 ee ee 385 अङ्गलिमोक्षनरितयं जान्वोः परिमा्जने वापि । तालन्नयमपि तज्जा मात्रासंज्ञं शंसन्ति ॥ AS on याज्ञ TIT. 198-201. This is उुवनीति, a variety of आया It occurs in the ms. of युहयोगियान्ञ VIIT, 12, where we read aya: परि. माजनमथपि | तत्काटत्रयमपि Xo. 39 स्वकमेणामनुषठानात्सम्बगात्मनिदृशन।त्‌ । Vaart परिज्नानाद्‌ गृहस्थोपि विमुख्यते ॥ quoted by अपराकं on aq, LIL. 57. This occurs in बहयोगियाश्च ® (ms.) XI. 47; परिन्नानाद्वदेन्मुक्तिरेतद्‌।लस्यलक्षणम्‌। क यञ्केशभयाख्चेव GA नेरन्ति पण्डिताः। हञानकर्मसमायोगात्परमाभ्नोति प्रषः । TMT न सिष्येत उमे तस्मात्‌ समाश्रयेत्‌ ॥ quoted by अप्राकै on यह्व. IIT. 205 ; these two are युह्योगि. IX. 34 ands. 387 चत्वारो बाह्मणस्योक्त। आश्रमाः श्रुतिचोदिताः । क्षन्ियस्य जयः प्रोक्त द्वावेको वेश्य- WAT: ॥ quoted in प्रा, मा. vol.I., part 3, 2. 153. This is योगृयाज्ञवस्कय 1. 30. 938 gare योगियाज्ञवरक्यः | पतिवेद्‌ MEAT TAME पज वा ^, ॐ हति श्रीयाह्नवल्क्यगीनासूपनिषत्सु बह्मवियाय। ane याज्गवल्कयगार्गीसिंवादे प्रथमोध्यायः, 190 History of Dharmatisira’ 22 and another verse (X. 19) which is a quotation from the Bhagavatgita.34° There is another ms. ( No. 354 of 1875-76 ) in the same collection called Brhad-Yogi-Yajiavalkya-smrtiin twelve chapters and about 930 verses. Yajfiavalkya in Mithila is asked by Janaka and the sages and then expounds the following subjects :— how mantras are to be studied in connection with metre, deity, sage and viniyoga, about okara or pranava; seven Vyahrtis; Gayatri ; nyasa of Gayatri; sandhyopisana; snina; Japa; pranayama; dhyana ; siryopasthina ; culogy of yoga ; eulogy of Vedaéastra. From the above it is clear that Yoga-Yajiavalkya and Brhad- yogi-Yajnavalkya are entirely different works and that the latter is comparatively an early work, as quotations from it are cited by Vacaspatimisra (gth century) and Apararka. The latter work con- tains numerous quotations from the Bhagavadgita and the Manu- smrti and a few from the Yajiavalkyasmrti (the verse about the 14 vidyasthanas is the same in both ). So it .must have been composed between 200 and 700 A. D. There are many commentaries on the Yaj. आप. Out of these those of Visvaripa, Vijiianesvara, Apararka and Salapani are the most famous. For these see sections 60, 70, 79 and 95 below. On ac- count of the paramount importance of the Mit. in modern Hindu Law as administered by British Courts in the whole of India, the smrti of Yaj. has indirectly become the guiding work for the whole of India and this position it richly deserves by its concise but clear state- ment of principles, its breadth of vision and its comparative impar- tiality towards the claims of both sexes and the different varnas. 35. The Parasara Smrti This work has been published several times, but the edition of Jivananda ( part Il. pp. 1-52.) and that in the Bombay Sanskrit Series with the voluminous gloss of the great Madhava are the best known. In the following pages Jivananda’s edition has been used. The smrti of Parasara must have been an ancient one as Y4j. (1. 4.) mentions him among the ancient writers on dharma. But it is doubtful whether we possess the ancient smrti of Paragara. The extant smyti is probably a recast of it as it mentions Yaj. in the first A LL LE SNS 40 य य वापि स्मरल्मावै & ५. योगयाज्ञवस्क्य उ. 19. $5. The Partéarasmrti 191 chap. (p. 2 ). The Garudapurina jn chap. 107 gives a summary in 39 verses of the ParaSara-smrti. In doing so it takes parts of the latter and pieces them together. For example, verses 2-4 in the Garudapurana ( chap. 107 ) are ‘ Srutih smrtih sadacdro yah kascid vedakartrkah | vedah smrtih brahmanadau dharma Manvadibhih sada danam kaliyuge dharmah kartaram ca kalau tyajet । papa- krtyarh tu tatraiva sapam phalati varsatah ॥ Acardt pripnuyat sarvath sat karmani dine dine । sandhya snanam japo homo devatithyadi- pajanam 0)’. These are taken verbatin: or with slight changes from the Parasara-smrti ; compare na kascid vedakarta ca vedasmarta catur- mukhah t ईप smrtih sadacara nirnetavyas ca sarvada । tathaiva dharmarh smarati Manuh kalpaintarantare \ tapah param... danam- ekain kalau yuge ॥ , . . tyajet-deSam krtayuge... kartarath ca kalau yuge |... krte ta tatksanat Sapah ... kalau sarhvatsarena tu ॥ chap. I. verses 20-21, 23, 25, 27 and vide 39 for verse 4 of the Garuda-purana. This establishes that the Garuda regarded the Para- Sara-smrti authoritative and ancient. There is another problem to be considered. Kautilya mentiors six times the views of Parasara or the Parasaras on various aspects of politics and state admi- nistration. Therefore it appears that there was a work of Parasara on politics, in which it is possible that vyavahara also was dealt with. The extant Parasarasmrti is divided into twelve chapters and contains according to the last verse but one 592 verses. It deals only with cara and prayascitta. Madhava introduced his dis- quisition on vyavahara, which forms about a fourth of his extensive gloss, in an indirect way by regarding vyavahara as a part of the duties of Ksatriyas on which the Parasarasmrti has something to say.34! The name Paragara is an ancient one. In the Tai. Aranyaka CI. 1.3.37) we have a Vyasa ParaSarya. In the Varhsa that occurs in the Brhadaranyaka we have a Parasarya. The Nirukta 341 क्षियो हि प्रजा tery शखपाणिः मचण्डवत्‌। विजित्य परसैन्यानि क्षितिं धर्मेण ¶ाल- येत्‌ ॥ Trae chap. I. p. 6. (B.8. Series); “अत एवाकारकाण्डे भ्यवहाराणामन्तर्मा- वममिपेत्य पराशरः पृथग्भ्यवहारकाण्डमकृत्वा क्षितिं धर्मण पालयेदिति gears ee. Cnt कृतवान्‌ । परा. मा, 9.8. 19% History of Dharmastaira gives an etymology of Paragara.3#?, Panini attributes a bhiksusutra to Pardgarya.343 The introductory verses of the smrti say that sages went to Vyasa and requested ;him to instruct them in the dharmas and conduct beneficial to mankind in the Kali age and that the great Nyasa took them to his father Parasara, son of Sakti, in the Badarikasrama, who then propounded the dharmas of the four ४५१८5. The first chaptar recites the smrtis then known (19 in all ) and lays down that in the four ages of Kyta, Treta, Dvapara, and Kali, the dharmas proclaimed by Manu, Gautama, Sankha-Likhita and Paragara were respectively to be the guiding ones. The following are briefly the contents of the Paragara smrti :-— I. Introductory verses ; Pardsara imparts to the sages knowledge of dharma ; the dharmas of the four yugas; differentiation of the four yugas from various points of view; six daily duties, viz. sandhya, bath, japa, homa, Vedic study, worship of gods, Vaisvadeva and honouring guests, eulogy of honouring guests, the proper means of livelihood for Ksatriya, Vaigya and Sudra; II. duties of house- holder ; agriculture ; the five unconscious acts of injury to animal life ; III. purification from impurity due to birth and death; IV. concerning suicide; punishment for wife deserting her husband though poor, foolish or diseased ; definition and rules about Kunda, Golaka, Parivitti, and Parivitta; remarriage of women; rewards for chaste widows; V. expiation for minor things (such as dog-bite ) ; about a Brahmana who has consecrated fires dying on a journey or committing suicide; VI. Expiation for killing various beasts and birds, for killing Sadras, artisans, women, Vaigyas, Ksatriyas, sinful Brahmanas ; eulogy of Brahmanas; VII. purifications of various articles (such as vessels of wood, metal &c ); about a woman in her menses ; VIII. Expiations for killing cows and oxen unwittingly in various ways; approaching a parisad for expiation, constitution of a parisad ; praise of learned Brahmanas; IX. proper thickness of sticks for beating cows and bulls; expiations for; using thicker sticks and injuries to them ; X. other expiations such as candrayana for inter- course with women with whom intercourse is forbidden; the expiation called Santapana ; XI. expiation for partaking food from $463 पाराशयेशिलाकिभ्यां भिश्षुनटसु्रयोः । पा, 1४. 3. 110. 85. The Parasarasmrtt 198 Candalas &c.; rules as to whose food may be taken and whose not; purification of wells &c. when animals fall in them; XII. bath prescribed after evil dreams, vomitting, shaving &c.; expiations for drinking wine and nasty things through ignorance; five kinds of bath ; when bath at night allowed ; what things should always be kept in the house or seen; definition of the unit of ground called gocarma; expiations for the deadly sins of Brahmahatya, drinking liquor, theft of gold &c. Parasara contains several peculiar vicws. Ee speaks of only four sons (aurasa, ksetraja, datta and krtrima) though he does not expressly negative a larger number (chap. 4 p. 14 ). He eulogises the practice of Sati ( last two verses of chap. 4). The well-known verse of Narada (Stripuriisa-yoga 97) “‘naste 11116 &c.” is read at the end 25 ‘‘ patir-anyo na vidyate” (p. 15). There are a few verses in the Indravajra metre ( ९. g. on pp. 11-12 and 36). The Para- Sarasmrti quotes the views of several writers on dharma. Manu is frequently cited in the words ‘‘ Manur-abravid.” In the 7th chapter alone those words occur four times.344 None of them corresponds exactly with any verse of the Manusmyti. Yet Manu V. 133 may be compared with the first two. Besides these, in the gth chapter Manu’s view is quoted that on killing an animal the guilty party should restore a similar one to the owner or its price.345 In the roth he says that according to Manu uncooked food, milk or oil brought from a $tidra’s house and used in cooking in a Brahmin’s house could be eaten by a Brahmana. This is similar to Manu IV. 223.348 Inthe rath chapter Parasara cites the view of Manu that a Brahmana fed on food (cooked) from sudras would become a vulture for twelve births, a pig for ten anda dog for seven. OR went eee $44 माजोरमक्षिकाकीटमद्क्रकृमिद राः । Reed wurde ARATE ॥. There are two more ending with नूच .,. ndiq. प्भासादीनि तीर्थनि APIA: सरितस्तथा | विप्रस्य दक्षिणे कणं सानिध्यं मनुरयवीत्‌ ॥ पराशर chap. 7; ००८४० यो. ध, a. I. 4. 2. for the last. Ms प्रमापणे म्राणमतां दयात्तसखरतिरूपकम्‌ । तस्यानुरूपं मूल्यं वा Zarigeniery: ॥ परश्चर 9th chap. $6 शुष्का गोरसं BE शद्रवेश्मन आगतम्‌ Te ne पूतं भोज्यं तन्ममुरबषीत्‌ ॥ पराशर 10th chap. ; नायाच्छुद्रस्य TEM genset द्विजः । भादृदीनाममे- वास्भादुवृत्तावेकरात्रिकम्‌ ॥ मन्‌. 1४ -28. 8, ०, 2९. न wat 0 111 ee ~= 194 History of Dharmatastra There is nothing corrosponding to thisin Manu. Inthe 9th Manu is spoken of as onc who knows all Sastras.347. The first verse of the 6th chapter says that Manu deals at length with expiation for killing animals.348 This is probably a reference to Manu XI. ty¥1-141. Numcrous verses in the Paragara-smyti are word for word the same 25 those of the Manusmrti. For example, Manu I. 85-86 occur in the first chapter of Paraisara, Manu V. 160( about a widow remaining chaste ) occurs with slight variations in the 4th; Manu XII. 114-115 (about parisad ) occur in the gth chap. ( p. 29); Manu XI. 212 (about the definition of Santapana) is the same as Parasara ( 10] chap. p. 40). Several verses are common to Baudhayana and Pardsara, €. £. Baud. Dh. ऽ. 1. 1. 8,11, 14 occur in the eighth chapter of Parisara(pp. 29,30). The verse ‘na nari- kelair na ca sanabalair” occurring in ParaSara ( 9th chap. p. 35) is quoted as Vasistha’s by Haradatta on Gautama (22. 18). 044६414 is mentioned by name several times (chap. III. 2, p. 8, chap. VJ. 1. p. 18 and p. 23, chap. VII. 1. p. 24, chap. X. 12. p. 38). Uéganas is cited on p. 49 (chap. 12 ), Prajapati (in IV. 3. p. 13), Safkha (chap. 4 p.15 ). Weda, Vedangas, dharmasastras and smrtis are spoken of on p. 23 (6th chap.). In the 11th chap. Pardgara refers to several Vedic mantras, most of which occur in the Rgveda, but two of them, “‘tejosi Sukram” and ‘‘devasya tva” are not found in the Rgveda, but in the Vaj. S. ( 22. 1 and 1. 24 respectively ) 22125114 appears 10 have been a practical man. He cxhorts his readers to save their bodies first in invasions, journeys, diseases, calamities and then care for dharma. He recommends the non- observance of rules of purity in times of difficulty and adherence to the strict rules of dharma when one is at ease.349 The Mit., Apararka, Smrticandrika, Hemadri and other later works quote ParaSara very frequently. Most of these are found in the extant Parasarasmrti. For example, vide pp. 1169, 1177, 1180, 1191 &c. of Apararka, all of which are traced in Pardgara pp. 42, 43, 42 and 16 respectively. Visvaripa quotes Parasara several times 347 मनुना AAR MAMAN जानता । परार 9th. 248 अतः परं प्रवक्ष्यामि प्राणिहृत्य।सु निष्कृतिम्‌ | पराशरेण पूर्वोक्तां मन्वरथंपिं च विस्त॒ताम्‌ ॥ $49 Sarah प्रवासे वा व्याधिषु ्यसनेप्वापि | Was Tae HUET समाचरत्‌ ॥ ; आपत्कले तु संप्रातते शौचाचार न चिन्तयेत्‌ । स्वयं समृद्रेत्‌ पश्यात्‌ EM धर्म समा- रेत्‌ ॥ 7th chap., last three verses. 86, The Paraiégaraaemrit 198 and these quotations can be verified ; €, £. on Yaj. III. 16 the verse ५ anatham ” ascribed to Parisara is found in Paragara chap. III p.10; on Yaj. III. 257 ten verses are cited by Visvarapa from Parasara which occur in Parasara with considerable variations (chap. VII. pp. 20-21); on Yaj, III. 262 the verse ‘“‘gavam bandhana” is cited from Parasara, which is the first verse of the 8th chapter. There-'. fore it is quite clear that in the first half of the 9th century the Paragarasmrti that we have now was considered to be authoritative and the work of an ancient sage. It seems to have known a work of Manu, as seen above. Therefore it must be assignad to some period between the first and the 5th century of our era. In the same direction points the fact that the Garudapurina ( chap. 107 ) seems to have known the introductory verses of Parigara and as shown above ( p. 191 ) combines passages of Parasara in a summary of its teachings.3s° The Visnu-dharmottara which 15 frequently quoted by Apararka and other later works cites verses that are borrowed from Paragara. For example, chap. 75. 1 of the former is the same as a verse of ParaSara.35? There is an extensive work called Brhat-Pardsara-samhita (published by Jivananda, part II. pp. 53-309). It is divided into 12 chapters and the last verse says that it contains 3300 verses and that Suvrata proclaimed the Sastra imparted by 2405414. The introduc- tory verses contain the same story as that in the Parasara-smrti and many of the verses in the first chapter of the two works ( such as those about the 19 writers on dharma &c. ) are almost the same in both. The total of verses in the printed work comes to about 3000 and not 3300. It appears that the work is a recast of the Paragarasmpti made by Suvrata. The subjects of the twelve chapters are :—I. Introductory, the proper sphere of Aryas; summary of contents ; II. Disquisition on the 6 daily karmas, sandhya, bath, japa, worship of gods, Vaisvadeva and honouring guests ; Gayatri ; the dharmas of the Varyas; II]. duties and manners of 2 house- holder ; agriculture, honour to cows ; IV. forms of marriage ; duties of wives; Jatakarma and other rites; gifts; proper persons to 950 पराशरोबवीद्‌ ene ध्म वर्णा भतीदिकम्‌ । HET कस्ये क्षयोत्पस्या ef यन्ते तु प्रजा- द्यः ॥ गरुडपुराण 107. 1. ( Venketesvar Press ed. ) $51 अनाथं erent प्रेतं ये वहन्ति द्विजातयः । पदे पदे यज्नफलमानुपबोहभन्ति ते ॥ पराशर chap. 3. p. 12. 196 Tlistary of Dharmasastra receive gifts; V. concerning éraddhas; VI. impurity on birth and death ; prayascittas for various acts; VII. candrayana and othr penances ; VIII. gifts; IX. rites for propitiating Ganesa and the planets, Rudra &c ; X Rajadharma ; dharmas of forest hermit and 10: ; XI. the different varietics of Brahmacirin, householder, forest rmit and yati; XII. pranayama and other angas of yoga. This Brhar-Parasara contains a considerable number of verses mostly in the Indravajra metre and a few in tha Vasantatilaka ( €. £. p. 134). The Brhat-Paragara appears to be a late work. Itis a recast of the Paragara-smrti. It contains the Vinayakaganti as elaborated by Yajiiavalkya, since it speaks of only one Vinayaka (gth chap. p. 247) and not of four asin M. Gr. S. On p. 249 it quotes Yaj. I. 285 ( about the names of Vinayaka ) with the readings found in the Mit. It speaks of the rasis( p. 244 ). It is not quoted by Visvardpa, the Mit. or Apararka. ,It is mentioned in Bhattoji’s comment on the Caturvirhsatimata ( p. 138) and by Nandapandita in the Dattaka- mimarhsa, which quotes a verse ( Brhat-Paragara p. 153 ).35 A Vrddha-Paragara is quoted by Apararka (on Yaj. II. 318 ) immediately after 0125214 and as holding a different view. Madhava also quotes a Vrddha-Paragara ( ParaSara-Madhaviya vol. 1, part 1, p. 230). This seems to be a different work from the Paragara-smrti and the Brhat-Paragara. Hemadri ( Carturvarga. vol. III, part 2, p. 48 )and Bhattoji in his gloss on CaturvirhSa- timata (p. 138) quote a Jyotih-Pardégara. 36. The Narada-smrti There are two versions of Narada on Vyavahara, a smaller and a larger one. The smaller version was translated by Dr. Jolly in 1876 ( (लः & (तड London ). The text of the longer version was published by the same scholar in the Bibliotheca Indica series (1885) and was translated by him in the Sacred Books of the East Series ( vol. 33 ). The edition of the text is accompanied up to verse 21 of the sth title ‘ abhyupetyaSusrisi ’ by extracts from the commentary of Asahaya as revised bf Kalyanabhatta, who was encouraged in the task of revision by KeSavabhatta ५ me => - [1 कक क Gy SEES a enon Sie meee Ve yee 95४ अगुत्रस्य पित॒म्यस्य TAS MAT मवेत्‌ । स एव TET Beis भाद पिष्डोदक- रियम्‌ ॥ दुत्तकमी्मासा ?. 36 86. The Ndradasmrtt 197 From verse 22 of the same title the printed text is the same as the smaller version. A verse quoted as Narada’s by Ksirasvamin is not found in the larger version but is found in the smaller version.35: An ancient Ms. of Narada from Nepal dated 1407 A.D. contains two additional chapters on theft and ordeals. Dr. Jolly includes the first as an appendix and omits that on ordeals on the ground that itis not authentic. One of the colophons of the Nepalese Ms. describes it as ‘ iti Manava-dharmagastre Naradaproktayairh sathhi- tayam &८ ` This corroborates what was said above ( pp. 149, 156 ) as to the close connection between Manu and Narada. Narada is not mentioned by Yajfiavalkya in the list of ancient writers on dharma, nor does Pardsara mention him. Visvarapa however quotes a verse of Vrddha-Yajnavalkya (on Yaj. I. 4-5 ), where Nirada is the first among ten expounders of dharma enume- rated therein ( vide note 219 ). The printed Narada contains three introductory chapters on the principles of judicial procedure ( Vyavahara-matrka ) and on the judicial assembly ( sabha ). Then the following titles of law are dealt with one after another :—rnadana ( recovery of debts ), upa- nidhi (deposit, lending, bailment ), sarhbhuiya-samutthana ( part- nership ), dattapradinika ( gifts and resumption thereof ), abhyupe- tya-agusrasa ( breach of contract of service ), vetanasya-anapa- karma (non-payment of wages ), asvamivikraya (sale without ownership ), vikriyasarnpradina (non-delivery after salc ), krita- nugaya (rescission of purchase ), samayasyanapakarma ( violation of conventions of corporations, guilds &c. ), simabandha ( settlement of boundarics ); stripurhsayoga (marital relation); diayabhaga ( partition and inheritance ); sahasa ( offences in which force is the principal element )such as homicide, robbery, rape &c.; vakpa- rusya ( defamation and abuse ) and dandaparusya (hurt of various kinds ); prakirnaka ( miscellaneous wrongs). The appendix deals with theft, though a few remarks are made on that topic under the title of ‘ sahasa. ’ It will be noticed that Narada follows the Manusmrti to a con- siderable extent in the nomenclature and the arrangement of the 3*3 क्षीरस्वामी on the word TIS in अमरकोश quotes the verse am हि मगवान्धर्म- स्तस्य यः दषते कवम्‌ | Which is मनु 8. 16 and क्नान्तिपवै 9. 15, 198 History of Dharmasastra eighteen titles. Some of the titles are differently named by Narada, e. g. he speaks of upanidhi, while Manu employs the word niksepa. Narada scems to have included the svamipalavivada of Manu in vetanasya-anapikarma. He makes one title of वर्च and saméa- hvaya. Narada includes strisarngrahana under sahasa and adds three itles, viz. abhyupetya-asusrasa, vikriyasampradina and prakirnaka. ` The smrticandrika expressly3s+ says that it follows the work of Narada in preference to that of Manu as regards the nomenclature and sequence of the titles of law. Narada follows Manu in speaking of witnesses in the section on rnadina and in treating of theft after the cightcen titles have been dealt with ( vide Manu IX. 256 ff. ). The printed Narada contains 1028 verses (including 61 on theft in the appendix ). About seven hundred of these verses occur in various nibandhas as quotations. Upto the 21st verse of the section ‘abhyupetydsusrisa’ the commentary of Asahiaya furnishes a valuable check for the authenticity of the text. For the remaining portion, there are important data as to its authenticity, sequence and readings. Visvaripa, who belongs to the first half of the 9th century, quotes about fifty verses of Narada (generally by name). The text that he had before him was essentially the same as that of the printed edition, exceptin a very few cases. Out of the seven verses of Narada on ‘samayasya-anapakarma’ Visvartipa quotes five (on Yaj. II. 196 and 196 ) and expressly states that Narada wound up his chapter on that topic with the verse ‘dosavat karanam &c’. as the printed text does. On Yaj. II. 226 Visvarapa distinctly says that the verse ‘yameva hyativarteran’ &c. is followed immediately by ‘mala hyete manusyesu’. This is the case with the printed text also ( dyiitasamahvaya verses 13-14). On Yaj. III. 252 Visvaripa quotes a verse af Narada about the three kinds of wealth, sukla, Sabala and krsna, which does not occur in that form in Narada, though the latter contains similar dicta.335 Vigvardpa contains no quotation from Narada on the topics of Acara or prayascitta. The same is the case with Medhatithi and the Mitaiksari. Medhatithi somewhat inaccurately summarises the 34 नार दीयेद्ुशक्रमानुसरिणश्च वयमित्यनपदययमिहाभिधानम्‌ | 355 ae च शवलं चेव रूष्णं च विविधं धनम्‌ । शुद्खं न्यायार्जितं धम्थानितरइ व्यावहारि- कमू ॥ ; तव्युन्चविधं ज्ञेयं शष्ट शबलमेव च । ष्णं च तस्य विज्ञेया; TAT: सपधा पृथ ॥ ( नारद्‌, ऋणादान 44 ), $6. The Naradasmrit 199 the introductory words (in prose) of Narada (vide note 269 above ). Medhatithi frequently quotes Narada particularly from the sections on mnadana ( vide on Manu 8. 47, 155, 149) and dayabhiga (on Manu 8, 28, 29, and 207, 209, and 143). On- Manu 8, 349 he quotes Narada on partnership (verse 10), on 8. 216 he quot Narada ( vetanasya-anapakarma verse 5 ). In some cases Mesa cites Narada’s verses without naming hime. g. on Manu 9. 76 1८१ quotes the well-known verse ‘nashte myte pravrajite &c.’ ( Narada on marital relation, verse 97) as ‘smrtyantara’. It was shown above (p. 172 ) that the vyavahara section of the Agnipurana dates from about 900 A. D. Chap. 253 of the Agnipurana contains thirty verses of the extant Naradasmrti, viz. Agni 253. 19--9 = Narada ( vyavahara-matrka chap. I. 8-15 ); Agni 253. gb--12 = Narada ( vyavahara-matrka chap. I. 26-292); Agni 253. 13--30 are the verses defining the eighteen titles from rnadana to prakirnaha contained in Narada and occur in the same order in both. The readings preserved in the Agnipurana deserve some discussion. Agni (253. 3-4 ) reads ‘dharmas ca vyavaharas ca... uttarah ptirva- sadhakah’, while Narada has ‘pirvabadhakah’. Agni reads ‘caritrarh sarngrahe [पाऽ rajajnayam tu sadhanam’ ( 253. 5 ), while Narada has ‘caritrarh pustakarane rajajhayaih tu sisanam’. Agni (253.15 ) reads ‘dattvadravyarh ca samyag-yah’, while Narada (dattapradanika 1) reads ‘dattva dravyamasamyag-yaly’. ‘The Agni (253. 11) reads ‘Sanka sadbhistu sarhsargat tattvarh sodhabhidarsanat’ and avoids the rare word ‘hodhabhi- in Narada ‘Sankasatam tu sarhsargit tattvarh hodhabhidarsanat?) = (Vyavaharamatrké I. 27 ). For Narada’s ‘aksabradhnagalakadyair &c.’ ( dytitasamihvaya I) Agni reads ‘Aksavajra &c.’ (253.29). The Mit. (on Yaj. Il. 199 ) and Vir. ( p. 718 ) follow printed Narada in the 195 case and also in the other cases. In the Smrti-candrika, Hemadri, ParasSaramadhaviya and other later nibandhas numerous verses of Narada are quoted on topics of 4cira, sraddha, prayascitta. For example, HemAdri ( caturvarga vol. III. part 2, pp. 159, 183, 185, 223, 235) quotes several verses of Narada on Ekadagi and a verse of Narada about the astrological vega called padmaka. The Smrticandrika (1, pp. 198-199 ) quotes 26 verses on the worship of Narayana, the last of which is the well known verse ‘dhyeyah sada savitrmandala-madhyavarti &c.’ and the same work (on §riddha p. 354) quotes a verse of Narada in which Sunday and Sarhkranti are mentioned. The question arises whether 260 History of Dharmatastra thes¢ quotations of Narada on acara and prayascitta and allied topics are the work of the same Narada that wrote on Vyayahara. From the fact that early writers like Visvarapa, Medhatithi and Vijfianesvara do not contain a single quotation of Narada on topics ther than that of vyavahara, it appears probable that the quotations ^ on acara and prayascitta belong to a later date than the Naradasmyrti on vyavahara and either did not exist in the days of Visvaripa and Medhatithi or had not attained canonical authority in those days. There is in the India Office Library a ms. of Naradasmrti in three chapters and 322 verses dealing exclusively with acara and prayascitta ( vide Jolly’s Introduction p. $ to edition of text ) The Naradasmyti, excluding the introductory passage in prose about the successive abridgments of the original work of Manu by Narada, Markandeya and Sumati Bhargava, is written, in the 61048 metre except in the case of two verses (verse 38 of the 2nd chap. of vyavahara-matrka and the last verse of the chapter on sabha). Narada himself is mentioned by name in connection with the ordeals ( rnadina verse 253 ).355a The first person also occurs in ‘atah param pravaksyami’ (rnadana 343). Acdryas are cited in ‘dattapradanika’ (verse 5). Dharmasastra and arthasastra are mentioned (vyavaharamatrka, chap. I, 37 and 39 ) and Narada lays down the rule as in Yaj. (II. 21) that in a conflict between the two the former should furnish the rule of conduct.35° Narada refers to Vasistha’s rule about interest (rnadina 99). Two verses are quoted from a Purana.357 Manu is named in several places ( rnadana verses 250, 251, 326 ).358 The first passage about Manu is quoted by Visvarapa on Yaj. (II. 98) and corresponds closely with the teaching of Manu (8. 113). But the other passages 8658 सन्दिग्धर्थमियुकतानां विशुद्ध्यर्थं इुरत्मनाम्‌ । OB नारदेनेह सत्यान॒तविशुद्धये ॥ $56 यत्र विप्रतिपत्तिः स्याद्मशाखार्थशाखयोः | अथशाखोक्तमुत्सृज्य धमंशास्ोक्त माचरेत्‌ ॥ $57 पुराणोक्त gl श्छोको भवतः । यः परा प्रहिणयास्स्वां वाचं Game: । आत्मार्थ रि न कुयौत्स पापो नरकनि्मैगरः ॥ वाच्यथां नियताः सर्वै बाड्मूला aaah Pam: | यो हि तां स्तेनयेद्वाचं स सर्वसतयरुन्नरः ॥ नारद्‌ ( ऋणादून 227-228 ), 358 सत्य॑ वाहनशस्।णि गोधीजकनकादि च । ... इत्येते शपथाः मोचा भनुना श्वस्प- कारणे | ऋणादान 248, 250; दैवं परञविधं ्ञेयमित्याह भगवान्मनुः | ऋणादान 25: छायानिषेशितो रक्ष्यो दिनशेषममोजनः । विषवेगङ्कमातीतः ygisat Face ॥ ऋणादान 326 $6. The Ndradasmrti 201 crediting Manu with dividing ordeals into five kinds and giving his view about poison ordeal have no corresponding passage in the extant Manu. Therefore Narada had a version of Manu before him that was somewhat different in certain respects from our Manu or Narada may be referring to Vrddha or Brhat Manu. Besides this there is one remarkable fact to be noted about the relation of Manu and Narada. There are about 50 verses that are common to Manu and Narada. Manu 8. 12-14 and 18-19 are Narada (sabha, verses 8-10 and 12-13 in a different order), Manu 8. 140-141=N. (gnadana ‘99-100 ), Manu 8. 148-149 =N. (rnidana 80-81 ), M. 8. 143=N. (r. 129, M. 8. 64=N. (r. 177), M. 8. 72=N. (rp. 189), M. 8. 93 and 113 =N. (r. 199, 201), M.:98-99=N. (r. 208, 209 and Udyogaparva 35.33- 34), M. 8. 89=N. (4. 225), M. 8. 186-187, 189, 797 = N. ( upanidhi 10-13), M. 8. 232-233, 235 = N. ( vetanasya-anapakarma 14-16 in a different order), M. 9. 47=N. ( marital relation, verse 28 ), M. 8. 224-225 = पि. ( marital relation, 33-34), M. 9. 357-358=N. ( marital relation, 65-66 in reverse order), M. 9. 3=N. ( dayabhaga 31), M. 9. 216 =N. (dayabhiga 44), M. 8. 267-269 =N. (vakparusya 15-17), M. 9. 270-272 = N. (vakparusya 22-24 ), M. 8. 281-284 = N. (danda-parusya 26-29 ), M. 4. 87 = दि, ( prakirnaka 44 ) Narada ( rnadana 158 ) ‘Srotriyas-tapasa vrddha ye ca pravrajita narah | asaksinas-te vacanan natra heturudahrtah’ has probably Manu 8.65 in view where we read ‘na saksi. . . na Srotriyo na lifgastho na satigebhyo vinirgatah’. Besides these there are several cases where Narada closely agrees with Manu though the verses are not identical, e. g. Narada ( sthasa 19 ) may be compared with Manu 9. 271 and Narada ( appendix on theft, verses 1-4.) may be compared with Manu ( 9. 256-260 ). These facts establish that Narada is based on a version of Manu that was essentially the same as the extant text of Manu, though there was some difference here and there. Narada contains several verses that occur in the Mahabharata. Forexample, Santi rrr. 66 = N. ( vyavahara-matrka 72 ),359 Udyoga 35. $8 = N. (sabha, verse 18 ), Udyoga 35. 31-32 = N. (1. 202-203). There are several cases where the text of Kautilya agrees with 859 aaag इश्यते FI संयोतो इन्यवाडिव । म aS विदयते व्योम्नि न Wats हुताशनः ॥ ह्व, 2, 26. $02 History of + Narada.3© In some of these cases the agreement is almost word for, word.3 Though Narada is based on Manu, he differs in several essential matters from Manu. We have seen the difference between them in the nomenclature of the titles of law. Manu only casually mentions the ordeals of fire and water (8.114), while Narada enumerates five kinds of ordeals, describes them at length and adds two more viz. taydula-bhaksana and taptamasa ( ynadana, verses 259-348 ). He allows Niyoga ( marital relation, verses 80-88 ), while Manu strongly condemns it. He allows remarriage of women ( Narada, marital relation, 97 ), while Manu is against it. Manu mentions seven kinds of slaves ( 8. 415 ), while Narada raises their number to fifteen ( abhupety4susris4, verses 26-28 ) ; Manu con- demns gambling outright (9. 221-228 ), while Narada allows it under state control and as a source of revenue ; Narada is further far more systematic than Manu and is full of divisions and _ subdivi- sions. For example, he divides property intothree kinds, each of which is again subdivided into seven varieties ( rnadana 44-47 ) ; Narada divides the law of gift into four sections, which are further subdivided into 32; he subdivides the eighteen titles into 132 ( vyavahara-matrka I. 25 ) There are a few points which are almost peculiar to Narada, such as the fourteen kinds of impotent persons (stripurmsayoga 11-13), the three kinds of punarbhas and four kinds of svairinis (ibid. verses 45-52 ). Narada is probably later than Yajnavalkya. Yaj. knows only five kinds of ordeals, while Narada knows seven and the former's treatment of them is not so exhaustive as Narada’s. The rules of judicial procedure in Narada are more systematic and exhaustive than those of Yaj. Narada contains more definitions than Yaj. In some respects however Narada is more conservative than Yaj. For example, Narada nowhere recognises the rights of the widow to † ०० व ग गण्य a रि 860 Compare कोरटिस्य, धमस्थीय, chap. I, verses at the end with ajqq, व्यवहार मानका 18४ ohap., verses 2, 10-11, 39-40. $61 धर्मश्च व्यवहारण्य BRA राजरा।सनम्‌ | चतुष्पाद्‌ ष्यवहारोयमु्तरः Tarp ॥ तत्र सत्ये स्थितो धर्मो व्यवहारस्तु साक्षिषु । जरित्र पुस्तकरणे राजाज्ञायां तु शासनम्‌ ॥ MIT, भ्यवहारमातका I. 10-11; the first half in each verseis the same in © कोटिल्य, 84, The Naradasmeti 208 succeed to her deceased husband as Yaj. does; Narada gives no rules about the succession of gotrajas and bandhus as Yaj. does. Ina few respects Narada agrees with the views of Manu instead of with Y4j., such as allowing a Brihmana to marry a $adra woman. Narada regards sexual intercourse with a pravrajita (female ascetic ) as a mortal sin ( striputhsayoga 74-75 ), while both Manu (8. 363 ) and Yaj. (II. 293 ) treat it lightly. Taking all these things into consideration it may be said that Narada flourished nearly at the same time as or somewhat later than Y4j. Narada contains several rare words such 35 र" hodha” (in vyavaharamatrka I. 27, meaning ‘one’s property when lost or stolen’). He gives expression to certain principles of law and politics, such as that a man is master of his own house, in other words, a man’s house is his castle 53५ he highly eulogises the office of king, almost assigning it a divine origin and exhorts the people to obey and honour even a weak and undeserving king.3®} Mr. Jayasval sees in this and in the fact that Narada speaks of dinara while the Mrccha- katika speaks of nanaka indications that Narada belongs to the fourth century, is later than the drama, is propping up the authority of a new dynasty and flourished under the Imperial Guptas ( C. W. N. vol. 17, p. ccLxxxv ). He regards a person as minor till the sixteenth year.36+ This limit was probably first fixed by Narada. Narada further boldly says that in case of conflict between dharma- Sastra and usages, the latter have to be followed, as they are directly observed.3°s As Narada’s is regarded as an authoritative smrti by Visvarapa, Medhatithi and other later writers and as Asahaya, whois mentioned by name in the commentary of Visvarapa, wrote a comment on 362 च्रयः स्वतन्ध्रा ठोकेस्मिम्याजावार्यस्तथव च । प्रतिवण च सर्वेषां वणानां स्वे गृहे गही || ऋणादान $2. This idea occurs in शान्तिपर्व 321. 147 “सर्वः स्वे स्वि गृही राजा". 363 Vide sftates verses 20-22 aia संचरत्येष भमो साक्षात्‌ सदस्रदक्‌ । न तस्या- जञामतिक्रम्य PAGEL परजाः कचित्‌ ॥... नियेलोपि यथा श्रीणां ea एव पतिः सदा । परजानां विगणो्येवं yer एव मजापतिः ॥ S64 बाल आ Sag वर्षात्‌ पोगण्ड इति शस्यते । परतो व्यवहारज्ञः श्वतन्प्रः पिनरो विना ॥ ऋणादान २536, 365 धरमशास्लविरोधे तु युक्तियक्तो विधिः स्मतः । SUTRA हि यद्धदान्धमस्तेनावहीयते ॥ व्यवहुरमातुका ५0, 204 History of Dharmatasira Narada, the Naradasmrti must be older by some centuries than the 8th century, the latest date to which Asahiya can be assigned Baha in his Kadambari compares the royal palace to Naradiya.3* Ordinarily Naradiya standing by itself would denote the Narada- “ purana ( compare Visnu-purana 3. 6. 21 where we have the form Naradiya for the purana ). The Narada-purina ( Venkatesvara Press edition, Bombay ) contains, however, no treatment of rija- dharma. Bana may have intended a violent pun, meaning ‘the palace where the duties of kings were being expounded ( avarnyamana ), like the Naradiya in which rijadharma has not been set forth (avarnyamana).’ European scholars like Dr. Jolly and Buhler hold that Bana refers to the extant Naradasmsti. But on this explanation also the difficulty is not entirely got over. The extant Narada can hardly be described as a treatise on rajadharma. It deals only in an indirect way with one aspect of the king’s duties and is rather con- cerned with vyavahara and the duties of the subjects towards each other from the strictly legal point of view. If we turn to the Maha- 01127414 and other works, we shall find that rajadharma meant some- thing different from what is treated of in the Naradasmrti. There- fore Bana’s reference to the Naradiya is of a doubtful character. The Rajaniti-ratnakara of Candesvara frequently quotes Narada on politics( pp. 3, 13, 79 ). These quotations are not traced in the printed Narada. Therefore it is highly probable that Bana refers to a distinct work of Narada on politics which has not yet been recovered The Vyavaharamatrka of Jimatavahana and the Parasara-MAdha- viya ( vol. III, part I, p. 203 ) quote a verse from Narada, the latter half of which is the same as the latter half of a verse in the Vikramorvasiya.367 The doctrine attributed to Narada is found in ५2]. (II. 20 ) and the Visnudharmasatra, ( 6. 22 ) but not in the same words. Unfortunately the date of Kalidasa is far from being universally accepted, but the fourth or first half of the sth century is often accepted as the probable date. There is further diffi- 366 « नारदीयमिवावण्यंमानराजधमंम्‌ ( THES ) p. 91 of Peterson's ed 367 अनेकाथाभियुक्तेन सव॑द्रभ्यापलापिना | विभावितेकदेशेन देयं यदभियुज्यते ॥ aap (on याज्ञ. 7. 20), TATA Of जी Pp. 310-11; दंस प्रयश्छ मे कान्तां गतिरस्यास्त्वया हृता । विभाविते ... युज्यते ॥ विक्रमोर्वशीय 10. 17 (Pandit’s ed), $6. The Naradasmrti 205 culty in the fact that the text of the Vikramorvasiya has been largely tampered with. If the verse is a genuine part of the drama, it seems natural to suppose that Kalidasa turns a well-known legal maxim to a somewhat humerous use. It is hard to suppose that Narada would borrow the words of a dramatist for setting forth a legal\ maxim. This would pushyback the date of Narada far beyond the sth century. Narada in two places uses the word ^" dinara”, once in the sense of a golden ornament and again as a coin or unit of value also called ‘‘suvarna.” In this last case he says that ^ dinara is equal to 48 Karsipanas or twelve dhinakas.” Jolly ( R.u, $, p. 23 ) thinks that Indian dinaras can scarcely be older than the 2nd century A. D., although in the times of the Indo-Scythian kings coins of the weight of dinara occur. Therefore Jolly is of opinion that Narada is laterthan 300 A. D. Winternitz ( History of Indian Literature, vol. II. p. 27160. 4 ) follows him in this assumption that all Sanskrit works in which the word dinara occurs must be later than the 2nd or 3rd century A. D. It may be that the golden dinaras most numerously found in India belong to the 2nd and 3rd centuries A.D. But as Keith points out (J. R. A. S. 1915 p. 504) Jolly’s assumption is wrong and the introduction of dindras into India need not be later than the beginning of the Christian era. Golden dindras were first coined in Rome in 207 B.C. and the oldest Indian pieces corresponding in weight to the Roman Denarius were struck by Indo-Scythian kings who reigned from the first century ए, €. ( ५५. B. p. 44). Therefore there is nothing to prevent us from holding that Narada flourished in the first centuries of the Christian era, i.e. between 100 and 300 A. D. Mr. Jayasval assigns him to the 4th century A. 0. and after the Mrcchakatika. Most scholars would not be prepared to assign to the Mrcchakatika so early a date as the 3rd century A.D. Besides Mr. Jayasval builds his theory on very slender foundations. Because the drama employs the word nanaka and Narada speaks of dinara only, no chronological conclusion as to the priority of the one to the other can be drawn. After both words became current in the language, one author, though later, may employ one word, while another, though earlier, may employ the other. 868 मणयः Garment दीनारादि हिरण्मयम्‌ । मुकाविद्रुमशङ्गायाः wer: स्वामिगामिनः ॥ नारद्‌, भ्यवहारमातृका 71. 3५; काषापणोण्डिका गेया ताश्चतस्नस्तु धानकः । तद्‌- द्वादश Tareq दीनाराख्यः स एव च ॥ परिशिष्ट verse 60. 206 History of Dharmaéastra It is difficult to say anything as to the home of Narada, In the appendix on theft Narada in one place says that in the south a silver karsipana is current, that in the east it is equalto twenty panas and that he does not follow the standard of karsipana current j'in the land of the five rivers.369 From these data and from the fact that the oldest mss. of Narada come fram Nepal and that an old commentary on Narada in Newari was composed in Nepal, Dr. Jolly conjectures that Narada’s home was to be sought in Nepal. This is all pure guess-work. There is no reason why Narada could not have hailed from central India. The places where the oldest and best mss. of a work are found can hardly ever be indications of the original home of an ancient author. Bhamaha is by common consent a Kashmirian writer on Poetics, but the only mss. of: his work so far found come from southern India. Prof. Dr. Bhandarkar (Carmichael Lectures 1918, p. 90), probably following the Nayacandrika, hazards the conjecture that the writer called Pisuna cited in the Kautiliya is another name of Narada. Beyond the bare fact that Narada is often credited in the puranas with the role of instigating feuds and quarrels and that the word pisuna means ‘‘wicked, back-biter’, there is nothing to support this identification. A Jyotir-Nirada is quoted by Bhattoji in his commentary on the Caturvirhsatimata ( p. 11 ). A Brhan-Nirada is quoted by Raghunandana and a Laghu-Narada in the Nirnayasindhu and the Sarhskara-Kaustubha. In the Mahabharata several opinions are attributed to Narada. Onc of them condemns the eating of flesh.37° The first half of the last verse is the same as Manu $. 52. Narada is credited with having divided utpitas ( portents ) into three varieties.37'_ Narada is said to have held the view that one must always be active.37?_ It appears that all these views are taken from some work or works of a Nirada. 369 कार्षापणो दुक्षिणक्यां fara रोप्यः saa । पणर्नियद्धुः पूर्वस्यां ute पणाः स त॒ ॥... पाश्चनयाः प्रदेशे त॒ Be या व्यावहारिकी । काषौपणधमाणं तु निबदुमिह ने- तया ॥ चोथप्रतियेधप्रकरण 57 and 5. 370 स्वमांसं परमसिन यो वर्धयितुमिच्छति । नारदः पराह धमौत्मा नियतं सोधसीदति ॥ अनुशासन 115. 14. | 371 उत्पानांखिविधान्‌ प्राह नारदो भगवानृषिः । दिर्याश्येवान्तरिक्षांश्च पार्थिवाश्च पितामह ॥ सभ] 46. 8-9 972 तद्नत्करमैव कर्तव्यमिति होव।च Fez: । उयोगपृवं ५9, $7. Brhaspat $07 The first is probably taken from Narada’s version of the Manusmyjti of which the puranas speak as stated above ( note 270 ). For Asahaya the commentator of Narada vide section 58 below. 37. Brhaspati Brhaspati as a sitra writer on politics has been dealt with above (section 26). In this section Brhaspati the jurist will be spoken of. The complete smyti of Brhaspati on law has not yet been discovered. It will be, when discovered, a very precious monument of ancient ‘India, exhibiting the high-water mark of Indian acumen in strictly legal principles and definitions. Dr. पाला collected together 84 verses ascribed to Brhaspati in the legal treatises of Aparirka and others with German translation and notes (Leipzig, 1879) and Dr. Jolly collected about 711 verses of Brhaspati on law and translated them in the Sacred Books of the East ( vol. 33 ) Yaj. (I. 4-5) enumerates Brhaspati among the writers on dharma, but he is probably referring to Brhaspati’s work on politics. The com. on the Nitivakyamrta (7. 7) quotes the first verse of Brhaspati’s Nitisastra. We saw above how Brhaspati closely follows the extant Manu- smrti, how he pointedly refers to the text of Manu (notes 282-286) and therefore might by analogy be styled a vartikakara of Manu. In many places Brhaspati explains and illustrates the laconic treatment of Manu. Manu (8. 153 ) speaks of four varities of interest ( Cakra, Kala, Karita, and Kayika), but does not explain these terms. Brhaspati explains them clearly.373 Manu ( 8. 49 ) enumerates five modes of recovering a debt (dharma, vyavahira, chala, Acarita, bala ) but leaves them unexplained ; Brhaspati devotes several verses to the explanation of these terms ( vide Kulluka on Manu 8. 49). Brhaspati gives elaborate rules regarding partnership. Brhaspati enumerates nine ordeals (of fire, water, poison, balance, 1064, taptamasa, tandulas, dharmadharma, phala); while Manu barely alludes to two. Manu devotes only three verses to sarhvidvyatikrama (8. 219-221 ), but Brhaspati must have devoted at least a score of verses to this topic, as Aparirka alone quotes 17 verses of Brhaspati on this title ee 873 Vide eggs on मन्‌ 8.153; ताता स्वरूपमाह बहस्पतिः | कायेका कायक्षंयक्ता मस- ग्राह्या च कालिका । बदवेद्धिश्चकरवृ दधिः कारिता ऋणिना कृता ॥ 208 History of Dharmatastra The order in which the topics of law appeared in Brhaspati can be settled with tolerable certainty from the quotations in Apararka, Vivadaratnakara, Viramitrodaya and others works. It was as follows :—the four stages of a law-suit, proof (kriya, human of three sorts and divine ), witnesses ( of 12 kinds ), documents (ten kinds), bhukti ( possession ), ordeals (nine), 18 titles, rnadana, niksepa, asvamivikraya, sarhbhiya-samutthana, dattapradanika, abhyupetya- Susriisa, vetanasya-anapakarma, svamipalavivada, sarhvid-vyatikrama, vikriyasarhpradana, simavivada, parusya ( of two kinds ), sahasa (of three kinds ), strisarhngrahana, stripurhdharma, vibhaga, dyita, samahvaya, prakirnaka (otherwise called ‘ nrpasgraya vyavahara, ’ wrongs for which proceedings are set on foot by the king ). Brhaspati was probably the first jurist to make a clear distinction between civil and criminal justice.37# He divided the eighteen titles into two groups, those springing from wealth ( 14 titles )and those springing from injury to beings ( 4 titles ). This distinction was probably dimly perceived by even Gautama, when he says that in disputes based on injury there is no hard and fast rule about witnesses (i.e. about their interest in the subject of dispute ).375 Brhaspati like Narada lays down the rule that a legal decision should not be arrived at merely on the basis of astra and that whena decision is devoid of reasoning, there is loss of dharma, for even a good man may be held to be a bad one or what is good may be held to be sinful in a judicial proceeding, just as Mandavya was held to bea thief on a decision without thoughtful reasoning.}7° Brhaspati gives such elaborate definitions and rules about procedure from the filing of the plaint to the passing of the decree that he can very well stand comparison with modern legislators on the same subjects. 974 तदाह बृहस्पतिः । द्विपदो ष्यवहार्य धनष्तासमुद्धवः | Rare हिसामूट- भ्यतु्विंधः ॥ ब्यवद्भरमातृका Of जीमूतं ° 7. 277 ; vide also स्म॒तिच० ( ध्व, 2.9 ) ‹ पार्ष्ये द्वे वधश्येव पर्मीसंग्रहस्तथा | Pass चत्वारि पदान्याह य॒हस्पतिः १. 375 न पीडाकृते निबन्धः । गो. ध. सु. 13. 9 on which हरदत्त says ‘Wigner हिंसा- विषये । साक्षिणां निबन्धो न निरुष्यः। अर्थसंबन्धादि न किंचिदपि दूषणे भवति.।' 976 केवलं शास्लमाधित्य न केभ्यो हि निर्णयः । ghegia विचारे तु धमद्मनिः प्रजायते ॥ जोरोऽचोरो साध्वसाधु जायेत ग्यवहारतः। युक्तिं विना विचारेण माण्डव्यश्योरतां गतः ॥ quoted by अपराकं ०० याज्ञ. II. 1 ; compare नारद्‌ ( ब्यवहारमातका chap. I. ५४ ) 3 यात्यचोरोपि बोरत्वं चार्यायात्यचोरताम्‌ । अचोरण्बोरतां प्रातो भाण्डल्यो ` BATA: ॥ For the story of माण्डम्य, who kept silent, vide Adiparva 107, $7. Brhaspah $09 Narada and Brhaspati agree very closely in several respects For example, both speak of three kinds of proof, four parts of a judicial proceeding, almost the same defects of plaints, four kinds of answer, four divisions of the law of gift and their subdivisions, five modes of recovering debts, four kinds of sahasa. We have seen that Narada departs from Manu in several essen- tial matters. On the other hand Brhaspati follows Manu very closely. But he too differs on some points from Manu,.for example, we saw above how Brhaspati dissents from Manu on the question of the divi- sibility of clothes &c. (note 285). He appears to differ from Manu as to the maximum interest allowed on corn, fruit, wool and_ beasts of burden.377, Manu and Nirada are both silent as to the widow’s right to succeed to her deceased husband’s estate. But Brhaspati agreeing with Yajiavalkya makes her the first heir of her sonless husband.378 . These considerations make it clear that Brhaspati is certainly later than Manu and Y4j. It is difficult to state his exact relation- ship to Narada. He agrees more closely with Manu than Narada does, but in some respects such as definitions and the rights of women he shows great advance over Nirada. So he is probably a contemporary of or not much later than Narada. He employs the word nanaka.37? He defines a dinara, also called ^ suvarna =, as equal to twelve dhanakas and says that a dhanaka was equal to four andikas, an andika being a copper pana weighing a karsa and bear- ing a stamp.38° This agrees with what Narada says about dinira. 377 हिरण्ये द्विगुणा ase वखकुप्यके । धान्ये चतुरीणा पोक्ता शदे TA ठवेषु च ॥ युहस्पाते quoted by HATS ०" यान्न II. 39; compare मनु 8. 151 378 आम्नाये SATA च लोकाचारे च सूरिभिः । शरीराधं स्मरता भार्या पुण्यापुण्यफले समा ॥ यस्य॒ नोपरता भायां SET तस्य जीवति । जीवत्यधशरीरेथं कथमन्यः समाञ्ुयात्‌ ॥ सदुल्यर्वियमानेस्तु पितुभ्रात॒सनाभिभिः। असुतस्य प्रमीतस्य पत्नी तद्भगहञरिणी ॥ बृहस्पति ५१००४०५ by अपराकं ०४ याज्ञ. 7. 185. The Mit, has the last verse. $79 Scraqarrsea परकेनाणकवेदिमिः ॥ अपरां on यङ्क, IT. 259 ; fa, ₹, P. 711 and ite p. 38 $80 Vide note 568 above. arrestee ag Raa: कार्षिकः पणः । स एव चाण्डिका ` ` ` ` प्रोक्ता वाश्यतस्रश्त॒धानका ॥ ता Ia सवणेस्त्‌ दीनाराख्यः स एव त्‌ । Tze quoted in श्यतिष् ® p. 99, वि, ₹, », 667. कात्यायन्‌ is quoted on sama page by the eAferqe for a similar definition. ४, D. 27 210 History of Dharivaégastra Dr. Jolly ( S. B. E. vol. 33 p. 276) assigns Brhaspati to the 6th or {५ century A.D. But this is much later by several centuries than € evidence warrants. Katyayana was looked upon as an authori- jtative writer along with Narada and Brhaspati by Visvarapa and ` Medhatithi. This position he could not have attained in a century or two. 30. he cannot be Placed _larer_tuan,_te 60 century than the 6th centu Katyayana 1 several places quotes Brhaspati as an authority Apararka quotes Katyayana as saying that according to Brhaspati pastures, ways, clothes that are worn on the body, debts ( or books for use according to others ) and what is set apart for religious purposes should not be partitioned.3*: Katyayana says that accord- ing to Brhaspati, that wealth which a man acquires by means of his learning after refuting an opponent in a contest with a stake for the winner is styled ‘‘ vidyadhana ” and is not liable to partition3® $ and what is acquired through valour &c. by persons that were taught in the family or learnt under their father should be parti- tioned among the brothers, according to Brhaspati. If a man falsely denics his liability and if only a part of the claim is brought home to him, then he should be made to pay the whole.3*3 That the statement of a witness may be relied upon on a matter under his direct perception owing to his being near the plaintiff and the defen- dant and not otherwise; so says Brhaspati.3*+ The foregoing examples show that Katyayana looked upon Brhaspati as an autho- rity who must therefore have flourished several centuries before. Therefore Brhaspati cannot be placed later than the 4th century ^. ०, As he knew the extant Manusmrt, was later than Yaj. and probably than Narada Brhasp ati must have flourished between 200 and 400 A. D. This conclusion is strengthened by the fact that Visvarapa quotes, without making any difference, prose and verse passages of Brhaspati and thereby shows that in his opinion the jurist Brhaspati १० 7 1 OE ee 7 ND | SRN eC Me 881 गोप्रचारश्च रण्या च वं यं्ौङ्गयोजितम्‌ । प्रयोज्यं न विभज्येत धमां च बहस्पतिः ॥ वि, र्‌, ४, 505 and RAAT ०० याज्ञ IT. 119 88? परं निरस्य awed वियात श॒तपुवकम्‌ । वियाधनं तु altars विभाज्यं बहस्पतिः ॥ quoted by अपराकं on या II. 119; OT. Ar ITI. 2. p. 559 86 सवांपलापं यः कृत्वा मिथ्यास्पमपि संवदेत्‌ । सर्वमेव तु द्य स्यादिति युक्तो षडस्पतिः॥ a अर्थिपस्यर्थिसानिभ्यादनुरतं तु यद्भवेत्‌ | aged साक्षिणो वाक्वमन्यथाह अहस्पतिः ॥ quoted in the ष्यवहारमालुका of जीमूत, p. 917, 87, Brhaspati 211 (in verse ) was identical with the political writer Brhaspati and was a very ancient writer in his day. Medhatithi (on Manu 9. 153) quotes the verse “‘na pratigrahabhir ” (ascribed to Brhaspati by others ) as Smptyantara. Brhaspati is cited in a few cases as referring to his own views in the third person3®s ; some- times he uses the first person also.38* Nothing can be said about his country at present. In a well-known passage Brhaspati refers to the usages of the southern people, of the people in the MadhyadeSa, of the eastern and northern people.3®7 In a striking and beautiful passage Brhaspati compares vyavahara with yajiia,3® the king with Visnu, the successful party with the sacrificer and the defeated party with the victim, the plaint and the reply to food and the pratijfia to the sacrificial offering ( prepared from food ), the Sastras to the three Vedas and the sabbyas to the priests in a sacrifice. Brhaspati seems to have been very fond of such long-drawn metaphors. 3®9 The Smrticandrika quotes about seventy verses of Brhaspati in the Ahnika portion and about forty on Sraddha. In the later works like the Parisara~Madhaviya, the Nirnayasindhu and Sarhskara- Kaustubha, the number of verses quoted from Brhaspati is much larger than even those quoted by the Smrticandrika. Those verses are quoted on such sarhskdras as purhsavana, namakarana, caula, upanayana, vivaha and also on 4Sauca and purification of dravyas. Even the Mitaksara quotes several verses of Brhaspati on matters ee 0 ee वक व 4 ee ~~ कन्‌ ee ~= a ee - ~~ ~~ ०0 (नोनि 885 ताडनं बन्धनं चेव तथेव च विडन्नकम्‌ । एष दण्डो हि शूद्रस्य नार्थदण्डो बृहस्पतिः ॥ परा, मा, TL. 1. 2. 212; स्म॒तिच° 586 एष दण्ड; समाख्यातः पुरुषापेक्षया मया | १०५०४०० by अपराकं ०० याज्ञ. II. 211. 987 squat दाक्षिणव्येमातुलस्य सुता द्विजः । मध्यदेशे कमेकराः शिल्पिनश्च गवाशचिनः ॥ मत्स्यादा् नराः पूर्वै न्यमिचाररताः कियः। उत्तरे मयपा नायः स्पृश्य नृणां रजस्वलाः ॥ वीर, ०.२०, sq, न, &९6 888 यज्ञे संपूज्यते विष्यान्यवहारे महीपतिः । जवी तु यजमानोश्न जितः पशुरुदाहृतः ॥ एर्वपक्षोच्तरावायं प्रतिज्ञा च हविः स्मरता । धरया शास्ाणि सभ्यास्त॒. ऋत्विजो दक्षिणा- दने ॥ quoted in eq घा, ०. 884 $80 ०. &. विपो धर्महुमस्यादिः स्कन्द्शाज्ञे महीपतिः । सचिवाः पृञ्नपुष्पाणि फलं न्यायेन पालनम्‌ ॥ यशो वित्तं फलरसो मोगोपग्हपूजनम्‌ । ७जेयत्वं sedis: स्वगे स्थानं TUPI ॥ वीर्‌ ० p14. Compare नारद्‌ (ष्य, ay, 7, 33 for the sgcong verse ), 218 History of Diarntatdstra other than vyavahara. For example the Mit. on Y4j. I. 210 quotés a verse of Brhaspati that a nivartana ( of land) is equal to 30 dandas in area ( danda being seven cubits in length) and tes nivartanas are equal to a gocarma9° On Yaj. Il. 17 the Mit. ` quotes two verses of Brhaspati about impurity on birth or death &c. On Yaj. III. 21 the Mit. cites the definition of degantara given by Brhaspati.39! On Yaj. III. 24 the Mit. quotes Brhaspati’s opinion that the period of mourning on the death of one’s maternal grandfather, Aicarya or Srotriya is three days. On ४३). III. 253 the Mit. quotes Brhaspati’s rule as to priyascitta for consciously drinking wine Vide also Mit. on Yaj. III. 30, 250, 254, 260, 290 for othe, quotations from Brhaspati The foregoing therefore establishes that Brhaspati was known at least to the Mi-and later writers as an expounder in verse not only of vyavahara but also of other topics of dharma as well. As over a thousand verses of Brhaspati ( including about 800 on vyavahara ) are quoted it appears that his work must have been an extensive one comprising several thousand verses Such a work of Brhaspati has yet to be recovered The Mit. on Y4j. III. 261 quotes a Vrddha-Brhaspati on the nine varieties of sarnkara.393 Kullika on Manu ( 9. 181) cites a verse of Vrddha-Brhaspati about the eleven subsidiary sons (vide note 283 above, where the verse is ascribed to Brhaspati). Hemadri ( Caturvarga vol. III, part 2, p. 472 ) quotes a Jyotir-Brhaspati on the prohibition of a graddha on the thirteenth tithi of the dark half. Apararka on Y4j. II. 3-4 quotes three verses from Vrddha-Brhaspati 500 संपहृस्तेन दण्डेन fg quar निवतेनम्‌ । दृश तान्येव गोचभे TTT श्वं महीयते ४ A similar verse occurs in the यृहृस्पतिस्मति ( Jivananda part I. 0. 645) where the reading is दशहस्तेन 391 महानयन्तर यश्र गिरिवा व्यवधायकः । वाचो यत्र विमियन्ते तदू वेशान्तरमुष्यते ॥ देशान्तरं वदन्त्येके ष्टियोजनमायतमू | अत्वारिशद्रदन्त्यन्ये yet तथव च ॥ 392 सुरापाने कामशृते ज्वलन्तीं at विनिक्षिपेत्‌। मुखे तया aoe मृतः शुद्धिमवाच्नुषात्‌ & 303 यथाह वुदबहस्पतिः । एकशययासमं पद्धिमोण्डपडधन्नमिभ्रणम्‌ । याज योनिस्तथा च सह भोजनम्‌ । नवध संकर रो न कनया, ay a ascribed to agent by the गृहस्थरत्नाकर (folio 180a of 7.0, $7, Brhaspati 213: about the derivation of the word “prad-vivaka” and one on the punishment for sabhyas who take bribes. Three of these verses are ascribed to Brhaspati in the Parasara-Madhaviya and other works and one of them to Katyayana in the Vyavahara—matrka, 38, Katyayana Narada, Brhaspati and Katyayana form a triumvirate in the realm of the ancient Hindu Law and procedure. The work of Katyayana on vyavahara, like that of Brhaspati, has yet to be recovered, The following account is based on the quotations from Katyayana contained in about a dozen works from Visvarapa to the Viramitrodaya. Katyayana is enumerated as one of the expounders of dharma by Sankha-Likhita, Yajiiavalkya (I. 4-5) and Paragara. A Katya. is quoted as an authority in the Baudhayanadharmasitra (I. 2. 47). A Srautasitra and Sraddhakalpa of the white Yajurveda are ascribed to Katyayana. Katyayana appears to have taken Narada and Brhaspati as his models in the order and treatment of the subjects to be dealt with in vyavahara. He closely follows both the writers in terminology and technique. On_ several points he presupposes Narada and expounds and elucidates the latter’s dicta. For example, Narada (Intro. chap. I. ro-11 ) lays down that vyavahara has four padas, each later one prevailing over the preceding, viz. dharma, vyavahara, caritra, rajaSdsana ( note 361 ) and then Narada very briefly in one verse explains these four terms. Katyayana on the other hand devotes at least nine verses to the elucidation of the rule as to each succeeding one prevailing over its predecessor.39* Narada contains very little on the topic of stridhana ( dayabhaga chap. verses 8-9 ). He merely enumerates the six kinds of stridhana and then lays down the rule of succession. Katyayana’s treatment of stridhana has attained classical rank. It-appears that he was probably the first to carefully define the several kinds of stridhana (such as adhyagni, adhyavahanika, pritidatta, Sulka, anvadheya, saudayika), to lay down woman’s power of disposal over the several varieties of stri- dhana and to prescribe lines of devolution as to stridhana. The verses on this topic occurring in the nibandhas number about thirty. 9८ Vide प्रा, मा, Vou. ए, part I, pp. 16-17, and वीषु P- 9-10, 120-18}. 214 History of Dharmatietra The leading nibandhas contain only a few quotations from Brhaspati on stridhana. Hence it may be surmised that Katyayana probably was the first smrti writer to give elaborate rules on this topic. It has been already shown (notes 381-384) how Katyayana often quotes the views of Brhaspati. A few more examples may be added here. According to Brhaspati, says Katyayana, when a man who stands surety with others on a joint liability goes abroad, his son would have to pay the whole debt, but if the man dies then the son would be liable for his father’s share only.395 When cattle stray into fields, gardens, houses or cowpens, they may be, according to Brhaspati, caught hold of (by the ear &c.) or beaten.396 According to Brhaspati, a man of the ksatriya, vaisya or Sidra caste may employ one of his own caste to do the work of a dasa (slave or serf ), but even a Brahmana could never employ another Brahmana in the same way.397 ^ About a dozen nibandhas on vyavahara quote about 900 verses of Katyayana on vyavahira, the Smpticandrika alone citing about 600 of them. In these verses Katydyana refers at least a score of times to the views of Bhrgu. It is remarkable that only a few of the views ascribed to Bhrgu are found in the extant Manusmfti. Katyayana says, according to Bhrgu, whatever (ancestral ) wealth was concealed by one coparcener from others, whatever was badly divided should be divided in equal shares when afterwards discovered ( Parisara~-Madhaviya III, p. 566 ). This may well be compared with Manu 9. 215. Katyayana 5055 according to Bhrgu, it is not Brahmana-murder to kill an Atatdyin who is foremost by his austerities, learning and caste. This has in view Manu 8. 360. Kullika distinctly says that Katyayana simply explains the verse of Manu by referring to it as Bhrgu’s. On the other hand there are several places where the views ascribed to Bhrgu find no counterpart in the extant Manu. According to 995 एकच्छायाभ्रिते स्वं TAY भोषिते सुतः । मरते पितरि at परणं न यृहस्पतिः ॥ परा, मा, ITI, p. 251. 396 दचारामविवीतेषु Tey पशुपादिषु । wet तत्पविष्टानां तानं वा बृहस्पतिः ॥ वि, ₹, 7. 241 ® ॐ9 क्षत्रविद्‌ द्रधमेस्तु समवर्णे कदाचन । कारयेद्‌ दासकर्माणि ब्राह्मणं न Agere: ॥ षि. ह; 2. 158, ` . $8. Kaiyayana ` “215 Bhrgu in all sabasas of the worst type the truth should be found out by means of divine proof ( ordeals &c. >) even though there may be witnesses.39® There is nothing in the Manusmrti corresponding with this. According to Bhrgu the ordeals of balance &c. are pres- cribed for those who are suspected to be in league with marauders\. and who have incurred popular censure, but in such cases there is no undertaking ( by the complainant to pay fine ).399 The Manu- smrti has not a word on this point. Household paraphernalia, beasts of burden, cattle, ornaments, slaves should be divided when discovered ; if they are (alleged to be ) concealed, the ordeal of koSa should be resorted to ; so says Bhrgu.4°° Another important circumstance deserves to be noted. Katyayana several times refers to the views of Manu. Katyayana says that the view of Manu was that in certain charges ( such as the commission of mahapatakas ) the ordeals for the accused were to be performed by good ला. +° According to Manu if a woman deserted her son, though he may be able ( to pay ), her stridhana should be seized and the paternal debt should be paid thereout.4°? Manu declared, says Katyayana, that if animals be killed, the offender should offer ( to the owner ) another similar animal or its proper price (note 345 above where Paragara also quotes it as Manu’s view). All these views attributed to Manu by Katyayana are not found in the extant Manusmrti. In certain places Katyayana refers to the views of the Manavas ; €. £. according to the Gargiyas and Manavas if a bribe had already been paid, the person receiving it should be made to repay it and should be fined eleven times as much ;4°3 according to 398 उत्तमेषु च सर्वेषु साहसेषु विचारयेत्‌ । स्रावं दिष्यवृष्ेन सत्सु सा्षिव वे भगः ॥ परा. मा ITI. 2. 90 999 लोकापवादषु्टानां शङ्कितानां च दस्युमिः। तुलादीनि नियोज्यानि न शिरस्तन्न वे मगः॥ ARG, FAT 400 गह्योपस्करवाल्याश्च दोद्याभरणकर्मिणः । दृश्यमाना विभज्यन्ते Sal गुडे्वीन्मनुः ॥ ATs ए. 723 and परा. az, IIL ए. 557 401 एषु aay दिष्यानि परतिषिद्धानि यत्नतः। कारयेन्सम्जनेस्तानि नामिशेस्तं त्यजेन्मनुः ॥ अपराकं 9. 696 who ascribes it to भृगु. The टोडरानन्द्‌ reads त्यजेः. 402 या स्वपुत्रं तु sree समथमपि GR । आहत्य Mea तत्र पिव्यर्णं दोधयेन्मनुः ॥ वि, र्‌, ४. 65. 403 अथ प्रागेव दत्ता स्यात्मापिदु्यस्तथा बलात्‌ । ges चेकादशगुणमाहुगोगीचभानवाः ॥ अपकृ 2. 782; विर्‌. 653 ( which reads अम्भीयमानवाः ). 416 | History of Dharmatistra the Manavas thieves caught red-handed with their booty should be at once banished.4°* As regards both these references, the teaching i the Manusmrti seems to be different ; vide Manu 9. 231 and 270 spectively. These facts about Katyayana’s references to Bhrgu and Manu raise several difficult questions, whether Bhrgu and Manu stand for two entirely different works or for the same work and ;whether he refers to some other version of the Manusmyrti ascribed to Bhrgu. In my opinion he is not referring to two separate works, and that he had before hima version of the Manu- smrti promulgated by Bhrgu but somewhat different from and probably larger than the present Manusmrti. In the nibandhas several verses are ascribed to Katyayana along with Manu, Yajiavalkya and Brhaspati. For example, the well- known verse about the sixfold division of stridhana ( adhyagnya- dhyavahanikam &c. ) is ascribed by the Dayabhaga to Manu and Katyayana. The half-verse “‘varnanamanulomyena dasyam na pratilomatah” is the same in both Yajiiavalkya (II. 183) and Katyayana. The Viramitrodaya ( p. 140 ) ascribes a verse to Brhaspati and Katyayana, in which the opinion of Brhaspati is cited. There is very close agreement between the definitions proposed by the two last writers of dharma, vyavahara, caritra, and rajaSasana. Besides Manu (or Manavas), Brhaspati and Bhrgu, Katyayana cites the views of several other writers on dharma. For Gargyas and Gautama vide notes 403 and 404 above. He says, according to Kausika, powerful robbers were to be guarded by chains of iron, were to be low-fed and were to undergo hard labour for the state till death ( Apararka p. 849 ). He quotes the view of Likhita that where a woman is deprived of food, raiment and dwelling (by her husband’s coparceners ) she would be entitled to demand her own ( stridhana ) and a share from the coparceners. In one case ( Apararka p. 755 ). a verse is cited as Katyayana’s in which Katyayana himself is named ( ParaSaramadhaviya III. p. 235 ). Katyayana contains the same advanced views about law and rules of procedure as are found in Narada and Brhaspati. He is even in a 404 मानवाः सय एवाहुः सहोढानां प्रवासनम्‌ । गोतमानामानिषटं यघ्माण्युष्छेदाद्धिगर्हितम्‌ ॥ वि. २. 382. It is not unlikely that the correct reading is प्रमापणं for yeaa, 28 the immediately following view of गौतमं suggests. The words of aq ०० सहोढं सोपकरणं षातयेद्विजारयमू. $8. Ratyayana 217 advance of these two writers in certain matters, such as definitions in general and the elaboration of rules about stridhana. He gives numerous definitions, such as those of vyavahara, pradvivaka, stobhaka, dharmadhikarana, tirita and anusista, simanta &c. He ५१ seems to have been the first to invent some new terms. For example, he defines paScatkara as a judgment given in favour of the plaintiff after a hot contest between the plaintiff and the defendant, while the term jayapatra is restricted by him to the judgment given on admission by the defendant or a judgment dismissing the suit on various grounds.‘°s He lays down a stringent rule that if a man abandons a ground of defence or attack and puts forward a less cogent one, he would not be allowed to put forward again the stronger ground after a decisive judgment of the court.‘ This resembles the 4th explanation to section 11 of the Indian Civil Procedure Code (1908) about res judicata. The verses about karsapana and dinara quoted above (note 368) from Narada (parisista verses 58-60) are ascribed to Katyayana by the Smpticandrika. The date of Katyayana can be settled only approximately. He is certainly much later than Manu and YaAjiiavalkya. As shown above he presupposes Narada and regarded Brhaspati as a very leading authority on vyavahara. Hence his upper limit is the 3rd or 4th century A. D. Visvariipa quotes eight verses as Katy4yana’s by name (vide on Yaj. II. 5, 6,47, 63, 281 ) on such topics of Vyavahara as the defects of the plaint, the contents of the plaint, the liability for the debts of a deceased person, payments of debts ot honour (satyamkara), punishment for abortion, grievous hurt and homicide of a Brahmana woman. Medhatithi (on Manu 4. 1) ascribes to Katyayana the rule that in case of conflict between the dictates of dharmasastra and arthasastra the king should prefer the former. Medhatithi on Manu (VIII. 216) speaks of Katyayana-satra, appears to quote a portion of it in prose and explains it.4°7 Medhatithi 405 निरस्तास्तु क्रिया यत्न भमाणेनेव वादिना । पर्यात्कारो ater न सर्वासु विधीयते ॥ अभ्यवाद्ादिषहीनेभ्य इतरेषां पदीयते । वृलानुवादसंतिदं Tey स्याव्णयपन्रकमू ॥ स्मृति ०, टोढरानन्द्‌, वीर्‌” 6 frat बलवर्तीं मुक्त्वा gdet योवलम्बते । स जयेवक्रते भ्ये; वनस्तां नाद्यात्‌ क्रियाम्‌ ॥ भिता० ० याज्ञ, 77. 80 } व्य. मा. ए. 281, वीर ° p. 108. 407 ‹ यो वान्यः कस्य जित्कर्मणि धनमाबध्य अधंतो निवतैतेति कात्थायनीये सुभ भममावभ्व आसज्य धनष्ययं कारयित्वा यदि sted निवर्तेत सोपि तदेदित्यनुषङ्गः 0’ H. D. 28. 218 History of Dharmatistra says that Katyayana extended the maxim of the trader carrying merchandise ( bhandavaha-vanik maxim ) to all similar transactions. All known quotations of Katyayana are in verse. When -Medhatithi speaks of a sutra and quotes a portion of it (as ‘‘va” and ‘‘iti” after “‘nivarteta” indicate ) in prose, we must either suppose that he is referring to some other work of Katyayana than the one in verse from which hundreds of verses are cited by other writers or that Katyayana’s work on vyavahara also contains some prose passages. As hardly any other writer quotes a prose passage of Katyayana on vyavahara, the second alternative appears somewhat unlikely. Visvaripa and Medhatithi regarded Katyayana as an authoritative smptikara along with Narada and Brhaspati. This position he could not have attained in less than a few hundred years. Therefore the lowest limit to which Katyayana can te assigned is the 6th century. Hence it may be said that Katyayana flourished between the 4th and 6th century A. D. The Vyavaharamatrka ( p. 307 ) quotes a Brhat-Katyayana on the question of proof. The Dayabhaga mentions a Vrddha-Katyi- yana. The Sarasvativilasa also quotes verses of Vrddha-Katyayana on rescission of purchase and other topics ( p. 320). In the present state of our knowledge it is very difficult to say whether these two are different works. The Caturvarga-cintamani ( vol. III, part 2, p. 657 ) speaks of Upakatyayana. Apararka quotes a verse from sloka-Katyayana which is not found in the Karmapradipa ( Jivananda’s ed. ), but appears to be a summary of a prose passage quoted as Katydyana’s immediately before by Apararka. In Jivananda’s collection of smrtis ( part 1, pp. 603-644 ) there is one of Katyayana in three prapathakas and 29 khandas and about five hundred verses. The same work is printed as Gobhilasmrti in the Anandagrama collection ( pp. 49-71 ). It contains also a few prose passages in the rath, 13th and 14th khandas. The pre- vailing metre is Anustubh, a few verses being in the Indravajra and other metres. The work is styled the Karmapradipa of Katya- yana. The opening verse justifies this name when it states that like a lamp the work will clearly show the mode of performing certain rites treated by Gobhila and other rites which are not clearly eluci- dated.t°® ~The contents of this work are briefly as follows :— how 408 अथातो गोमिलोक्तानामन्येषां चेव कमैणाम्‌ | अस्प शानां विधिं सम्यम्दर्शभिष्ये प्रदीपवत्‌ ॥ 88. Raiyayana 219 to wear the sacred thread; sipping water and touching varioys limbs with water; the worship of Ganesga and fourteen miatrs every rite; kuSas; Sraddha details; consecration of sacred aS . details about aranis, sruc, sruva; rules about cleansing the teeth and bathing; sarhdhya ; pranayama, muttering of Vedic mantras ; tarpana of gods and manes; the great daily yajnas ; who is to offer raddha ; rules about periods of impurity due to death; duties of wife ; §raddhas of various kinds. The Karmapradipa mentions by name several authors. It very frequently cites the views of Gobhila ( pp. 603, 626, 638 ) and Gautama ( pp. 619, 620, 626, 630, 636, 639 ). TheKarmapradipa as the opening verse says is intimately related to the Gobhila Grhya- siitra. It distinctly says that as Gobhila did not dilate upon the details as to time and procedure of goyajiia and vajiyajiia, Katyaiyana dilates upon them. This is borne out by the Gobhila grhya-satra.+% Another*?® passage of Katyayana about the Astakas is based upon the very words of the Gobhila grhya. Frequent reference is made to the views of Vasistha on the worship of Matrs ( p. 605 ), on Sraddha ( pp. 608, 629 ). Vide also p. 642 (28. 16). Among the other authors named are Nirada on the sticks for dantadhavana ९? 615 ), Bhargava ( probably Uganas ) on p. 640, Sandilya and Andilyayana on p. 626. Katyayana is named in several places ( pp. 624, 627, 638 ) and once the first person is used ( asin ८ mamapyetad hrdi sthitam ” p. 643). The Katyayanasmrti quotes the verse of Manu ( III. 70 ) on the five great yajiias. On p. 633 four verses forming the consolation to be offered to the relatives ofa person departed are the same as $}. (III. 8-11) and one verse in the same context occurs in the Mahabharata ( Santiparva 409 Vide p. 638 verses 1-11 of 26th khayda and compare with Gobhilagrhya- attra IIT. 6. 10-15 ( गोयज्ञे पायसश्वरः । ore यजेत पुथणमिन्ब्रमीम्बरम्‌ । ऋषमपुजा । गोयज्ञेनेवाश्वयक्षो ष्यःख्यातः | TATE देवतानामच्नाधिको | गन्धेरभ्यु- क्षण गवाम्‌ 1). | 410 यस्तु शाकादिको होमः कार्योपुषाष्टकावृतः | अन्वष्टक्यं मध्यमायामिति गोभिलगौतमा । वार्केखण्डिश्य सर्वासु कोत्सो मेनेषटकासुच ॥ कात्यायन ० 17. ४4 ( 7. 6९6) ; compare गोभिलगद्य 77. 10. 4-7 "चतुरको हेमन्तः ताः सर्वा; समांसाश्निर्कीरथदिति कोत्सः। ere इस्योद्राहमानिः । तथा गोतमवाकसण्डी । योधमामहायण्यास्तामिखराष्टमी तामपुपाष्केत्याबक्षते । ` r 2%0 History of Dharmaststra 27. 31 and other places 2.4" On p. 631 Katyayana speaks of Rama having performed yajfias taking as his spouse the golden image gf Sita. The question is:—what is the date of this Katyayanasmrti ( Karmapradipa ) and whether it is the work of Katyayana the great jurist. The Mit. (on ४३}. 1. 254 ) quotes a verse as Katya- yana’s which occurs in Jivananda’s text (p. 624 verse 20 ); similarly the Mit. quotes two verscs as Katyayana’s (on ४३}. III. 247 ) which have a place in the Karmapradipa ( Jivananda p. 634 verses 4-5 ). Scores of verses cited as Katyayana’s by Apararka ( on Acara and prayaécitta ) are found in the Karmapradipa. For example, vide Aparirka p. 43 (three verses ) and Karmapradipa ( p. 605, 1110-12), Apararka p. 51 (three verses about samidh ) and Karmapr. ( p. 613, 8. 17-19 ), Apararka p. 135 ( four verses about bathing in rivers ) and Karma. ( p. 615, 10. 5-7 and 14 ), Apararka 0. 532 (four verses on éraddha in which Katyayana himself is cited as an authority ) and Karma. ( p. 624, 16. 16-19 ), Apararka p. 872 ( six verses ) and Karma. ( 21. 2-7 p. 632 ), Apararka p. 1066 ( three verses about an agnibotrin being guilty of mahapataka ) and Karma. ( 23. 4-6 p. 634 ). The Smrticandrika also quotes profuse- ly from Katyayana on 1८014, Sraddha etc. and cites from the Karma~ pradipa by name passages which occur in Jivananda’s edition. The above references show that in the eyes of the Mitaksari and Apararka the Karmapradipa was an authoritative work. Therefore it follows that it must have been composed centuries before the 11th century A.D. It is however remarkable that several quotations ascribed to Katyayana in the Mitaksara, Aparirka and other works are not found in the Karmapradipa. For example, the Mitaksara ( on Y4j. प्रा. 242 ) cites Katyayana’s verse about five varieties of lapses in conduct viz. mahipataka, atipataka, pataka, prasangika, upapataka and on Yaj. II. 260 quotesa verse of Katyayana about what are atipatakas. These are not to be traced in the Karmapradipa printed by Jivananda. Similarly Apararka ( pp. 94-95 ) quotes three verses of Katyayana that are very interesting but are not found in 411 सवं क्षयान्ता Me: पतनान्ताः समुष्ठूय। । संयोगा विपयोगा्ता मरणान्तं ह जीवितम्‌ ४ 83, Kdatytyana 991 Jivananda’s edition.4*? Later works like the Nirnayasindhu, the Sathskaramayokha, the Madanap§arijata quote numerous verses of Katyayana on upanayana, marriage and other sarthskaras which we vainly seek to find in the Karmapradipa. Hence it follows that. there was some large work of Katyayana of which the Karmapradipa is either an abridgment or only a portion. The next question is whether Katyayana the jurist and the author of the Karmapradipa are identical. There are not sufficient data to identify the two. The only fact that points to the identity is that such eminent and early writers as Vijfiinesvara and Apararka appear to make no distinction tetween the two. Besides the Karmapradipa is also an early work. Against this it has to be re- membered that Visvardpa, probably the most ancient of all extant commentators, nowhere quotes Katya4yana on Acari and prayascitta. This absence of quotations is not a very cogent argument; still it raises a doubt in one’s mind whether a work of Katyayana on 20013 and other non-jural topics was known to Visvaripa. The other principal versified smrtis will now be described in ( Sanskrit ) alphabetical order. 39. Angiras From Visvarapa downwards Angiras is quoted very frequently on all topics except that of civil law ( vyavahara ). Angiras is one of the writers on dharma enumerated by Yaj. Visvaripay( on Y4j. I. 9 ) states that according to Angiras a parisad may comprise 121 Brahmanas. On १}. 1, 50 Visvaripa quotes a verse of Angiras that what is done according to one’s own will without following the dictates of SAstra is fruitless.443 On Yaj. III. 248 Visvaraipa says that the vrata called Vajra was prescribed by Angiras for Brahmanas guilty of deadly sins. Visvarapa (on Y4aj. III. 265 ) quotes two verses of Angiras on the prayascitta for killing the wife of a Brahmana who has kindled the sacred fires, for killing wives of 412 वरयित्वा तु यः कब्निलमणश्येलुकषो यद्‌ । रक्तागमाज्लीनतत्य कन्यान्ं दरयहूरम्‌ ॥ पदाय ग्डेष्डुरकं यः कन्यायाः Set तथा । धाया सा वषेमेकं तु देयान्यस्मे विधा- नतः ॥ GU त॒ या कन्या अन्वेनोढ यद्‌ भवेत्‌ । संस्हतापि प्रदेया ENTER पष प्रतिश्चुता ॥ . ५५३ स्वस्वामिभायकृतं कमे यतु धमविवजितम्‌ । करीड़ाकर्मेष बालानां तत्सवं निष्मयोजनम्‌ ॥ 222 History of Dharmatistra other Brahmanas and Ksatriyas and Vaisyas. On Yaj. Ill. 266 he quotes two verses of Angiras laying down prayascitta for killing certain beasts and birds, wherein Angiras himself is mentioned with honour ( bhagavan ). Apararka ( pp. 22-23 ) quotes thirteen verses /from Angiras on the constitution of parisad, wherein such terms as chaturvidya, vitarki, ahgavid, dharmapathaka are explained and the last of which says that a parisad sitting in judgment over those who are guilty of mahapatakas may consist of hundreds. The Mitaksara (on Yaj. I. 86 ) quotes several verses on the practice of sati and ascribes them to both Sankha and Angiras.4'¢ Aparirka (pp. 109, 712 ) quotes four other verses on the same practice, one of which is in the Indravajra metre and another prohibits a Brahmana wife from following that practice. Medhatithi (on Manu. V. 157) quotes the view of Angiras on sati and disapproves of it. The Mitaksara, Haradatta and others quote numerous verses of Angiras on asauca and prayascitta. Haradatta on Gautama (20. 1 ) quotes a verse of Angiras about the seven antyajas.t's Visvarapa( on Y4j. 1. 237) quotes a sitra of Sumantu in which Angirasa is cited as an authority The Suddhi-mayakha quotes a verse of Angiras which relies upon Satatapa.4© The Smrticandrika quotes Angiras on the enumeration of Upasmrtis (vide note 260 above). The Smrticandrika also contains a few prose quotations from Angiras ; the same work cites a verse of Angiras holding the dharmasastra of Manu as the supreme guide.4"7 The Angiras-smrti (in Jivananda part I, pp. 5§4-560) in 7 verses is probably an abridgment. It lays down prayaécittas for various occasions, such as taking food and drink from antyajas, for cruelly beating or causing various injuries to cows. It also lays down various rules for the wearing of the dark cloth ( nilivastra ) by women. It cites Angiras and Apastamba by name. The penultimate verse condemns those who rob women-of their wealth. en | — ES वि GE A 111 11 EE eR 1 1 ot क) 2 1, 1 * ene enn 414 One of them is the wellknown verse fag; sizqiqeiz] ष यानि SANA मानुषे । तावत्कालं वसेत्स्वगं Wale यानुगच्छति ॥ 415 चण्डालः श्वपचः कषत्ता सूतो वदेदिकस्तथा | मागधायोयव चव सपतेन्त्यावसायिनः ॥ 416 सर्वेषामेव वणोनां सूतके मतके तथा । द॒कषाहाच्छद्धिरतेषामि ति शातातपोभ्रवीत्‌ ॥ 417 यदूर्वे मनुना भाक्तं धर्मा्ञमनुत्तमम्‌ । नीहि नत्समतिक्रम्य वचनं हिलमात्मनः ॥ स्मृति” ( RUE ) 89. Argiras There are several mss. in the Deccan College Collection whihe contain a varying number of verses on prayaécitta agreeing more ¢s less with Jivananda’s text. For example, No 53 of 1879-8 contains about one hundred verses, No. 205 of 1882-83 contains 54 verses, while No. 65 of Visrambag collection and No. 83 of 1895- 1902 contain only 32 ; No. 81 of 1884-86 is styled Brhad-Angiras and contains 151 verses, many of which are identical with those in the Calcutta text. | The Mitaksara (on ४३). वा. 277) and the Smrtiratnavali of Vedacarya (1. O. cat. No. 1552 p. 475 ) quote a Brhad-Angiras and the Mitaksara also quotes a Madhyama-Angiras several times (on Yaj. III. 243, 241, 258, and 260 ). 40. Rsyasrnga This is a writer who is frequently quoted on acara, agauca, sraddha, and priyascitta by the Mit., Apararka, Smrticandrika and other works. Apararka ( p. 724 ) quotes as Rsyasrnga’s a verse ascribed to Sankha in the Mitaksara (on ५३}. IT. 119) and other works, which states that when one coparcener recovers with his own efforts family property that was lost to the family, he gets a fourth share of it and the others become sharers :in the rest.4*® The Smrticandrika (I. p- 32 ) quotes ‘ api vasasa vajnopavitarthan kuryat tadabhave पारप sutrena’, which is in prose. 4. Karsnajini This writer is quoted by the Mit. ( ४२}. III. 265 three verses ), Apararka, Smrticandrika and other works mostly on ésraddha. Apararka ( p. 138) quotes a verse from him which enumerates the seven sons of Brahma, Sanaka, Sanandana, Sanitana, Kapila, Asuri, Vodha (?) and Pajicasikha. Apararka ( p. 424 ) quotes a verse which refers to the two signs of the Zodiac, Kanya, and Vrscika. ० 0 42. Carurvimsatimata ‘There are two Mss. of this work in the Deccan College Collection (No 244 of A. 1881-1882 and 111 of 1895-1902). It contains §25 verses. The work is so called because it embodies the essence of the teachings of 24 sages, Manu, Yajiiavalkya, Atri, Visnu, eee ie eget oe 418 caret तु यो मृमिमेकभ्यवुदधरेत्‌ कमात्‌ । Tait तु लमन्तेन्ये ger तु तुरीयकम्‌ ॥ History of Dharmataistra oth/asistha, Vyasa, 15425, Apastamba, Vatsa, प्रद, Guru qu¢) quotes two verses of Pulastya who enumerates eleven intoxicating drinks together with sura as the twelfth.37_ Apararka quotes several verses from Pulastya on sarhdhya, Sraddha, ASauca, duties of yatis, prayagcitta. Apararka quotes two verses from Pulastya propounding the view that a com- bination of jfiana and karma is the correct view.43® The first of these verses is ascribed by him to Yoga-Yajnavalkya elsewhere ( note 336 ). The Smrticandrika quotes about forty verses from Pulastya on ahnika and Sraddha. In one place it quotes Pulastya on the efhicacy of bathing on Sunday, Tuesday, and Saturday.+39 In another place it refers to the japa of Rama, Paragurama, Nrsirhha, Trivikrama. The Danaratnakara of Candegvara cites a prose text from Pulastya on the gift of deer-skin,4#° The Pulastya-smrti must have been composed between 4th and 7th century A. D. 435 स्नातकस्य TATA पच्वापानेभिदयत्निणः । स्वनिवं गहस्थेष शोचकल्पान्नियोजयेत्‌ ॥ faoqaq ०० या. I. 1%. 436 मुन्यन्नं agoredie: मासं क्षत्नियवेश्ययोः । मधुप्रदानं शूद्स्य सर्वेषां चाविरोधि यत्‌ ॥ 437 पानसं द्राक्षमधुकं Me तालमेक्षवम्‌ | मधूत्थं Tene भरेयं नरिकेलजम्‌ ॥ समानानि विजानीयन्मयान्यकादशेव तु । द्वादशं तु सुरामदयं सर्वेषामधमं स्मम्‌ ॥ 438 ज्ञानकर्मसमायोगात्यरं प्राञ्नोति परुषः । एृथग्भावान्न Rene उमे तस्मत्समाशरेयत्‌ ॥ ज्ञानं प्रधानं न तु Sat कम पधानं न तु बुद्िहीनम्‌ । तस्मादुभाभ्यां त मवेत्पसिद्िने ्यकपक्षो विहगः प्रयति ॥ पराकं ० या. 77. 57, p. 911. 489 रण्यज्कारशनेर्वारेः स्नानं कु्वेन्ति ये नराः । व्याधिमिस्ते न पीड्यन्ते ay: केसरिणो यथा ॥ स्मरति ०. 0 अथातः रष्णाजिनविधिं ष्याख्यस्यामः। कार्तिक्यां पौणमास्यां बेशाख्य च बन्द सूयमरहे विषुवयोवां रष्णाजिनं ससरं सशक्रमन्रणं मनोहरम्‌ | MS. No. 114 of 1884-86 from 2096687 College (folio 51a ), 46. Pracetas 999 46. Pracetas Pracetas finds a place among the sages enumerated by Paraéara though not in Yajniavalkya. In both Mit. and Apararka there are passages in prose and verse ascribed to Pracetas on daily duties, graddha, 4sauca, prayascitta. The Mit. ( on ४३}. III. 27 ) quotes a verse from Pracetas saying that workmen, artisans, physicians, male and female slaves, kings, royal officers have not to observe periods of impurity+4' ( on death ), This verse is cited as a smrti by Medhatithi on Manu V. 60 without ascribing it to Pracetas. So Medhatithi looked upon Pracetas as equally authoritative with Manu, Visnu and others. The Mit. (on Yaj. III 20, 263-64), Haradatta (on Gautama 22. 18) and Apararka frequently cite verses from Brhat-Pracetas on agauca and prayascitta. The Mit. and Aparirka also quote verses on the same topics from Vrddha-Pracetas. A few prose quotations from Pracetas are noted in the Smrti- candrika and by Haradatta (on Gautama 23.1 ). 47. Prajapati Prajapati is cited as an authority by the Baudhayanadharmasitra (1. 4. 15 and II. 10. 71 ). Vasistha several times quotes Prajapatya Slokas ( viz. III. 47, XIV 16-19, 24-27, 30-32). It has been shown above that most of these verses are found in the Manusmrti or have close corréspondence with verses of Manu. So it is not unlikely that both the writers of dharmasitras mean Manu by Prajapati. In the Anandagrama collection ( p. 90-98 ) there is a smrti of Prajapati in 198 verses on the various details of sraddha, such as the time, place, the persons authorised to perform, proper food, Brahmanas to be invited etc. The prevailing metre is Anustubh, but there are nine verses in the Indravajra, Upajati, Vasantatilaka ( verse 137 ) and Sragdhara ( verse 96 ). It speaks of Kalpagastra, smytis, dharmagastra, puranas. It contains a verse referring to the Kapya and VrScika ( scorpion ) signs of the zodiac, which is almost the same as a verse of Karsnajini. “1 कारवः शिल्पिनो वेया दासीदासा तथव च । राजानो राजमृत्याश्च aE AT: प्रकीर्तिताः ॥ 980 History of Dharmafasira The Mit. ( on Yaj. III. 25 and 260 ) quotes verses of Prajapati on aSauca and prayascitta. Apararka cites verses of Prajapati on purifi- cation of various substances, sraddha, witnesses, ordeals and ३5४८४. None of these is traced to the printed text of Prajapati. Apararka ( p. 952 ) gives a long prose text of Prajipation the four orders of parivrajakas, viz. kuticaka, bahidaka, harhsa, paramaharhsa. Apararka ( p. 542 ) cites a verse of Laugiksi which refers to the view of Prajapati that the son of a putrika was to offer pindas to his mother by the gotra of his maternal grand-father.442, Apararka, Smticandrika, Paragara-Madhaviya and other works quote several verses of Prajapati on vyavahara. Witnesses are of two kinds, krta and aksta. In this he seems to have followed Narada ( rnadana, verse 149 ). Prajapati lays down the characteristics of valid reply ( uttara ) of the defendant and 00065444 the four varieties of uttara. The Parigara-Madhaviya cites several verses of Prajapati on ordeals. Prajapati recognised the right of the sonless widow to succeed to her husband’s wealth++5 and enjoined on her the duty of offering Sraddha every month and year to her husband’s manes and to honour his relatives. 446 48. Marici This sage 15 relied upon as anauthority by the Mit., Apararka, Smrti- candrika on Ahnika, Asauca, Sraddha, Prayascitta and Vyavahara. Apararka quotes several verses on tarpana one of which speaks of Sun- day.447 Marici disallows bathing in the rivers in the months of Sravana 44४ मातामहस्य गोत्रेण मातुः पिण्डोद्कक्रियाम्‌ । कुर्वीत TET एवमाह प्रजापतिः॥ पराके. 443 साक्षी द्विभेदो Aka: रुत एकोऽपरोऽकृतः | रेख्यारूढः GA हेयः मुक्तकोऽरूत उच्यते ॥ TIT 7. 666, स्मृतिच ° (ब्य. ?. 80 reads उत्तरोऽङ्त ). 448 स्मतिच ° ( sq, P. 42-43 ), परा. मा, vol. JIL. p. 69-78. 445 पूर्व प्रमीत िहोत्रं मरते भर्तरि तद्धनम्‌ । लभेत्‌ पतिता नारी धमं एष सनातनः ॥ 446 जङ्गमं सथावरं टेम SY धान्यरसाम्यरम्‌ | आदाय दापयेष्छादटं मासरसंवत्सरादिकम्‌ ॥ पितृष्यगुरंदोहित्रान्‌ भतेस्वस्रीयमातृलान्‌ । पुजयेत्कल्यपूर्ताम्यां वृद्वानाथातिथीस्तथा ॥ स्मतिचं 0 ( p. 291 ); Tt. Fl. vol, III. p. 536. 447 सन्या रविवारे च गही जन्मदिने तथा । मस्थपुश्रकलशरार्थी न कु्ांिलतर्पणम्‌ ॥ BAS Dp. 192; स्मृतिच* ( आद्धिक 0. 125 ), 48. Marte 391 and Bhadrapada.44® 206 made a very near approach to the modern conceptions underlying the Transfer of Property Act. ‘Completeness is not attained without writing in the transactions of sale, mortgage, partition and gift of immoveable property’.49 If a buyer purchases a chattel before a row of merchants and to the knowledge of the king’s officers and in broad daylight, he is free from blame and gets back his money ( if the thingturns out to be another’s property ), while if the price (paid by a buyer for a chattel) cannot be recovered ( from the vendor who sells without title ) owing to the vendor's address being not known, the loss should be apportioned between the buyer and the original owner of the chattel.45° Marici divides adhi into four varieties, bhogya, gopya, pratyaya, 21720111. It is to be noted that Apararka( p. 908 ) quotes a prose passage of Marici on asauca. 49. Yama The Vasistha-dharmasttra (18. 13-15 and 19. 48 ) cites four $lokas of Yama and quotes (11. 20) one verse in which Yama is spoken of as an.authority. All the slokas except one are found in Manu.‘5! Vasistha quotes a Sloka of Prajapati wherein Yama’s view 448 नमोनमस्मयोेष्ये सवी नयो रजस्वलाः । तासु स्नानं न कुर्वीत देवर्विपित॒तपेणम्‌ ४ ATU ए" 235 449 स्थावरे विक्रयधमने पिभागे दान एव च । प्रनिम्रहे च at च arewa सिभ्यति Feat ॥ पर्‌. मा. VOI. पा. p. 128 ; स्मतिच ° ( sq, ?" 60 reads किसिनेनप्रुयात्‌ सिद्धिमविसंवादूमेव च ) 450 अविज्ञातनिवेशत्वायन्न मूल्यं न म्यते | हानिस्तन्न समा कत्थ्या केत नाशिकियेोदंयोः ॥ पराकं 2. 775 451 अथापि यमगीतानृश्छोकानुद्‌हरन्ति । श्मशानमेतलयस्यक् ये gras पापचारिणः । तस्मा- SPARTAN तु नाभ्येत्तव्यं कदाचन ॥ न शूद्राय मतिं द्यान्नोच्छिष्ट न हविष्कृतम्‌ | न चास्वोपदिशेदर्म न चास्य वतमादिशेत्‌ ॥ यश्चास्योपदिशेदमं यश्चास्य ब्रतमार्देशेत्‌ | सोसंवृ्तं तमो धोरं सह तेन पदयते ॥ वसिष्ठ 13. 13-15. The last two are almost thesame as wa IV. 80-81 and the first isa paraphrase of anq, श्रो Tq इ वा एतद्ुशानं Tega: । तस्माष्टद्रसनीपे नाण्येतच्यम्‌". नाधद्‌ोषोस्ति ust वे व्रतिनां न च ARO | रेन्द्रस्थानमुपासीना AeA हि ते सद्‌ा ॥ वसिष्ठ 19. 48 and मनु ए. 93. “अथाप्युदाहरन्ति | अथ चेन्मघ्रविदयुक्तः शारीरः TTT: । दुष्यं तं यमः ME पड्किपावन एव सः ॥ व.सेष्ठ॥ 11. 20; vide बृहद्यम 5. 41. धुते षा यि वा तें विपो नायानश्लभ्युतम्‌ । यमस्तदश्जि प्राह तुल्यं गोमांसभक्षणेः ॥ वसिष्ठ. 14. 30 232 History of Dharmatistra is set forth. Yama is one of the sages enumerated in the list of Yajiiavalkya. Govindaraja (on Manu 5.16) and Apararka quote averse of Sankha wherein Yamas’ view that the flesh of certain birds could be eaten is referred to.45? Apararka (7, 1231 ) also cites a verse of Sankha in which the view of Bhagavan Yama that one should save one’s life in all ways (even by incurring sin ) is relied upon. In Jivananda’s collection ( part I. pp. 560-568 ) there is a ऽत of Yama in seventyeight verses on prayascitta and purification ($uddhi ). In this smrti Yama himself is cited in the third person (verse 65 ). One verse ( 33 ) refers to the view of Bhasvati (son of the sun, by which may be meant either Manu or Yama himself ).453 Some of the verses are identical with those of Manu (e. g. verses 26, 28 are the same as Manu 11.178 and 3.19). Verse 44 1 in the Upajati metre. In the Anandasrama collection there is a Yamasmrti in 99 verses on prayaégcitta, Sraddha, and purification. Most of the topics of this smrti are the same as those of the Calcutta text, but most of the verses are not identical. A few verses are found in both, €. g. the verses about the seven lowes! ०5165441 (antyajas ). Verse 11 quotes the view of Satitapa. This smrti contains the well-known text that a woman passes on marriage into the gotra of her husband, which is cited by the Mit. (on Yaj. I. 254 ).55 In the same collection there is a smrti of Brhad-Yama ( pp. 99-107 ). It is divided into five chapters and contains 182 verses. It deals with prayaécittas for various lapses, purification from various kinds of contacts (Suddhi), Sraddha, partition and a few matters of medical procedure. In this smrti Yama is frequently cited by name. Satatapa is cited on partition (V. 20). Many of the verses of this text are identical with those of Yama in Jivananda’s text. For example, Jivananda (0. 561 ) verses 15-17 are the same व क 1 १ = 1 A rey eee ee 452 HA च मथूर च लावकं च कपिखलम्‌ । वाधीणसं ade च म्ष्यानाह यमः सताम्‌ ॥ ( सदा ».।. ) अपराकं ए. 1167 463 ततो देवलकन्ेव भृतको वेदविक्रयी । एते व्याः प्रयत्नेन रएतद्गास्वतिरबवीत्‌ ॥ Compare मनु 3, 180. 454 रजकश्वमेकारुय नटो बुरेढ एव ख । केवतैमेदमिङ्ठाश्च RA अन्त्यजाः स्मृताः ॥ Jivananda verse 64, Anand&érama verse 83. 465 शवगोच्रादूभश्यते मारी Magee पदे । स्वामिगोग्रेण कर्तव्यास्तस्याः पिण्डोदुक- fear: ॥ Verse 78, 49. Yama 298 as Brihad-Yama III. 1-3, Jivananda p. 563 verses'29-33 are the same as Brhad-Yama III. 34-38, Jivananda verses 35-36 are the same as Brhad-Yama III. 16-17. The verse in the Upajati metre ( Jivananda 44 ) is Brhad-Yama IIT. 61. Two of the verses at the end of chap. V. are the same as Y4j. II. 17 and 23. The numerous mss. of Yama contain either one or other of the above three texts or different texts bearing on the same topics. For example, Deccan College collection Nos. 209-211 of A 1881-82 and No. 153 of 1895-1902 are the same as the Yamasmrti in the Anandaégrama collection, No. 401 of 1891-95 seems to be the same 25 Brhad-Yama in the Anandaésrama collection. But the I. O. Cat. No. 1334 p. 390 contains 57 Slokas, the last 20 of which are in the Indravajra metre. Visvaripa, Vijnanesvara, Aparirka, the Smpticandrika and other later works quote over three hundred verses of Yama on all topics of dharmaSastra including vyavahara. This establishes that they had an extensive work of Yama before them from which it is probable various abridgments corresponding with the printed works were made. ViSvariipa quotes about ten verses of Yama on water as purifier (on Yaj. I. 187), on Sriddha Con Yaj. I. 225 and 252) and on prayascitta for killing a cow (on ४६}. III. 262). The identi- cal verses are not found in the printed texts. Some of the verses quoted from Yama in Apararka and the Smrticandrika can be traced in the printed text. For example, Apararka ( p. 42 ) quotes a verse of Yama in which Yama himself is referred to as an authority.456 It occurs in Jivananda’s text (verse 65 ). The two verses in Jivananda’s text (verses 26, 28) that are identical with Manu are cited in the Smrticandrika as ४9725, Two verses of Brhad-Yama (III. 20-21 ) about the proper age of marriage in the case of girls are quoted as Yama’s in the Smpticandrika.457 In some of the verses quoted by Apararka from Yama, the opinions of . Manu are cited which can be identified with the views of the Manu- 456 अपः STE: य आचामति वे द्विजः । सुरां पिबति स as यम्य दनं यथा ॥ This is attributed to यम in the स्मतिचं० also. 457 अष्टवषौ भवेद्रोरी नववर्षा च Tels aman} भवेत्कन्या अत ऊध्वं रजस्वला ॥ माष greet ae कृम्यां यो न प्रयश्छति । मास्ति माकि रजस्तस्याः पिता पिबति शोणितम्‌ ॥ स्मृतिब ° ( stare ४.79. ). . H. ०, 30. 234 History of Dharmasasira smyti. For example, according to Yama food polluted by the touch of hair, moths and insects, or seen by sinners and women in their courses is purified by water, holy ashes etc.+5* This refers to Manu ४. 125. Similarly the Smrticandrika quotes a verse of Yama-which says that according to Manu those who administer poison, who are incendiaries and robbers and those guilty of homicide and abetment thereof should pay the extreme penalty of death.459 Apararka (pe 988 on Yaj. III. 109 ) quotes five verses of Yama which refer to the 26th ¢attvas well known in the Sankhya system, regard Purusottama as a 26 tattva and propound that he who correctly understands the 25 tativas, in whatever aSrama he may be, reaches the highest abode of Visnu. Apararka quotes a few prose passages from Yama on the garments to be worn by brahmacarins,*® on prayascitta for killing various kinds of birds and insects, for cutting trees and bushes, for drinking wine, for stealing gold and for the other deadly sins etc.4° The Mahabharata (AnuSsasana 104. 72-74) quotes gathas of Yama. The Smrticandrika quotes a verse of Yama which speaks of the sun being in the zodiacal sign Virgo.4% Yama required the king to look into the disputes of litigants carefully and impartially.463 Yama cites the authority of Manu for the proposition that everything brought about by coercion such as a gift or a deed was liable to be set aside. This is almost identical with Manu 8. 168. Yama lays down that a Brahmana was never to be awarded corporal punishment, but that a Brahmana guilty of 458 अवक्षुतं केशपतङ्गकीरैरुद्क्यया वा पतितश्च Te | अलातमस्माम्बुहिरण्यभागेः संस्पष्टमन्नं मनुराह भोज्यम्‌ ॥ अपराकं ?. 267. 459 विषाभिदायकाश्चोरा घातकश्वोपघातकाः । स्वशरीरेण दण्ड्याः स्युभनुराह प्रजापतिः ॥ स्मतिच° ; vide मन, 9. 278. 460 सर्वेषां रोरवशाणक्षोमाविकानि सामथ्यद्धोवञ्चाणतिराणि न 1 अपरा P- 58, 461 Vide pp. 1130, 1135, 1218, 1292. 463 हंसे Te कन्यास्थे &o. स्म्रतिष्च° ( श्रा. P- 366 Gharpure.), 463 राजा मन्तिसहायस्तु हयोर्षिवद्मानयोः | सम्यक्कार्याण्यवेन्षित रागदरेषविवा्ितः ॥ ITS p. 596, ५6५ marge Megs TTT Saag । सर्वान्‌ यलकृतानरथा्‌ नि्त्थोनाह 4 ममुः ॥ समृतिच० ( व्य, P. 180), 49, Yama 238 crimes was to be imprisoned and made‘*s to work. Yama, like एद], (II. 145 ), prescribed that the stridhana of a woman married in the Asura form went to her father,‘ if she died childless. Apararka (p. 822 ) quotes two verses of Yama that prescribed the first ammerce- ment for him who, though forbidden, wrongfully takes the water of a lake or disturbs a water-course and the highest ammercement for him who breaks a lake. Aparirka ( 0. 860) also cites Yama for the fine of five krsnalas in the case of adultery with another’s wife of the same caste as that of the paramour and twelve panas in case the wife is of a lower caste. The Smrticandrika and the Vyavahara- mayiakha on the other hand direct that the king should punish the Brahmana woman guilty of adultery with a Sadra by throwing her to dogs and by forcible tonsure and riding on an ass in case of adul- tery with a Ksatriya or Vaisya. The Smrticandrikara, Parasara- Madhaviya and Vyavaharamaytkha quote a verse of Yama about a debtor, who, being able to pay, does not wantonly pay, being punished by taking twice the amount. Yama remarks that the order of sarhny4sa is not allowed to women in the Vedas or in the Sastra*®7 ( dharmaégastra ) and that her real dharma is to be the mother of children from one of herown caste. A Brhad-Yama is cited by the Mit. ( on Y4j. III. 255 and 290 ), Haradatta and by Apararka on prayascitta. Similarly a Laghu-Yama is cited by Haradatta and Apararka and a Svalpa-Yama ( probably same as Laghu-Yama ) by the Smrtiratnakara of Vedacarya. 50. Laugaksi The Mit. (on Y4j III. 1-2,260, 289) quotes verses of Laugakst on 4gauca and prayascitta. Apararka quotes prose passages and verses of Laugaksi on the sarhskaras, vaigvadeva, caturmisya, purification 465 न शारि aregered दण्डो मवति कर्हिचित्‌ । गुप त॒ Va यदध्वा राजा भक्तं प्रदा- TU... यथापराधं विप्रं तु विकमीण्यपि कारयेत्‌ । अवध्या ब्राह्मणा गावो लोकेस्मिन्‌ वेदिकी श्रतिः ॥ स्मतिच० ( घ्य, ४. 316). 46 आसुरादिषु यद्‌ द्रन्यं fey प्रदीयते i अधजायामतीतायां पितैव तु धनं हरेत्‌ ॥ स्मृतिच ० ( ष्य. ?. 286. ). Note अप्रजासामतीतायां, which is the reading in feeraq ( p. 172 above ). 8 fare: gat वा शाखे व। sa न विधीयते । मजाः हि तस्याः स्वो धः सवणो- दिति QT ॥ स्मृतिच° (व्य. 254 ) 236 History of Dharmasastra of substances, Sraddha, agauca and prayascitta. Apararka cites ( p.512 ) a verse of Laugaksi which regards Prajapati as an authority. The Mit. and almost all works on vyavahara cite a verse of Laugaksi defining yoga and ksema and prescribing that they are impartible. i Sag 51. Visvamitra Visvamitra is one of the writers on dharma enumerated by Vrddha-Yajfiavalkya as quoted by Visvaripa. Apararka, the Smrti- candrika, the Kalaviveka of Jimatavahanaand other works quote verses of Vigvamitra on almost all topics of dharma except vyavahara, such as on the five deadly sins, on Sraddhas, prayascitta etc. ViSvamitra defines dharma as that which is esteemed by. Aryas (respectable people ) who know the Vcdas.4* His verses on the mahapatakas are frequently quoted.449 The Madras ( Govt. ) Mss. cat. ( p. 1985 No. 2717 ) notices a smrti of Visvamitra in verse in nine chapters. 52. Vyasa In Jivananda ( part II pp. 321-342) and in the Anandagrama collection of smytis there isa smrti ascribed to Vyasa. The two texts are the same with a few variations. It is in four chapters and contains about 250 verses. Vyasa is said to have declared the smpti in Benares. The contents briefly are :— the dharmas herein laid down prevail only in that region where the black deer roam about ; the authoritativeness of पाः, smgti and purinas; mixed castes; sixteen samskaras ; duties of Bralhmacari; marriage ; Brahmana may tharry Ksatriya or Vaisya girl but not Sadra; duties of a wife; the nitya, naimittika and kamya acts of householders, eulogy of the house- holder stage and of gifts. पर्वा प) quotes a few verses of Vyasa. They are mostly taken from the Mahabharata and are concerned with topics of marriage, daily duties ( such as washing the teeth and bathing ), éraddha and priyascitta. Similarly Mcdhatithi quotes several verses from the 468 यमायौः क्रियमाणं तु शसन्त्यागमवेदिनः । स धर्मो य॑ विग्न्त तमधर्म cae ॥ स्मतिच° ( अद्धिक ?" °). 469 ब्राह्मणो न च हन्तव्यः सुरा पेया न च ARS | ब्राह्मणस्वर्णहरणं न कतेष्यं कदाचन It गुरुपत्नीं न गच्छेच्च संसग नेश्च नाचरेत्‌ । महापातकिसंज्ञा तु निर्विषा मनीविमिः॥ SIS p. 1044. 68. Vyasa 287 Mahabharata 25 Vyasa’s. In Apararka, the Smrticandrika and other works about two hundred verses of Vyasa are cited on vyavahara. From these it appears that Vyasa dealt with rules of procedure and the several titles of law ( vyavahara-padas ) and ‘that his doctrines closely agreed in most respects with those of Narada, Katyayana and Brhaspati. He gives rules on the four kinds of uttara ( mithya, sarhpratipatti, karana and pran-nyaya ), divides documents in three varieties ( svahasta, 13027442, rajasasana ), divides laukika documents into eight sub-varieties ( just as Katyayana seems to have done ); he closely follows Brhaspati in his requirements about royal grants and two of his verses about grants (sastirh varsa &c. and sama- nyoyarh dharmasetur nrpinam) occur very frequently in inscriptions (vide Apararka on Yaj. I. 318 ). Vyasa lays down that if a stranger enjoy a person’s land for twenty years when the king is there (i.e. when there is no revolution or anarchy ) and when the owner is able (to resist) the latter loses his property.47° He speaks of adverse possession as having five characteristics.47! He mentions seven kinds of sureties, while Harita and Katyayana speak of only five and Brhaspati of four. He speaks of only five kinds of ordeals. He defines a niska as equal to 14 suvarnas, a suvarna being equal to cight palas.172, Vyasa seems to represent a middle stage in the evolution of the rights of the widow to succeed to her deceased husband. He says that a woman was to get a maximum of two thousand ( karsipanas ) from the estate of her deceased husband+73 ( besides what he gave her when living ). Vy4sa gave to the father and sons equal shares in ancestral property and allowed partition even against the wislt of the father.47! From these important charac- 410 वर्षाणि विंशतियैस्य भ॒भक्ताथ पररिह | सति रक्षि सषमथस्य तस्यं Be न Hes ॥ AIG २. 68 41 सागमो दीधकालश्च केदोपाधिविवजितः । प्रत्यर्थिसंनिधानश्च पश्च। क्रो भोग उच्यते ॥ AAs 7. 635. 412 पलान्यष्टौ सुवणैस्य सृवणीश्च चतुर्दश । एतन्निष्कपमाणं तु व्यासेन परिकीर्तितम्‌ ॥ lays, 4:3 द्विसाहस्रः परो दायः सिये देधो धनस्य च । यञ्च A धनं दत्तं सा यथाकाममाष्ु- यात्‌ ॥ अपराक 7. 752. 4 क्रमागते गृहे क्षेत्रे Ragen: समांशिनः । पेतृकेण विमागाह्ैः ger: पितुरनिच्छतः ॥ अपराकु 7. 728. 288 History of Dharmatistra teristics of Vyasa it may safely be concluded that Vyasa flourished about the same time as Yajiiavalkya and Brhaspati, i. €. between the second and the fifth century. In Apararka and other works there are numerous verses attribut- ed to Vyasa which are certainly not taken from the Mahabharata or from the Vyasasmrti in the Anandasrama collection (pp. 357-371). For example, on Y4j. I. 12 he cites a verse of Vyasa in the Vasantatilaka metre about the auspicious asterism for cauJa and another verse laying down Saturday, Sunday and Friday as unsuitable for caula. Similar- ly Vy4sa’s verses dealing with the merit of bathing on Sunday, Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday in conjunction with certain tithis are cited by Apararka ( p. 213). Vyasa speaks of Sraddhas when the Sun is in the sign of Virgo( Apararka p. 424 ). These indications are sufficient to assign Vyasa to a comparatively later date. But as Apararka evidently makes no distinction between Vyasa the jurist, Vyasa the reputed compiler of the Mahabharata ( ९, £. he quotes on p. 961 six verses of the Bhagavatgita as Vy4sa’s) and Vy4sa who wrote on the sarhskaras, sraddha and other topiee, it appears that the jurist and the writer on other topics of dharma were separated from him by several centuries. Whether the jurist and the writer on other topics of dharma are identical is a difficult pro- एला. All that can be said is that the two may probably be identical. The Smrticandrika quotes a Gadya-Vyasa and about 450 verses of Vyasa on ahnika, vyavahara and priyascitta. Apararka quotes a verse of Vrddha-Vyasa on Saudayika, a kind of stridhana. The Mit., the Prayagcittaemayakha and other works cite verses of a Brhad-Vyasa. _Ballalasena in his {21452478 quotes Maha-Vy4sa and Laghu-Vyisa as authorities and also Dana-Vyasa, which probably means the dana-dharma portions of the Mahabharata. 53. Sat-trimsan-mata This appears to have been a work like the CaturvirhSatimata described above. Quotations from it are cited in the Kalpataru, the Mitaksara, the Smrticandrika, Apararka, Haradatta and a host of writers and works. Mitramigra475 says that though the Sat-trimnsan- हि 1 Lo I । 45 पू्रान्मतादिकं तु कंश्िदेव परिगृीतववाद्विगीततवादुपरमाणमित्ुक्तम्‌ | कस्पतर्गा विह्नानिन्वरापरकिशूलपणिममृतिभिस्तु प्रमाणत्वेन परिगृहतिम्‌ । परिभावापक़ाश ?. ` ` ना = = क जानक यिप = ण Rg A TRE ES १ Oe Ate RNR ज मि =निः 68. Sat-trithéan-mata 239 mata has been accepted as an authority by the above-mentioned writers, yet certain other writers did not hold the work authoritative. The fact that Vigvarapa and Medhatithi do not mention this work, taken along with the above statement of Mitramisra, may be relied upon for holding that this compilation must have been among the latest products of the age of smrtis and was probably compiled some time between 700-900 A. D. Almost all the quotations from this compilatiou are concerned with the topics of purification of sub- stances (Suddhi), 54404 and ptayascittas for sins and pollutions of various sorts. No verse of this compilation dealing with vyavahara could he discovered. One verse quoted from it prescribes a bath on touching Bauddhas, Pasupatas, Jainas, atheists and followers of Kapila.476 Another verse quoted by Aparirka cites the view of Brhaspati.‘77_ In another verse the view of Vaivasvata is referred 10.178 Apararka quotes a prose passage from this compilation prescribing the prayascittas for touching the corpse of a candala etc. As no ms. was available, it is dificult to say what 36 sages are relied upon as authorities. 54. Samgraha or Smrtisamgraha This work is frequently cited by the Mitaksara, Apararka, the SmrticandrikA and other works on all topics of dharma. The quotations on vyavahara are copious and are very important for the history of Hindu Law. A few of the important views of the Sarngraha- kara are set out below. He gives the requisite characteristics of a plaint in five verses.479 According to him dacuments are of two kinds, rijakiya and jinapada. The ordeals from dhata (balance ) to poison (i. ५. four) are prescribed in cases where the subject matter is of great value ( 1. €. above 500 panas ), while koSa and the (other) ^ योदधान्‌ पशुपत।ञ्जेनान्‌ लोकायतिककापिलान्‌ । विकमेस्थान्‌ द्विजान्‌ स्पष्टा सचलो जलमाविशेत्‌ ॥ स्मतिच ० 1. p. 118, अपराकं ए. 923 omits जेनात्‌ and reads लोका- यतिकनास्तिकान्‌,. “7 तिलहोमायुते चेव पराकट्ूयमेव च । गयत्या लक्षमेकं च समान्या gees अपराकं ए. 1249 8 समुच्छिषटस्तु यो ak aR वा मक्तभोजनः। एवै वैवस्वतः प्राह THT सान्तपनं चरेत्‌ ॥ अपराक ए. 1174 “9 Vide मिता० on arg, 1.6, स्फतिच० ( ष्य. ?. 36 ), व्यवहारमयुसं (9.1४), dite ( p. 68) 4 440 History of Dharmatistra ordeals (in all three ) are prescribed in disputes for lesser’ sums.+* This is slightly opposed to Narada ( rpadana verse 336) according to whom the five ordeals from tula to 1668 were prescribed in substantial disputes.48* The Sarhgrahakara has in view the seven ordeals spoken of by Narada ( rnadana verses 252, 337, 343 ), while Brhaspati and Pitimaha enumerate nine. He defines daya as the wealth that is handed down through father and mother.4®? He held that ownership arose from the dictates of sastra and was not an affair of the world (Jaukika) and puts forward two reasons in support of his theory, viz. if ownership were laukika, then it would not be possible to make such assertions as ‘his wealth has been wrong- fully seized by another’ and the texts (vide Gautama X. 39) laying down the means of acquisition of wealth for the several varnas would be meaningless.483 Dharesvara held the same view. These views were claborately criticized by the Mit. According to the Sarhgrahakara,‘*+ partition creates ownership in the son as regards paternal wealth (in which he has no rights by birth). Dharesvara entertained the same opinion, which was vehemently controverted by the Mit., holding that partition takes place of that in which one has already ownership. Accordingto the Samgraha,+*s ownership does not consist in being able to dispose of a thing at one’s sweet will, since it is the इवऽ that prescribes the proper disposal or application of all things. The Sarhgrahat® laid down that the special share given to the eldest son, the practice of niyoga and the offering of a cow are all forbidden in the present age. Dharegvara also held the same ee ee STEER eons Se 480 ara विषान्तानि गुवैथेषु दापयेत्‌ । कोशादीनि पनक्ञीणि लघ्वषु यथाक्रमम्‌ ॥ स्मतिच ० ( न्य, 98 ); परा. मा, III. p. 153. 481 कोशान्तानि तुलादीनि गुरुष्वरथषु द्‌।पयेत्‌ | 482 पितृद्रारागतं द्रव्यं AAR च यत्‌ । कथितं दायशब्देन तद्विभागोधृनोच्यते ॥ धरा. मा, 1. ए. 478. 483 अस्यापदूतमेतेन न युक्तं वक्तुमन्यथा । विदहितोऽथोगमः wa यथावर्णं पृथक्‌ पृथक्‌ ॥ प्रतिम्रह्मजिवाणिज्यश्ुश्रुषाख्या यथाक्रमम्‌ | स्मतिच० ( व्य, P- 297 ), 48 क्रियते स्वं विभागेन पुत्राणां पेतकं धनम्‌ । स्वत्व सति प्रवर्तन्ते तस्मादुम्योः पृथक्‌ क्रियाः ॥ स्सतिच० ( न्य. ४. 259. ). 485 न च स्वमुष्यते तयत्स्ेष्छय। विनियुज्यते | विनियोगेोन्न सर्वस्य TAT नियम्यते।॥ 486 यथा नियोगधर्मो नो नानु कन्ध्यावधोपि वा । तथोदारविमागोपि नेव संति वतेते ॥ ` श्मतिच° ( भ्य. ४. 266 ); परा; मा, IIL ४. 493. 64, Sathgraha and Smrtisaigraha 241 view about the eldest son’s rights and the Mit. also approves of it and quotes anonymously the same verse (on Yaj. II. 117 ). The Sarngraha in two verses, apparently following Manu 9. 182-183, lays down that, if of several full brothers one has a son, all thereby have issue and that, if one out of the several wives of a person has a son, all the co-wives may be regarded as putravati. The Smfti- candrika says that Devasvami explained this dictum of the Sarhgraha- kara. The Sarhgraha says that the widow of a separated coparcener dying childless would inherit his whole estate if she submitted to Niyoga at the behests of her elders.487 This was also the opinion of Dhiaresvara and was refuted according to the Smpticandrika by Visvaripa. The Mir. also criticizes this view. He names Manu in connection with the succession of a person dying without leaving any one out of the twelve kinds of sons.48® He has in view Manu 9. 185. According to the Sarhgrahakara the order of succession to a sonless man is :— widow, the daughter who is a_ putrika, mother, paternal grandmother, father, full brothers, half- brothers, the line of the father ( pitrsantati ), the grand- father’s line, the great-grand-father’s line, other sapindas, sakulyas, the preceptor, the pupil, a fellow-student, a learned Brahmana. The Mit. notes that relying on Manu (9. 217) Dharegvara placed the paternal grandmother after the mother and before the father (thus agreeing with the Sarhgraha). ‘The Samgraha says that homicide and other offences when commited with force are called sahasa.+*9 It will be seen from the above that the views of the Sarhgraha- kara closely agreed with those of Dharesvara in many respects and were not approved of by the Mit. and other later writers. In vyavahara the Sarhgraha certainly marks a far more advanced stage than Yajfiavalkya and Narada, whose works do not contain the controvertial questions about ownership, partition etc. As Dhiare- Svara agrees very closely with the Smrtisarhgraha it may be argued that they were not separawd by a long interval of time. It has to be “7 भातृषु stray apteraey च । गुवोदेशन्नियोगस्थ। पत्नी घनमवाप्रयात्‌ ॥ परा. मा. ITI. p. 583. “8 अशोषात्मजहीनस्य प्रत्य धनिनो धनम्‌ । केनेदानीं मरहीतव्यमिश्येतभ्मभुनो ख्यते ॥ स्म॒तिच* ( ब्य. 7. 290, ), ^» मानुभ्यमारणाप्सीनि रुतानि प्रमे यदि । साहसानीति कथ्यन्ते यथादपाभ्मन्व a पुनः ॥ स्मृतिष° ( ष्व, 2.7). H. De 3३, 349 History of Dharmesdeted also noted that Visvaripa and Medhatithi do not refer to the Sarhgraha. It is not unlikely that the Sarhgraha was in vogue in the territory ruled over by Bhoja of Dhara and was therefore followed by Bhoja Dharesvara. Taking all things into consideration the Samgraha was probably compiled between the 8th and roth centuries of the Christian era. The Smrticandrika no doubt says in one place that the Sarhgrahakara follows the views of Dharegvara.49° But this statement should not be emphasized and interpreted too literally. All that it means is that both held the same opinion. There is no intention to state that Dhare$vara preceded the Sarhgrahakara. Chronology was never the strong point of Indian commentators, particularly when the writers whose opinions were referred to flourish- ed several centuries earlier. We know that Bharuci and Dharesvara preceded the Mitaksara which names both, but the Sarasvativilasa in several places ( €. g. pp. 347, 361, 383 ) says that Bharuci cannot tolerate the view of Vijfianesvara and also says that Dharegvara and Devasvami follow the view of Vijhanayogin ( p. 395 ) The Smrticandrika quotes several verses from the Sarhgraha on topics of sraddha in which Gautama, Katyayana, Paraéara, Manu, Yajfiavalkya, Yama and Saunaka are cited by name.‘9! 55, Samvarta Samvarta occurs as a Smytikara in the list of Yajnavalkya. He is cited on all topics of dharma by Visvarapa, Medhatithi, the Mit., .Haradatta, Apararka, the Smrticandrika and a host of other writers. _Vigvarapa quotes either wholly or in part about twenty verses of Sarhvarta on evening sandhya-vandana, on the duties of a yati and on the prayaécittas for theft, adultery of various kinds, deadly sins. Medhatithi quotes verses of Sarnvarta on Manu V. 88 and XI. 116. The Mit. quotes him on prayaégcitta and asauca ( ४३). III. 6, 17, 19 etc.). Apararka had a large work before him and quotes about 200 verses. 490 संग्रहकारस्य धरिश्बरमतानुसरित्वात्‌ । 491 Forexample ‹ याज्ञवर्क्यो Marae पात्रमु्तानमिच्छति + धमो eC रत्वा गृहकर्तापि शौनकः ॥ प्रीतिभरश्नादि देवानां ge sree । ' स्मृतिच° ( EL. 9. 484), compare या. I. 248. , after Sern पर्वमध्यैपाश् निवेशिताः (egal तदुत्तानं कृत्वा विप्रान्‌ विसजयेत्‌ ॥ 6४, Satwvarta 243 A few of the views of Sarhvarta on topics of vyavahara may be noted here. According to him oral testimony when in opposition to writing was to be discarded.492 This is in striking agreement with section 92 of the Indian Evidence Act. He says that if houses and fields are being enjoyed ( by one person as against another ) when the king is there (i. €. when the central government is strong and there is no anarchy), then it is possession that counts and not mere writ- ing (1. €, possession will be protected and not mere _ paper title without possession).493 He lays down that no interest was to be allowed if not stipulated forin certain cases, viz., on stridhana ( when used by the husband ), on interest, on deposit (as long as it is not lost or deteriorated) and in suretyship.49* He enumerates ten wrongs ( aparadhas ) of which the king was to take cognisance suo motu without any private person’s complaint, viz., restraint of the defendant (before judgment), obstruction of the public road, women conceiving in adultery, becoming rich without any ostensible means, destruction of a meeting-hal!! and of trees and crops, kidnapping of maidens, sinning Brahmanas, champe:ty and maintenance, destruction of the roads where tolls are to be paid, the danger of robbers, rape, injury to cows and Brahmanas.‘95_ He prescribed that disputes were not be investigated on the full moon and new moon day, and on the 14th and 8th ##this. 492 Sea लेख्यक्रिया प्रोक्ता वाचिके asa मता । वाचके तु न सिभ्येत्सा टेख्यस्यो- परि या क्रिया ॥ टेख्यस्योपरि यत्साक्ष्यं Fé तदभिधीयते । अधर्मस्य हि ag git- मतो राजा विवजयेत्‌ i वाचिकयीद्‌ सामथ्यमक्षराणां विहन्यते । Rami सदन.शः स्यादनवस्था च जायते ॥ अपरां ए. 691-92. ^ भुज्यमाने TeAR दियमाने तु राजनि । मुक्तर्यस्य भवेत्तस्य न लेख्यं तत्न कारणम्‌ ॥ परा. मा, 111. 7, 146 ५9५ न्‌ वृद्धिः waa लाभे विक्षेपे च यथाध्थिते । संदिश्ये प्रतिभाल्ये च यदि न स्यत्स्वयं- कृता ॥ स्मतिष ° ( ष्य. ४.७7). 49 आसेधं पथि भङ्गं च यजय गर्भः पतिं विना । स्वयमन्वेषयेद्राजा विना चव विदादिना ॥ यस्य दृश्यस्य (1) संपा्त्न॑टृश्येतागमः कवित्‌ । स्वय ... दिना ॥ BA ARS सस्यष्याधानमेव च । स्व... ॥ कन्यापहारकं पापं विप च पतितं तथा। TU wae स्वयं राजा विष्ारयत्‌ ॥ षडूभागकरशुल्काथे मागेभेदकमेव च । रवराषू- चोयैमीतिं च परदारामिमैनम्‌ ॥ गोगाह्यणनिहम्तारं सस्यानां चैव घातकम्‌ । द्रेतान- पराधान्य स्वयं राजा विखारयेत्‌ ॥ स्मतिच ० ! परा, मा, 111. 44-45 244 Fitstory of Dharmatistra _ In Jivananda’s collection (part I, pp. 584-603) and in the Anandaérama collection ( pp. 411-424 ) there is a smrti of Sarhvarta in 227 and 230 verses respectively. It purports to have been declared to Vamadeva and other sages by Sarhvarta. Its main contents are :— that is the religious country where the black deer roam about,. rules _ of conduct for a Brahmacarin, prayaécittas for various lapses on the part of a student, duties of householder, eulogy of liberality, duties of forest hermit and sarhnyasin, prayascittas for various sins and actions. Sathvarta is sometimes cited as an authority ( verses 38, 123). He recommends the marriages of girls at the age of eight (verse 67 ) and condemns marriage with a maternal uncle’s daughter (verse 157). In a few Mss. (e.g. I. O. cat. No. 1367) the Sathvartasmrti comprised is different from the printed Samvarta. The printed smfti appears to be an epitome of a portion of the original smrti of sarhvarta. Many of the verses in the printed texts are found in Apararka. For example Apararka p. 49=Saihvarta verse 6 ; Apararka p. 693=Sarhvarta verses 107-108; Aparirka p. 71053 =Samhvarta verses 111-113; Apararka p. 1094 (eight verses out of which five )=Sarhvarta verses 130-134. The pada of Sathvarta which Visvaripa quotes (ardhastamitabhaskaram ) on Yaj. I. 25 occurs in verse 6 of the printed text. This shows that the printed smrti preserves very ancient material, the authenticity of which is vouched for by so early a writer as ViSvarapa. The Mit. quotes a Brhat-Sarhvarta (on ४2}. III. 265, 288 ). A Svalpa-Sarhvarta is quoted in Harinatha’s Smrtisara. 56. Harita The verse quotations from Harita on topics of vyavahara deserve some treatment. He defines vyavahara as that whereby the recovery of one’s own wealth and the avoidance of (doing) the duties peculiar to another ( caste or class ) are effected in due course of [४५.५० He further says that that judicial proceeding is proper which is based on the dictates of dharmagistra and arthasastra, which is in conform- ity with the usages of respectable people and which is free from tg COND GEER? अनयन च ॥ 496 स्वधनस्य यथा Sit: परधर्मस्य THAT । म्यायेन्‌ यत्र क्रियते श्यवहारः स उश्यते ॥ 56. Harita 245 fraud.497 Hiarita calis upon the king to know the Sastras, the duties of the varnas and of the lowest castes.49® He like Narada said that vyavahara had four aspects, each succeeding one prevailing against the preceding 06099, viz., dharma, vyavahara, caritra, nrpajia. He attached the greatest importance to writing and said that a transaction consigned to writing is effective even after great lapse of time and that he who has a writing in his hands is entitled to possession ( probably in cases of mortgages and pledges ).5°° He lays down very elaborate rules about the requisites and defects of plaints, about summoning the defendant, about the contents, faults and kinds of the defendant's reply, and about the burden of proof.s°: He protects long possession of property even if it originated without title provided it had lasted for three generations.5°? He says that title is the decisive factor as to various kinds gf possession, viz., when possession is forcibly taken by soldiers and freebooters, when a thing is stolen or kept concealed, when it was delivered through affection - and friendship or when it was lent on hire, or when it was handed over for wearing or safe custody or was borrowed through friendship.s° To illustrate the relation of title and possession he uses a very apt figure, viz. just as a branch cannot be seen expanding in the sky unless it is supported by the roots, so title is the root and possession 497 धर्मशाञखार्थशाशोक्तः रिशाचारादिलक्षणः। ६ टेन च ष्यपेतो यः व्यवह्यरः स धार्मिकः ॥ स्मृतिच ०, 498 शाञ्लाणि सर्वधर्मास्तु Hwa | भूपतिः । PATENT च ज्ञात्वा तत्सर्वमाचरेत्‌ ॥ स्मृति च ०, | 499 धर्नेण व्यवहारेण AIRC ATT । चतुष्पाद्‌ व्यवहारोयमुत्तरः पूर्वबाधकः ॥ सरस्वतीषिदास p. 58 (Mysore ed.). Vide नारद ( Intro. chap. verse 10 ). 500 gditenit कलेन लिखितः सिदिमाश्रुयात्‌ i cafrye, Bet यस्य॒ भवेदटुस्ते भोगै तघ्य विनिर्दिशेत्‌ । अपराकं ०० या. 7. 90. 501 Vide मिता. OD ay, IT. 6 and 7. 502 अन्यायेनापि यदुक्तं (en ्रान्नाथवापि च । न तच्छक्यं पराहतु ततीयं समुपागतम्‌ ॥ समृतिष ०} भ्यद्धिनागममत्यन्ते शुकतं पर्वोक्षिगिभेवत्‌ । न तच्छक्यमपाहतु कमाश्निपुरुषा- गतमू ` ॥ मिता, ०४ या. 7. 27. 903 मटवाटबलादुक्तं हृतं गुप्तमथापि वा । जेदमणयद्‌सं च प्रदं भाटकेन वा ॥ तथा वसनरकषार्थं याचितं प्रणयेन वा । एव॑ बहुविधे भोगे आगमो निणयः ETA: ॥ न मलेन विना शाख ovate प्ररोहति । भागमरतु aed युक्तिः शाला पकी्तिता ॥ स्मतिष ०, 346 History of Dharmatistra is its offshoot. According to him sureties are of five kinds,s°* abhaya (for keeping the peace), pratyaya ( for confidence ), dana ( return of money or carrying out one’s obligations ), upasthina (return of money lent on pledge) and darsana (for appearance ). He prescribed an absolute tutelage for women as regards the giving away of the husband’s wealth and allowed only maintenance to a young widow of improper conduct.5°s But Harita was humane in his treatment of even erring wives. He does not allow ahusband to cast adrift an adulterous wife and prescribes that she should be given food to keep body and soul together and bare clothes.5°6 It appears from the above that Harita the jurist must have flourished nearly at the same time as Brhaspati and Katyayana, i.e. between 400 and 700 A. D. के 57. Commentaries and Nibandhas ( digests ) The literature on Dharmasiastra falls into three well-marked but somewhat over-lapping periods. The first period is that of the ancient dharmasitras and of the Manusmrti. It is a period dating from at least the 6th century B. C. to the beginnings of the Christian cra. Next comes the period when most of the versified smytis were composed and it ranges from the first centuries of the Christain era to about 800 A. D. The third period is that of the commentators and the writers of digests. This covers over a thousand years from about the 7th century to 1800 A. D. The first part of this last period was the golden era of famous commentators. Commentaries on smrti works continued to be written almost to the end of this period, ¢. €. Nandapandita wrote the commentary called Vaijayanti on the Visnudharmasitra in the 17th century. But the general tendency from the 12th century onwards was to write works not professing to be commentaries on a particular smrti, but works that were in the nature of digests containing a synthesis of all the dicta of smrti writers on topics of dharma. Examples of this class ६04 अभये प्रत्यये दाने उपस्थानेथ दनि । पथ्येव प्रकारेष TTT Merry: ॥ हमतिच ° 505 दानां वा धनाथ वा ame वा विशेषतः one वा feat a ज्ञी स्वातन्श्य महति ॥ स्म॒तिच ०; विधवा यावनस्था Sed भवति ककंशा । आयुषः क्षपणा तु दातव्यं जीवनं तद्‌। ॥ ato On या. IL 135 | 506 भायोय। व्यमिचार्ण्या tenn न विधते । gentied HIST अभःदाययां श्थियत्‌ ॥ स्मातच ९ 57. Commentariesand Nibandhas (digests) $47 + of works are the Kalpataru, the Smrticandrika, the Caturvarga- cintamani, the Ratnakaras of Candesvara. Even when in the earlier part of this period writers professed to compose only commentaries on particular works, they adopted the style of digests trying to introduce order out of a chaotic mass of Smpti dicta and explaining away apparent contradictions. For example, Visvarapa’s commentary (in the 4cara and prayascitta sections), the Mitaksara and Apararka’s work, though professing to be commentaries on Yajiiavalkya, are really in the nature of digests. In fact there is no hard and fast line of demarcation between a {70 and a nibandha (digest). Vijiianesvara is described by the Dvaitanirnaya of Sankara- bhatta as the most eminent of all writers of nihandhas. Therefore, though it is usual to speak of the third period as one of commentators and nibandhakaras, there is no necessity in this work to observe any sharp line of distinction between the two. In the following pages a few prominent and typical commentators and nibandhakaras who have written on allor most of the branches of dharmasastra and whose works have attained classical rank will be dealt with in chronological order as far as that can be done with any accuracy. 58. Asahaya Dr. Jolly in his edition of the Naradasmrti (B. 1. series) has incorporated a portion of the bhasya of Asahaya as revised by Kalyanabhatta. Even this revised version comes up to only verse 21 of the fifth title abhyupetya-asusriisa. The exact relation of Kalyana- bhatta’s labours to the original bhasya cannot be accurately gauged from the opening’*’ words ‘finding that the Naradabhasya composed by Asahaya was spoilt ( bhrasta) by bad scribes, Kalyana composes this after revising the ancient one’. The colophon at the end of the first chapter of the Vyavaharamatrka says that Kalyanabhatta revised the bhasya of Asahaya at the encouragement of KeSavabhatta.5°? Kalyanabhatta seems to have taken great liberties with the text of the original bhasya. On p. 9 verse 15 ( raja satpurusah sabhyah Sastram ganakalekhakau ), the comment on Sastra is ‘Manu-Narada- On te षि ५ ५ ७७» ^ = ०० ~ ~~ = ०० न पि, भ ए. 1 ए 7 ` त 17 ष श, ERE ae ee 1 [ जनका पुन; । ( first-verse). ५08 इति असहायनारदुभाष्ये केशवभटोन्ताधति-कल्यणमहपरिश थित-भ्यवहारमातुकायां मथमोभ्यायः । 248 History of Dharmatistra - Visvarapatmakam’. If Visvaripa named here be identical with the the Vigvarapa who commented on ४३). (as is almost certain ), this passage could not have occurred in Asahaya’s bhasya. Visvaripa, in commenting on १२}. III. 263-64,fmentions: Asahaya by name and cites his explanation of a sitra of Gautama (22. 13). The name Kalyanabhatta frequently occurs in the printed commentary itself (9. 81, 86, 89 ).5°9 In the I. 0. ms. there is a salutation to Siva and Ganega at the beginning. There isa ms. of the Naradiyabhasya as printed by Dr. Jolly in the Deccan College collection (No. 27 of 1874-75). It does not contain the first folio and curiously enough it ends just where the printed text stops. Dr. Jolly omits a few lengthy passages occurring in the ms. and generally indicates such omissions by dots. In a few cases Dr. Jolly omits only a word or two for no apparent reason, €. g. on p. 8 (folio 7b of No. 27 of 1874-75 ) he omits the wotd ‘paramasamrddhya’ after ‘vyavahirah’ and before ‘caturnam-api varnanim’. The Haralata of Aniruddha who was the guru of king Ballala- sena of Bengal the author of Adbhutasagara (about 1168 A. D. ) tells us that Asahaya composed a bhasya on the Gautamadharma- stitra.s'° Visvaripa also cites, as‘said above, Asahaya’s explanation of a sitra of Gautama. It appears that Asahaya probably wrote a commentary on the Manusmrti also. A passage of the Sarasvativilasas'' says that partition of dharma was approved of by smrtikaras like Manu, 509 तथा चोक्तमेव सामान्यभ्राहपन्रलक्षणवि चारप्रकरणे Soares | ए. 81 ; यथोक्ते त्रिषषट- केख्यप्रकरणकारकल्य।णमटरेन । ४. 86; कृत्याणरूतं श्टोकश्रयमस्ति । P- 89. 510 हारलता (8. 1. series) 7. 35. ‹ गौतमः | बाठदेशान्तरितमयजितानां TUT | ( गौ. ध. सु. 14. 44) यन्न मृतोऽशौचाभ्यन्तरे न श्रूयते तदेशाम्तरं तन्न मृतो देशः- न्तरिति इति गौतममाष्यरूतासहायेन emma’, हारलता >, (गोतमः । पिण्डनिवृत्तिः सतमे पञ्चमे वा । ( गो. ध. च्‌. 14. 18 ) । अश्रासहायश्पार्या । यद्‌। पितपितामहमपितामहाञ्लयो जीषन्ति तदु परपितामहादुश्वं Gea पिण्डदानम्‌ |. इदं त॒ व्याख्यानं न शोभनं प्रतिमाति ॥ 811 धमैविमागो मनुयान्नवस्क्यादिस्मृतिकाराणां तस्सृतिन्यारूयातृणानसहायमेधातिधिषह्ञा- नेशवरापराकणां निबन्दणा चग्बकाकारादीन च संमत एष । सरलतीषिलास ०५५. °° ‘ead p. 348 ( Mysore ed.). 58 Asahaya 249 21024114, by their commentators, viz. Asahaya, Medhatithi, Vijfianesvara and Apararka and by writers of nibandhas, viz. the author of the Candrika and others. Here the order in which the com- mentators are named requires that Asahaya like Medhatithi was known to be a commentator of Manu. This conclusion is to some extent corroborated by the fact that the Vivadaratnakara}'? quotes with reference to Manu 9. 182 the words of Asahaya thereon. On Manu 8. 156 Medhatithi quotes the opinion of Asahaya.5"3 The foregoing establishes that Asahiya composed bhasyas on the Gautamadharmasitra, on the Manusmrti and on Narada. When the Smrticandrikas'+ refers to a bhasya of Narada it is most probably referring to Asahaya. In the Mit. ( on Y4j. II. 124) the opinion of Asahaya and Medhatithi on the right of an unmarried sister to receive one-fourth as provision for her marriage from her brothers is preferred to that of Bharuci.5'5 This seems to be rather areference to Asahaya’s commentary on Manu ( 9. 118 ) which contains a rule similar to Yaj. (II. 124 ), while Narada contains no such rule about a fourth share. It is a strange irony of fate that the The aeqaifawia often referstoa writer called निचन्धनक।र्‌. Heis— likely to be असहाय, Vide सरस्व्तीविलास ए. 457 ¢ अन्न (मनुस्मृत। ) वाक्पर्ष्यर- दण्डप।रु्यर्खःसंग्रहणानन्तरं दायविभागः Pas: | निचन् नकारेण तु जयोदुश्च वेवाद्‌- पदं दाय इत्यक्तम्‌ । उभयोमह्ान्‌ विरोधः । स पररद्ियते । तथाक्तं नारदेन । . °, नारदवचनानुस।रि निचन्धनकारवचनम्‌ | अतश्च तदृव्याख्येयस्यापिं गोतमसजस्य नारद्वचनानुसरित्वमेष ।१ ; तथा च गोतमः | aI पुमन्द्ण्डथस्तद्रयं a रते t renal विवृतो निषन्धनकारेण ` P- 468. 512 The verse of मनु is ्रातृणामेकजातानामेक्यत्पु्रवान्‌ भवेत्‌ | The words of असहाय are अन्नासहायेनोक्तं cat सति श्रातुजे aint सपत्नीपुत्र क्षेत्रजाद्यः परतिनिधयो न BAST TIA ।' वि, र. ४. 583. 53 यज्वासहयायनारद्‌ानां त॒ मते क।किणीमात्रमपि शक्तः कारणपरिवुत्तिकाले द पयितभ्यः । on the verse अदुशयिंत्वा तन्नैव, 514 स्मुतिच ० ( ष्य. ?. 36) on दुशनविधि says ‘oq तदीयभाष्ये भ्याख्यातम्‌ । तथा च नारद्‌; । ओीरुतान्यपरमाणानि कायौण्याहुरनापदि ।...अच्रापवादपरदुशनार्थमाह स एष । विशेषतो गृहक्षेजरदानाधमनविक्रयाः । इति । गृहृ्षेत्रयोदानाधमनविकयस्त्वापयप्यस्व~ ISA न ससिभ्यन्तीत्यथः | एवं तद्भाष्ये व्याख्यातम्‌ | 8 अतोसह्मयमेधातिथिपमुतीनां व्याख्यानमेव चतुरस्रं न माङ्चेः । मिताक्षरा, H, 2, 32. 250 History of Dharmasastra very name of Asahaya who is profusely quoted by the Sarasvati- vilasa in the first half of the sixteenth century was forgotten by later writers, so much so that the Balambhatti understands the word Asahaya ( in note 515 above ) as an attribute of Medhatithi in the sense of ‘ peerless As Visvaripa and Medhatithi both name Asahaya, his lowest limit is about 750 A. D. How much earlier he flourished it is difficult to say. He can hardly be earlier than the 6th century. In the com. on Narada ( p. 48 ) there is a story from Pataliputra about the repayment of a debt by sons, grandsons and great-grandsons. It has been argued ( Calcutta Law Journal, vol. 17 p. 59 ) that, as Pataliputra was a deserted city in the middle of the 7th century and as the reference shows that Pataliputra was a living and flourish- ing city, Asahaya must have lived long before the 7th century. But as the very authenticity of the text of the bhasya is doubtful owing to the drastic ‘revision’ of Kalyinabhatta, such a conclusion is extremely hazardous. In the ms. of the bhasya other places such as Vatapadraka (probably modern Baroda), Avavadu and Sarhvaduka are mentioned. There is nothing to show that the author was either a native of or had a first-hand knowledge of Pataliputra. He might have been relying on traditions when he gave the story. Dr. Jolly not being aware of the express mention of Asahaya by Medhatithi argued that he flourished earlier than Medhatithi (Tagore Law Lectures p. 5; $. 8. E. vol. 25 p. VII) on the ground that the Mit. and the Sarasvativilasa always place Asahaya before Medhatithi whenever authorities on vyavahara are enumerated. Dr. Jolly’s conclusion is right as shown above, but his reasoning is faulty. There is hardly anything of chronology in the order in which authors are named, since we find that the Sarasvativilasas?® names Vijfianesvara even before Asahaya, though the former flourished centuries after the latter. Some of the views attributed to Asahaya may be quoted here. The definition of daya (heritage ) given by the Mit. was identical with Asahaya’s.5'7 Asahaya explained the dictum of Usanas that 616 स. वि. ( pare 195 ) ' विज्ननेश्वरासहायमेधातिथीनामियं eareat’ (2. 1 of Mysore ed. ). 817 sragratgrrafirsdiat तु यत्स्वामिसंबन्धदेषे निमिशादन्यस्य स्वं भवति तद्‌ वुयशष्दनोऽयते इति । स, वि. ( pare 19 ), 58, Asahaya 251 fields were impartible by taking it to refer to the son of a Brahmana from a Ksatriya wife, who does not participate in land gifted to a Brahmana.5*® The Mit. on Yaj. II. 119 takes the same view. Asahaya held that as regards succession to the Sulka of a woman even step-brothers should be given something, though the major portion would go to the full brothers.s'2 According to Asahaya, the wealth of a childless Brahmana went to the teacher, then to the teacher's son, then to the teacher’s widow, the pupil, pupil’s son, pupil’s widow (one after another ) and then to the fellow-student.5?° The Vivadaratnakaras?! (p. 578) quotes the Prakaga as referring to the views ot Asahayaand Medhatithion Manu IX. 198 that the special rule of Manu applies to all the stridhana belonging to a Ksatriya woman who has a brahmani co-wife. The Vividaratnakaras?? quotes a verse of Narada about masa and a verse of the bhasyakara thereon. It probably refers to Asahaya’s bhasya. 59. Bhartryajna This seems to have been a very ancient commentator. Mcdhatithis?3 in his bhasya on Manu 8. 3 says ‘other explanations have been well brought out by Bhartryajfia and they should be understood from his work’. Trikanda-Mandana (who flourished before 1100 A.'D.) in his Apastambasatradhvanitartha-karikas*4 (I. 41) refers to the views of Bhartryajiia that one who had committed to 518 स, षि, para 195 ¢ or p. 371). 519 अतश्च कन्याश्रुल्कविषये सोदरास।द्राषमागेऽसोदराणामपि wears देयामित्यसहयायभ्या- ख्यानमसहायम्‌ । स, वि, para 314 (or ए. 384). Here there is a play on the word असहाय which means ‘ unsupported, baseless.’ 521 वित्रा दत्तमिति स्रीधनमाश्रोपलक्षणमित्यसदहायमेधातिथिरति (थी इति 1) प्रकाशकारः। ०४ तथा चोक्तं नारदेन-माषो विंतिभागस्तु हेयः कार्यापणस्य च । स च राजतो विव- क्षितः । तथा च भाष्यकारः। सोवर्णमाषकेः संख्या दण्डकमसु शस्यते । पनां शस्यचरणे माषरम्येत्य राजतेः ॥ वि. ₹. ०. 234. 8S ष्याख्यानाम्तराणि भरतयज्ेनेव सम्यक्ृतानि TA तत एवावगन्तस्यानि सर्वथा पमाण- मूलानि । 4 अदाभ्ययनसंसिदविज्ञानरहितोपि सन्‌ । नातीवाधिक्रियाथन्यो भैयज्ञादिदिशेनात्‌ ॥ त्रिकृाण्डमण्डन ( ए, {, series ),: 252 ` History of Dharmatdetra memory the text of the Veda had the privilege (the adbikara) of ~ consecrating the sacred fires, though he may be innocent of the meaning of the Vedic texts. From Ananta’s bhasya it appears that Bhartryajfia composed a bhasya on the Katyayanasrautasatra which had been lost (utsanna) in the former’s day. From Gadadhara’s comments on the Paraskara grhyasitra it appears that Bhartryajiia commented on Paraskara.s?s5 The Grhastharatnakara of Cande- §vara quotes Bhartryajiia’s explanation of the word sarhuthhaga occurring in Gautamadharmasitra ( 10. 39 ‘svami riktha-kraya-sarh- vibhaga-parigrahadhigamesu)’.52* The Nity4carapradipa (B. I. series) after quoting Gautamadharmasutra ( 11. 29 varnasramah svadhar- manisthah &c. ) cites the comment of Bhartryajias?7 on the word tac-chesena occurring in that sitra. Therefore it appears probable that Bhartryajfia like Asahaya was an ancient commentator of the Gautamadharmasitra. The Grhastharatnakara, after quoting from Vasistha (17. 1 ) and Visnu the well-known verse of the Aitareya- brahmana (rnam-asmin sarh-nayati) cites the explanation of Bhartr- yajiia as to the word ^ jitasya ’ occurring therein.5?8 Since Bhartryajiia is quoted by Medhatithi who also mentions Asahaya but not Visvarapa, it follows that Bhartryajia must have flourished before 800 A. D. and was probably a contemporary of or slightly later than Asahaya. ¢ [ 60. Visvarupa The commentary of Visvaripa called Balakridi on the Yajna- valkya-smrti has been recently published in two parts by M.M.T Ganapati Sastri in the Trivandrum Sanskrit Series. The Mit. states in the introductory verses that the dicta of Yaj. were expanded by es 55 on पारस्करगह्य 7.1. 2. ‹ एते qog भ॒संस्कारा दनि मनयज्ञमाध्ये अग्न्यथा दृतिं ककावःध्यायाः ’, on प्‌।रस्कर 7. 2 1. the ajsq of waaay on the word दार- क्क is quoted ; on the सूच ' केश मितो ARONA &९. (प)रस्कर II. 5 28 ) गदाधर 9०55 ^ इदं च सूत्रं gaa steed तिष्ठति भतृयज्ञककादिम्रन्थु नोपलभ्यते "* 526 संविभागो मतृदाय इति मतृयश्चः । गृहस्थरत्नाकर्‌ folio 78a of D. O. ms, No 44 of 1883-84, 697 अच्र तच्छेषेण इति तस्यव निस्याचारकर्मेणः Davila aga: । नित्याच रमरदृप p. 12. 528 अन्न जानस्योति जण.पाकरणयोग्यस्येति मर्तेयज्नः । गृहस्थरत्नाकर 1०1० 1888. 60. Visvariipa 258 the voluminous or ample ( vikata) explanations of Visvarapa. In commenting on ४३}. I. 81 the Mit. tells us that Visvaripa looked upon the words of Yaj. I. 79 ( tasmin yugmiasu sarhviset ) as a niyama. In Visvartipa’s commentary on Yaj. I. 80 ( evath gacchan &c. ) we do find that the verse of ४३]. and similar passages of Manu ( 3. 45 ), Vasistha and Gautama ( $. 1 ) are understood to contain a niyama and nota parisamkhya.s*9 On Yaj. Ill. 24 the Mit. informs us that Visvaripa, Medhatithi and Dharesvara looked upon certain texts of Rsyasrhga on asauca as in conflict with well-known smytisand discarded them. Mr. S. Sitaram Sastri published ( in 1900 at Madras )the text and translation of ViSvariipa’s comment on inheritance and Mr. Setlur also published the vyavahara section. In the following pages the Trivandrum edition is relied on. The printed com. of Visvaripa on the vyavahdra section is extremely meagre and scarcely merits the epithet vikata applied to it by the Mit. But the comment of Visvarapa on the 2८412 and prayascitta sections is truly voluminous and compares favourably with the Mit. The style of Viévaripa is simple and forcible and resembles that of the great Sankaracirya. He quotes profusely from Vedic works, mentions the Carakas and Vajasaneyins(on ४३} 1. 32), the Kathaka ( on Yaj. III. 237 and 243 ) and very often supports his position by quotations from the Rgveda (e.g. on Yaj. II. 121 and 206 ), the Brahmanas(e. g. the Satapatha on Yaj. 1. 53 and JIL. 257 ) and from the Upanisads ( €, g. on ४३. IF. 117, the well-known Chandogya passage about the ordeal for theft and on Yaj. I. 50 Chandogya II. 23. ro about the three branches of dharma). He speaks of the pada-pajha and the kramapa{ha as duc to human agency (on Yaj. III. 242 ). He frequently quotes the Grhyasatras of Paraskara and less frequently those of Bharadvaja and Asvalayana. He cites a host of smrtikiras.53° Most of the quotations attributed to 529 मानवं तु ‹ ऋतुकालाभिगामी स्यात्‌ ° इति ... नियमपरतेथव न्यःख्येयम्‌ । एतेनेव. .. वाशिष्ठं भ्याख्यातम्‌ |... गातमीयं त्वनत॒परिसंख्या्थं * ऋतावुपेयात्‌ ' इति केचित्‌ । TAT नियमार्थमेव व्याख्येयम्‌ ।. 930 The स्मतिक!र mentioned by name are : अङ्गिरस्‌, अन्रि, अपस्तम्ब, उशनस्‌, कात्यायन, काश्यप, WI, FAM, गतम, जातुकणे ( "णि ), दक्ष, नरद्‌, पराशर, पारस्कर, पितामह, पुलस्त्य, Tals, बुस्यति, बोधायन, भरद्वाज, भृग्‌, मनु, TSAY, यम, याश्षवल्क्य, वृदुयाह्नवल्क्य, वसिष्ठ, विष्णु, व्यसि, शङ्ख, शतातप, शोनक, संवते, सुमम्त, स्वयमु (be मनु ), हारीत, 254 History of Dharmastistra Svayarnbha are found in the extant Manusmrti, but this is not the case with the quotations ascribed to Bhrgu ( vide p. 138 above ). Most of the quotations from Brhaspati ( even on such topics as repayment of debts, sureties, the rights of Sadraputra ) are in prose, only a few being in verse ( €, £. 4 verse about ordeals on Yaj. II. 117, a verse about the method of partition on Yaj. II. 153). It appears therefore that Visvaripa either knew a work of Brhaspati in prose on arthasastra in which occurred a few verses or he had before him a prose work of Brhaspati and a versified smrti of Brhas- pati, both of which he regarded as the compositions of the same author. He quotes a verse ( on Yaj. I. 328 ) from Visalaksa, a well- known writer on politics quoted even by Kautilya. He refers to the arthasastra of Usanas along with that of Brhaspati. Kautilya is nowhere quoted by name. The learned editor of Visvarapa thinks ( Intro. p. V ) that ViSvaripa took Brhaspati and Visalaksa as drsa writers long anterior to ४३}. and therefore used their dicta to elucidate and support Yaj., while he omits Kautilya because he thought Kautilya to be posterior to Yaj. This argument contains several fallacies. In the first place it is wrong because Visvaripa quotes verses from Narada and Katydyana to supplement Y4j. There is nothing to show that Visvariipa regarded Narada and Katyé- yana also as anterior to Y4j. and we have seen above that they are several centuries later than the smrti of Yaj. Moreover Kautilya himself looked upon both Brhaspati and Visalaksa as high autho- rities and so Visvarapa might have quoted them rather than Kautilya. Even taking the latest date assigned to Kautilya (about 3rd century A. D. ), he flourished several centuries before Vigvarapa. It is impossible to believe that Visvarapa was in possession of the exact chronological relation of Yaj. and Kautilya. Many scholars, besides, place Kautilya’s work centuries before Yaj. It appears, however, that Visvariipa had the work of Kautilya before him. On Yaj. I. 307 he speaks of ministers tested by the four allurements ( upadha ) of dharma, artha, kama andbhaya. This is an echo of Kautilya (I. 10 ). On Yaj I. 343 Vis. refers to the view of some that a march should be made when neighbouring chiefs are over- whelmed in calamities.53! This is the view of Kautilya almost in 531 तथा बाहू :-सामन्तन्योर््यसनसम्येन wae तममिश्रमेव ्योयात्‌-इति । विश्वकप) compare " तत्यंसामम्तभ्यसने यतव्यममिन्नं वा इत्यमिन्रममियायात्‌ | seer VIL. 5; कं पुनस्तन्मन्त्रणीयम्‌ | उक्तं अ दिकमजारदूनस्ंमेषण-कापचिकोवुलिथित 60, Vitvartipa | 286 the same words. On ४३}. I. 341 Vis. speaks of the manifold aspects of the work of a minister, some words of his comment being almost identical with Kautilya’s. Visvaripa’s work is thoroughly saturated with the lore of the Parvamimarmsa. He quotes Jaimini by name (on Yaj. I. 225 where Jaimini VI. 8. 15 is quoted ). Curiously enough he applies the term nyaya to Mimamsa. He takes ‘ nyaya-mimarhsa’ in Yaj. I. 3 as one vidya, while he notes that others explain yaya as the system of logic propounded by Aksapada. He quotes the sitras of Jaimini as those of Yajnikas who know 10404 ( €. ९. ०7 Yj. I. 53 he quotes Jaimini I. 3. 16 and on Yaj I. 87 he quotes Jaimini VI. 8. 17 ). He applies the epithet naiyayika to a mimamsaka like Sabara and speaks of the mimarhsakas as nyayavidab.53* He mentions the Sabarbhasya by name (on Yaj. III. 243 ) and in several places quotes the very words of Sabara (e.g. on Yaj. III. 181 ).533 He quotes the slokavartika of Kumiarila( I. 12 the verse ‘sarvasyaiva hi &c. ) in his introductory remarks. In his comment on Y4j. J. 7 he cites over fifty verses in the nature of karikas dealing with the relation of Sruti and smrti and kindred topics. These verses are his own composition, as in one of them he assures us that a certain point will be dealt with by him in detail in the section on Sraddha.53+ In interspersing his commentary with karikas of his own and in their style and pithiness he greatly resembles Kumarila. Through- out his work he relies upon mimarhsa maxims and methods of we च NENA BAS BA TAT MAT TA चारप्पश्चनिरूपणपरप्रयुककापचिकादुश्ठेदङगादि- करणकन्यासंभदानकुमारचिन्ता-अन्तःपुरपचारायनेकविधं च । eqay, The words कृ [पटिको ... व्यजन ०००५०८० काटिल्य ( 1. 11 ) and कटिल्यु has chapters on राजपुन्नरक्षण ( i.e. BAT AAT ) RAGSIT ( i. @. अन्तश्ुद- प्रचार ), दुगेविधान and दूतप्रणिधि, 992 न्यायविद््च धार्मिकाः | अपि वा सर्वधर्मः स्यात्‌ » न्यायविद्श् Tider: सर्वर्थत्वादु. ब्रार्थ न्‌ प्रयोजयेदित्याहुः ( this is जमिनि VI. 8.17 ) $ न च BAIA विशेषण विवक्ष्यत इति व्य,यविद्‌ः ( ० याज्ञ. ITT. 250 ) The last is a well- known ममिंसाभ्याय. “aa च नेयायिकाः ‘Ae वचनस्य तिभ।रोस्ति' इत्याहुः, These words occur in शुध्रभाष्य ०० जैमिनि LIT. 2. 3. ०२ तथ। चोक्तं “Saar भते भवम्तं भविप्यन्तमित्यायेवंजातीयकम्े शक्नोःपवगमयितुम्‌ › हवि | This is शाबरभाष्य 9. 4 ( 8. I. edition). 44 सवे चेततप्रपश्चेनं gear: श्रादुसेग्रहे । Maer part 1/7. 16. 366 History of तावत्य discussion. For example, on Yaj. I. 4-5 he discusses the rule ot Jaimini II. 4. 8 ff (about ° sarvasakhapratyayam ekarh karma’ ) in its application to smrtis ; on Yaj. I. 225 he relies upon the position that words like yava and varaha are to be taken as employed in the Vedas in the same sense in which Sisfas use them ( vide Jaimini I. 3.9) ; on Yaj. II. 144 he speaks of wealth ( dravya ) being purusartha, where he alludes to the well-known distinction between kratvartha and purusartha, the subject of Jaimini’s 4th chap. His commentary on ४३). II] 212, 237, 262 are fine examples of his superb skill in the interpretation and reconciliation of apparently conflicting texts. Though Visvaripa was a past master in Purvamimarhsa lore, his philosophical views seem to have been identical with those of the great Sankara. According to him, moksa results from correct knowledge alone and the whole sarhsdra is due to avidya.s3s He quotes anonymously one of Gaudapada’s karikass36 (III. 5 ) on Yaj. IT. 134. He speaks on २}. III. 103 of Narada who knew the Veda of music ( gitivedavid ), of purana (on III. 175), and quotes verses ( 01 Yaj. III. 85 ) from an abhidhanakoga (lexicon ) and from 2 Namaratnamala ( on III. 266 ). He speaks of the sloka of Bhiksa- tana (on III. 66). Heisin this probably referring to the Bhiksa- tanakavya,'37 which is mentioned by the Sahityadarpana. Among commentators he mentions Asahaya’s bhasya on Gautama by name ( on Yaj. IIT. 263). On पठ). III. 256 he explains Mleccha as pulindas and Tajikas ( 1, €, Arabs ). 535 In his com. ०० याज्ञवल्कय 111. 66 he says ‹ अपवर्गार्थं हि पारिषाञ्यं ज्ञानेक- साधनं न TT कर्मणा प्रयोजनमिन्युक्तमेव “ । } ° तच्वाग्रहणात्मकेनविदयोत्थत्वालपश्च- स्थेवमादिचोयानवकाक्ष एव । ... तत्त्वेन AMO नान्यहस्त्वन्तरमस्तीति बरह्मविदां स्थितिः । . 536 तथा चहृ-~यथकरिमन्पटाकाशे रजोधूमादिभिरयुते । न at संयुज्यन्ते सुख Ba तथात्मनः ॥ इति | तथान्येरपि-~धूमपुणेघटानां च यस्येकशट्येव रेचनम्‌ । उत्पार्ध क्रियते तन्न जायते saa निभम्‌ ॥ Ea, In the Anandasrama edition of गोडपाद्‌ the fourth pada i तद्ज्जीवा सुंखादीभेः, 1 could not trace the kartka मपूणे °. 537 Vide I. 0, cat. p. 1448 for the मिक्षाटनक्ाव्य of शिवभक्तिदास alias सुतक्ष qe Who ००९8 वल््रीकिं, कालिदास and the कादृम्बरी of बाण, =e, 60. Védvariiva $57 It has been shown above (§34 pp. 169-170) how ViSvaripa’s text of Yaj. varied in some respects from that of the Mit. ; how he fre- quently refers to the views of commentators of व]. earlier than himself (10 the words ‘ apare, ° ‘ anye’ ), how he proposes several explanations of the same words in several cases. Dr. Jolly (Journal of Indian History 1924, pp. 7-8 ) says that the citations of Vis. in the Smpticandrika about his having refuted the views of DhareSvara cannot be traced in the printed Balakrida, as _also the reference to Vis. in the Mit. on Yaj. I. 81 and II. 135. It has been shown above (note 529) that the printed Vis on व}. I. 80 does contain the view attributed to it by the Mit. As regards the Mit. on Yaj. II. 135 1६ has to be noted that the Mit. does not mention Vis. by name there, but only speaks of ‘ bhagavan acarya,53® ’ which words are interpreted by the Subodhini and the Balambhattias referr- ing to Visvaripa. It is true that the printed Vis. does not contain in so many words the explanation attributed by the Mit. to ‘ bhagavan acarya.’ But it is worth considering that in the printed Vis. the two quotations from Manu and Sankha do occur and are put inthe mouth of an objector and are explained away in a way somewhat similar to.that put forth in the Mit.539 As regards the passages of the Smrticandrika, the matter requires careful examina- tion. The Smrticandrika (II. p. 294 Gharpure’s ed. ) says that according to the Sarngrahakara a widow was allowed to succeed to her sonless husband’s wealth if she submitted to niyoga, that the 538 The words of the Mit. are: यदपि मतं पिता RITAET रिक्थं WAT एव वा ( मनु 9-185) इति मनुस्मरणात्‌, तथा-स्वयांतस्य ह्यपुत्रस्य MITA Bee तव्‌- भवे पितरो इरेयातां ज्येष्ठा वा पत्नीति शङ्कस्मरणास्च अपुत्रस्य धनं भातृगामीति Me भरणं चास्य कुर्वीरन्‌ श्ीणामाजीवनक्षयादित्यादिवचनास्ब भरणोपयुक्तं धनं पत्नी लमत इत्यपि स्थितम्‌ । एवं स्थिते aged aga wala भरणोपयुक्तं पत्नी Tala शेषं च भ्रातर यदा तु पर्नीभरणमात्नोपयुक्तमेव द्रव्यभस्ति ततो न्यूनं .षा तदा किं eae गृह्णाति उत भातरोपीति विरोधे पृवैबलीयस्त्वज्षापनार्थं पत्नी इुष्ितिर इत्यार्धमिति । तदुप्यन्न मगवानाचार्यो न REN । यतः । पिता इरेद्पुत्रस्य ... हाते विकल्पस्मरणान्नेदं SATA तु धनम्रहणेधिकारपदशंनमान्रपरम्‌ । तश्चासत्यपि पल्वादिगणे घटते हात CTT 1 ०9 ननु एतदृष्यस्ति । * पिता हरं ,.. वा › इति । मातन्यसस्यामेतद्‌ द्रष्यम्‌ | कथं शङ्क वचनं ' स्वर्यातस्य ,,. पत्नी ` हति । उकलक्षणपत्नीवुदिश्रमावे सोदर्यजाघ्नमिपायं तत्‌ । aed, 8, 9, 33. 96 History of नय same was the view of Dharesvara and that Visvarapa refuted the view of Dharesvara. In no place does the printed Vis. name Dharegvara. The words of the Smrticandrika are not to be taken literally. It will be shown below that the author, Devanna- bhatta, flourished about 1200 A. D., while Dharegvara flourished between 1000-1050 A. D. Devanna had no_ correct idea of their relative chronological position. It has been shown above (p. 249) how though Asahaya is named by the Mit., the Sarasvati- vilasa very often says that Asahaya does not like (or tolerate ) the views of Vijfianesvara. Similarly the same work ( para 392 ) says that DhareSvara and Devasvimin do not tolerate the view of Vijia- nesvara, but Dharesvara is one of the predecessors of Vij. actually named by him. So all that the Smrticandrika means is that Dharesvara and Visvaripa differed in their views on the particular points mentioned by it. The word patni is taken by Vis. to mean a widow who is pregnant at the’ time of her husband’s. death and quotes the sitras of Vasistha and Gautama in support of his view as jnapakas. So this view entirely differs from the view of Dhare- $vara that the widow ofa 5001655 person succeeds if she submits to ntyoga. The Smrticandrika ( II. p. 300 ) says that the Sarhgraha- kara placed the father’s mother immediately after the mother and before the father, that the Sarhgrahakara relied on the same argu- ments that were employed by DhareSvara and that Visvaripa and others refuted those arguments. ‘The passage in the printed Vié. is somewhat corrupt in this place. Vis. does place the mother before the father on the ground of the word mata occurring first when the word ^ pitarau’ or the compound ‘ mdatapitarau’ is expanded. The comment does mention the verse of Manu (9. 217 ) about the grandmother, but it makes no clear sense, as it stands.54° For the reason given above Rai Bahadur M. M. Chakravarti ( JASB for 1912, p. 345 and for 1915, p. 322) is not right when he places Visvarapa later than Bhojadeva because of the remarks of the Smrti- candrika. In the works of Jimiétavahana (viz. the Dayabhaga and the Vyavaharamatrka ), in the Smyticandrika, the Haralata, and other later works like the Sarasvativilasa, the views of Visvaripa are frequently cited and discussed. Several such citations have been 64 क्षनियादिषु पुत्राणां तु पितरि मातुरमावे ' पितुमीता हरेद्‌ धनम्‌ ' इत्यस्य विषयः । 60, Visvarlipa 259 already examined by me ( JBBRAS for 1926, pp. 200-204 ). From considerations of space I do not repeat here the discussion of those passages. In the Grhastharatnakara‘5+' of Candegvara (D.C. No. 44 of 1883-4, folio 133a) the explanation of Visvarapacarya on Yaj. I. 135 is cited, which does not exactly tally with the printed Vié. Hemiadris4 refers to ViSvaripa’s explanation given in his section On partition which does not occur in the printed text. The result of the examination of these citations is that the printed text of Vis. is in the main genuine, but that in a few cases ( particularly in the vyavahiara section ) it is corrupt or deficient. Though Vis. holds the same view as the Mit. that ownership does not for the first time arise on partition but that partition takes place of whatis already ( jointly ) owned, yet on numerous points the two disagree. A few of them may be set out here. , (1) Vis. allows (on Yaj. II. 118) the father unrestricted freedom of distribution of property among his sons during his life- time, while the Mit. expressly says that this power of unequal dis- tribution is restricted to self-acquired property. (2) Vis. ( on श्र. II. 119 )allows a share of property to the widows of predeceased sons and grandsons of a man when a parti- tion takes place during his lifetime. The Mit. restricts the words ° patnyah ’ to the father’s own wives when he effects a partition during his lifetime. ( 3 ) Vis. connects the words ‘ without detriment to the paternal estate’ (in Yaj. II. 122) with the words ‘ whatever else is acquired by himself’ and not with ^ maitra’ ( gifts froma friend ) and ‘ audvahika ’ ( gifts on marriage ), while the Mit. connects the half verse ‘ whatever else is acquired by the man himself without ane 218 1), +| 541 विश्वरूप ०० याह. 1. 155 is तथ। चाम्नायः | तस्माहषेस्यप्ावृतो न बजेत्‌-इति । अयं मे षञ्ज: पध्मानमहृतात्‌-दत्येतदेव मन््रस्य कात्स्म्यम्‌ । यदा AW गच्छेत्‌ तदेवमिति भ्याख्येयम्‌ । , while the गृहस्थरत्नाकर says ‹ अयं मे वन्नः स्व पाप्मानपहन्ति-इति सर्वं मन्त्रं Ts वर्षत्यपावृतो ( ! प्रावृतो ) गच्छेद्‌ यावन्मन््र- समाधिः ऊर्थ्वमनियमः | तादतेवतिष।प्मनोषहतत्वादिति विश्वरूपाचार्यः | ५५ भ्राता वा STAT वा सपिण्डः शिष्य एव च । सपिण्डकक्रियां कत्वा कुयद्‌म्युद्यिकं ततः ॥ इत्यन्न वचने अभ्युदयशब्देन आभ्युद्ाथिकं omg विभागपकरणे विन्यक्पा- चार्येण भ्याख्यतिमू । चतुर्ग ° ( कालानिर्णेय 9. 45 ). | 260 History of Dharmatistra detriment to the paternal estate ’ as a qualifying clause to the next half verse and to another verse ^ kramad abhyagatam &c.’ In the Mit. the two verses ‘ pitrdravyavirodhena &c,’ and ‘ kramad &c.’ occur consecutively, while in Vis. they are separated by three verses and Vis. takes the verse ‘ kramad’ &c. as referring to the re-opening of 2 partition for a son born after partition. ( 4) Vis. allows niyoga only to Sndras in general and to ksatriya kings in case of danger of extinction of line ( vide com. on YAj. Y, 69 and II. 131 ), while Mit. forbids niyoga in general and holds the texts speaking of it as applicable to a girl who is only betrothed and not married. (5) Vi§s. appears to allow one share out of ten to the son of 2 50412 wife from a brahmana without restriction of any kind, while Mit. restricts the share to estates other than land acquired by gift. (6) Vis. interprets the expression ‘ half share’ (in Yaj. II, 138 ) with reference to the illegitimate son of a Sadraas meaning ‘some portion, not necessarily exactly half,’ while Mit. interprets it literally. | (7) Vié. allows a widow to succeed to her husband if she is pregnant at his death, while Mit. allows a widow to succeed without any restriction except that of chastity. (8 ) Vis. restricts the word ‘ duhitarah ’in ‘ patni duhitaras- caiva’’ ( Yaj. IT. 138 ) to putrika only and so does not allow all daughters whatever to succeed, while Mit. does not introduce any such qualification. (9) Vis. reads ‘anyodaryasya sarhsrsti’ for anyodaryastu &c.’ and ‘sodaro ’ for ‘ sarhsrsto ’ in ४2}. II. 143 and his interpretation of the verse is entirely different from that of the Mit. ( 10 ) Vis. reads ‘ adhivedanikarh caiva ° for ‘ adhivedanikadyath ca’ of Mit.and holds that bandbudatta, Sulka and anvadheyaka stridbana of a childless woman goes on her death to her full brother; while Mit. connects these three with the preceding verse and takes the half verse ‘ atitayam ’ as laying down a general rule of succession to stridhana of all kinds and interprets ‘ bandhavah ’ as meaning ° husband and the rest ’. ( 11) Vis. takes the verse ‘ adhivinna-striyai’ &c. (on Yj. 1. 152 )-as applicable to 4 wife superseded without any ground of 60. Vitvartipa 264 supercession allowed by the texts; while Mit. does not introduce any such qualification, As Visvaripa quotes Kumirila’s Slokavartika and is mentioned by the Mit. as an authoritative commentator it follows that he flourished between 750 A. D. and 1000 A. D. A greater approxi- mation as to the date of ViSvarapa can be made, if the identity of Visvaripa with SureSvara be held established. SureSvara, as he himself tells us in the Naiskarmyasiddhi, the Taittiriyopanisadbhasya- vartika and other works, was a pupil of the great SankarAcirya whose generally accepted period is 788-820 A.D. Madhavacarya in several works of his quotes as Visvartipa’s passages from the well- known works of Suresvara. For example, the Parasara-Madhaviya ( vol. 1, part I, p. 57 ) quotes a एकत of SureSvara as that of Visva- rapacarya.543 In the Vivaranaprameyasarhgraha (Vizianagaram series p. 92 )also Madhava quotes a verse from the Brhadaranyakopanisad- bhasya-vartika as ViSvartipa’s.s++ In the Purusarthaprabodhas4s of Brahmananda-bharati (ms. in Bhau Daji collection, Bombay ) composed in 1476 ( probably of the Saka era ) the author speaks of the Naiskarmyasiddhi as a work of Visvaripa. In the Sarhksepa- Sankara-jaya Visvarapa is said to be the author of the two vartikas on Sankara’s bhasya.s46 According to tradition embodied in the various lives of Sakata, the latter had four pupils, Sure$vara, Padma- pada, Totaka and Hastamalaka. Several works mention ViSsvaripa as one of the four pupils and omit the name Suregvara. For example, in the DvadaSa-vikya-vivarana of Gopila ( Aufrecht’s Oxf, cat. No.'s57, p. 227 ४ >) the four pupils of Sankara are named as Visvarapa, Padmanabha, Totaka and Hastamalaka. In the Mana- sollasa-vrttanta-vilasa of Ramatirtha we are expressly told that Sure- 543 इदं च वाक्यं नित्यकृमविषयस्वेन वार्तिके विभ्वरूपाचायं उद्‌।जहार-आश्बे Fee इत्यादि द्यापस्तम्बस्मतेर्बचः । फठवस्वं समाचरे नित्यानामपि कमणाम्‌ ॥ . The 0४९९ of आपद्तम्ब is आप. प, चू. I. 7. 20. 3 and the करिका ocours in the युहृद्‌ारण्यकोपनिषद्‌ भाष्यवार्तिक (1. 1.91). 544 The verse is on p. 640 of the ब॒हद्‌ारण्यकोपनिषदूमाभ्यवातिकि, 6४5 इत्येवं नेष्कम्यैसिद्धौ malaria: । भीमद्िवि्रूपारूभेराचारयेः करुणाणवेः ॥ ( folio 6). 546 इत्थं स उक्तो भगवस्वदेन शीविनश्वङ्यो विदुषां afte: । चकार भा्यद्रयवार्तिके (ते)भाज्ञा गुरूणां सषिचारणीया ॥ संह्ेपशङकरजय 13.68 (Aufrecht’s Oxford Cat p. 257). 469 History of Dharmatistra $vara is another name of Visvardpa, a pupil of Sankara ( vide Mitra’s Notices vol. V, No. 1763, p. 82). In the Saptasutra-sarhnyasapaddhati ( Mitra’s Notices, vol. VI, p. 296 ) the four pupils are said to eb Svariipacarya, Padmacarya, Totaka and Prthvidhara. The Gurv- vathSakavya (Vanivilas ed.) identifies Suresvara and Visvaripa (II.59) and makes him a pupil of Kumarila and Sankara. It may therefore be held as fairly established that Visvarapa and Suregvara are identical, Some corroboration is afforded by the fact that Visvaripa quotes Gaudapada the ^ paramaguru ° of Sankara and holds the same philo- sophical views as those of Sankara. Just as Visvarapa quotes Kumiarila’s Slokavartika, Suregvara also in his Taittiriyopanisad- bhasya-vartika quotes a karika of Kumiérila and styles the latter Mimarhsakarh-manya.547_ This shows that Suresvara treated Kumirila with scant respect, which seems unlikely if he was at any time Kumiarila’s pupil. ViSvaripa in his introduction’¢* performs an obeisance to the Sun, the great serpent (Sega), Tilaksvamin and Vinayaka. The Bhaimati of Vacaspati-misra has a similar salutation. Vacaspati-misra wrote his Nyayasiaci-nibandha in 841-42 A. D.i.e. he was almost a contemporary of Sankara and his pupils. The learned editor of ViS. tells us that in a commentary on Vis. called Vacanamala SureSvara is bracketed with Manu and Yogiévara ( Yajiiavalkya ) as an expounder of Sastra (i.e. dharmasastra ).549 Therefore that commentator looked upon Vis. and Suregvara as identical. From all these several considerations it follows that 547 मोक्षार्थी न प्रवर्तेत तन्न काम्यनिषिद्धयोः । नित्यनमितिके कुर्यास्त्यवायजिहसया ॥ इति मीमांसकमन्येः Sale मोक्षसाधनम्‌ । त. उ. भाष्यवारतिंक्‌ 1, 9-10. The verse मोक्षार्थी &०. 13 श्लोकवार्तिक ( संबन्धाक्षेपपरिद्यार verse 110 ), 548 प्रणम्याकं महानागं तिलकस्वामिनं तथा । विनायकं च सद्रोमिः स्मृतिर्व योत्यते मया ॥ विन्बदप , vide याज्ञ. 1. 289 आदित्यस्य सद्‌! पुजां तिलकस्वामिनस्तथा । महागण- पतेभ्रेव कुर्वन्‌ सिद्धिमवाप्रयात्‌ ॥ . The भामती has मण्डतिलकस्वामिमहागण- पतीन्‌ वयम्‌ । विश्ववन्यानमस्यामः सवंसिदिविधापिनः ॥. तिलकस्वाभी would mean froma: स्वाभी. The मिताक्षरा reads तिलकं स्वामिनस्तथा, &49 अवनम्य मनुसूरेन्वरयोगीश्वरतीवकिरणगुरुचरणान्‌ । शाञ्ञाणां व्याकर्तृम्‌ करतृनपि देवता निसा ॥ One of the versos at the end of the qyqmiet "+ भवमूतिनिबन्धनोद्धौ तिमिमीमपातिवादिके गुरोः । सकटाक्षनिरीक्षणषटवं ( वः! ) पतित ममयमुदुर्ष्यिति ॥, Vide Tri. Cat. of Madras Govt, mss, for 1919-22, pp. 4458-4460 for वचन्‌माल, 60. Vibvartipa | 268 Visvardpa flourished about 800-825 A.D. But this problem presents further difficulties. The mutual relations of Suregvara, Bhavabhati, Umbeka and Mandana are a great puzzle. I have dealt with this question in JBBRAS for 1928, pp. 289-293. The conclusions arrived at there are that Mandana’s literary activity lies between 690-710, that of Umbeka between 700-730 and Suresvara’s between 810-840 A.D. and that Umbeka and Bhavabhtti are identical, but that Mandana and SureSvara are separated by about 100 years. Dr. Jolly has brought together in the Journal of Indian History (vol. III. pp. 1-27) some valuable information about Visvardpa. In several later works a digest called Visvaripa-nibandha is frequently cited. That appears to be the composition of another Visvarapa altogether. For example, the san-navati-sraddha-nirnaya of Sivabhatta ( which is later than 1650 A.D. ) tells us that Visva- ripacarya composed a vivarana (commentary ) on the Sriddha- kalika.ss° The Krtyacintamani of Sivarima (D. ©. No. 221 of 1879 ) quotes severalss! verses from ViSvaripanibandha on Sapinda relation- ship in marriage, which are not found in the Balakrida, but which agree remarkably with the words of the Mit. on Yaj. 1.53. The Varsakriyakaumudi ( pp. 378, 380) mentions Visvarapa-nibandha and quotes two verses cited therein. The Tithi-nirnaya-sarva- samuccaya (later than 1450 A. D. ) quotes certain karikas of Visva- rapa onthe 18 varieties of Ekadasi.s5? The Kalanirnayasiddhanta- vyakhya ( composed in 1653 A.D.) quotes certain verses of Visvaripa on the question of the disposal of food prepared for a marriage when a period of impurity on death supervenes.553 The 550 अत एवोक्तं भ।दकलिकाया--मासिकानि सपिण्डं च अमावास्या तथान्दिकिम्‌ । अनने मैव तु कर्तष्यं यस्य भार्या रजस्वला! ॥ इति । अन्नेनैव कतव्यं न त्वानान्नादिनेति च कलिकाविवरणेपि श्रीमद्धि्वरूप।च।यव्याख्यानम्‌ ॥ Me. in the Bhadkamkar Collection, folio 7 b. 091 विश्यरूपनिबन्धे । एवमुक्तमकारेण gags सप्तमात्‌ । ऊर््वमेव Mad पञ्च माम्मातुबन्धुतः ॥ सम्तानो मिते यस्मासपुवंजादुमयत्न च । तमादाय गणे ( गणेद्‌ ) धीमास्वरं Tata केम्यकाम्‌ ॥ हति । Beal Sa folio 150. The Mit. says ' सन्तानभेदेपि यतः स्षन्तानभेदस्तमादाय गण्येयाषःसप्तम इति WaT योजनीयम्‌ I’, collection folio 19 a 553 Ms. in Bhadkamkar collection folio 19 b on verse 82, $04 History of Dharmasisira Nirnayasindhu also quotes verses of Vigvaripa. From these data it follows that a Visvarapa composed a commentary on Sraddha- kalika and also wrote a digest on matters of acdra and other topics of dharma in prose and verse. Raghunandana in his Udvahatattva ( ed. by Jivananda, p. 116 ) names a ViSvaripa-samuccaya. It is likely that it is the same as ViSvarapa-nibandha. 61. Bharuci. The Mit. on Yaj. (I. 81 ) says that Bharuci like Visvarapa held the view that the rule ‘ rtau bharyarh gacchet ’ wasa niyama and not a parisamkhya. On Yaj. Il 124 the Mit. says that the explana- tion of ‘ the fourth share’ to be given to unmarried sisters offered by Asahaya and Medhatithi was the proper one and not that of Bharuci. The Parasaramadhaviyass+ and the Sarasvativilasa ( para 133 ) inform us that Bharuci was of opinion that unmarried sisters ‘were only entitled to a provision for their marriage and were not entitled to a fourth share. Bharuci, being mentioned by the Mit., is certainly older than 1050 A. D. Raméanujacarya in his Vedarthasarhgraha (reprint from the Pandit, ed. of 1924, p. 154 ) mentions six acaryas that preceded him as expounders of the Visistadvaita system, viz. Bodhayana, Janka, Dramida, Guhadeva, Kapardin and Bhiruci. Similarly the Yatindramatadipikass5 of Srinivisadasa (Anandasrama ed. ) enumerates ( p. 2 ) a host of teachers as the predecessors of Rama- nujacarya in propounding the Visistadvaita system. Vyasa is the reputed author of the Vedantasitras, Bodhayana is said to have com- posed a urtti on the Vedanta-sitras, called nxptakoti according to the Prapatica-hrdaya (p. 39, Trivandrum ed.). Tanka and Brahmanandin are identical. Dramida is credited withthe authorship of a bhasya on the Vedanta-sitras ( which is quoted by Ramanuja in his bhasya on II. 2. 3). Nathamuni is said to have been the grand-father of Yamunamuni, who was born about 916 A.D. Ramanuja refers to him with great reverence as his teacher's teacher ( parama-gurt, vide Vedartha-sarngraha, p. 149 ) and is said to have been young 85८ भािस्तु चतुरधमागपदेन विवाहसंस्कारमाजोपयोगि भ्यं Revered, जतत दाजमाक्रवम- संस्कतकृन्यानां नास्तीति मन्यते । परा. मा, Vol. IIT, %. 7. 510, 555 ‹ च्यास-बोधायन-गुहदेव-मादचि-बह्वनन्दि-द्मिडाचायं-ओीपराहृश्च-लाथमुनि- THC परभृतीने। मतानुसारेण & ०.» 61. Bharuct : 265 when Yamuna died ( र< 1९ ^5 for 1915, p. 147 andI. A. for 1909, p. 129 ). It is therefore obvious that the teachers are arranged by the Yatindramatadipika in chronological order. Hence Bharuci, being placed earlier than even Dramida and Nathamuni, was com- paratively an ancient author and could not have flourished later than the. first half of the gth century. Bharuci the jurist also flourished before 1050. It is difficult to believe that there were two famous writers af the same name nearly about the same time. Hence it may provisionally be held that Bharuci the writer on dharmaéastra and Bharuci the Visistadvaita philosopher are identical. If this identity be accepted, then Bharuci the writer on dharmasastra becomes comparatively an early writer, being at least as old as Visvaripa. His views agree on several points with those of Visva- rapa, which is a circumstance that lends some corroboration to the date proposed for him. One interesting point about Bharuci deserves mention here. From numerous notices contained in the Sarasvativilisa it appears that Bharuci either commented upon the Visnudharmasatra or wrote some work in which he took great pains to incorporate explanations of several sutras of Visnu. For example, para 637 tells us that Bharuci explained the word ‘ प ° occurring in a sitra of Visnu as ‘pinda ’.55° In para 674 we are told that Bharuci explained the word ° niskarana’ in a ऽप्य of Visnu and that he held that a daughter’s son has not to perform the Sraddha of his maternal grand- father if the latter has a son. SudarSanacarya in his comment upon Apastambagrhya ( 8. 21. 2 ) ascribes the same view to Bharuci and quotes the very words of Bharuci.557 Vide J BBR AS for 1925 pp. 210-211 for further examples. There is nothing unnatural in Bharuci, the Visistadvaita philosopher, having composed a commen- 56 gure ERTS यीजशम्द्‌ः पिण्डवाचीति । स. वि, pare 637 ( pp. 422-23 of Mysore 60. ). The stttra of विष्णु 18 € बीजम्रहणानु- विधायम॑शं गृह्णीयात्‌ * स. वि. para 656. 5 अन्न area: | निष्कारणमिति वदता विष्णना समनम्तरकवृणां पुत्रादीनां विथमानतव दहिन्रस्य न कर्तृत्वसंक्रम्तिरिति । स. वि, para 674 (p. 427). The sutra of विष्णु is दोहिश्रस्य भा तामह्शादं निष्कारणम्‌. The words of सुदृरीनाचा्यं are हममेवार्थं area TRE ATH मातामहः पृत्रिकसुतश्चाकिलद्रष्यह्मरी alee तस्य पिण्डदाननियमः इत्यादिना मन्थेन | ४, 2, 34 266 History of Dharmatastra tary on the Visnudharmasitra. The extant Visnudharmasotra contains doctrines peculiar to the Visistadvaita system such as the worship of Narayana or Vasudeva, the four Vyahas of Vasudeva &c. If Bharuci was a Visistadvaitin he would naturally turn to the आप्र of Visnu as having the greatest claim on his attention. Many of the आऽ of Visnu quoted in the Sarasvativilasa with the explana- tions of Bharuci are not found in the printed text of Visnu, on which Nandapandita commented in the first half of «he 17th century. It appears that the Sarasvativilasa had before it a larger version of Visnu current in the south ( vide note 118, p. 70 above ). On scores of points there is divergence between the views of Bharuci and those of the Mit. Bhiaruci differed from the Mit. as to the definition of daya and vibhaga, he allowed niyoga to childless widows, while the Mit. condemned it in the case of all widows ; Bharuci, like Visvaripa, did not mention sapratibandha and aprati- bandha daya; Bharuci, like Visvaripa, held that a coparcener who concealed some joint property was not guilty of theft, while the Mit. held that he was. Vide ] BB RAS for 1925 pp. 211-13 for more examples and details. 62, Srikara The Mit. on Yaj. 1. 135 alludes to the tiew of Srikara and others that the widow succeeded as heir to her deceased husband’s estate if it was अभा. The Smptisarass59 of Harinatha attributes the same view to Srikara and disapproves of it. On Yj. II. 169 the Mit.5¢° cites the view of Srikara about that topic and dis- approves of it. Visvarapa also gives two explanations of that verse of Yaj., the first of which agrees with that of the Mit. and the second is akin to Srikara’s. 588 एतेनाल्पधनदिषयत्वं श्रीकरादिमिश्कं निरस्तं वेदितश्यम्‌ । 659 न च स्वर्पयकत्वे ( धनप्वे 1 ) पत्नी इुहितर इति बहुधनत्वे भरातृणामपजा इति वचन- ma श्रीकरमतमुचितम्‌ i स्मृतिसार्‌ I. 0, cat. No. 301, folio 1988. | $00 अधाविदितदेशान्तरं गतः कालान्तरे बा विपन्नस्तदा भंलमाईरणाशक्तेषिकरतारमदशै- Rake स्वयमेव तद्धनं ater समर्पयेत्‌ । तावतेवासौ wa भवतीति views , ध्याख्यातं तदिद्मनुषपन्नम्‌। मिताक्षरा, thea, वि, Pp. 907 ( Mysore ed. ) quoter these very words ‘| अथािदित सम्षयेदिति Heteupies orig: | विज्नानेश्वरस्तु &०. ’ ‘wa 69, Srikara 267 The works of Jimttavahana ( viz. the Dayabhaga and the Vyava- haramatrka ), the Smrticandrika and the Sarasvativilasa contain very interesting notices of Srikara’s views. Many of them were brought together by me in ] B BRAS for 1925, pp. 213-215. Srikara like Visvaripa held the view that ‘duhitarah’ in Yaj. refers to the putrika, he allowedthe parents of a childless person to succeed together at the same time. The Dayabhiga very severely criticizes the views of Srikara on the succession to re-united members, on vidyadhana and on Yaj. Il. 24 ( about enjoyment for 20 years ).5¢ Most of the views attributed to Srikara were also entertained by Visvaripa or are more antiquated than Viévartpa’s. Srikara was probably a writer from Mithila and seems to have propounded the view of spiritual benefit as the criterion for judging superior rights of succession. The Smptisaras®? of Harinatha ascribes such a view to a Srikara-nibandha. Whether Srikava wrote acommentary on a smrti or a general digest ( nibandha ) it is difficult to say. The Smrticandrikas®s says that Sambhu, Srikara and Devasvamin compiled digests of smrtis and added their own explanations of them. The Smrtyarthasara‘* of Sridhara asserts in the introductory verses that Srikantha and Srikaracarya filled up the gaps in the smrtis that were scattered about ( by introducing order out of chaos ). Srikara’s explanations of Yajfiavalkya are frequently cited by the Mit., the Dayabhaga and A a ROOT, L$ णर रिणी 561 Vide ब्यवहारतत्वं . 47 where श्रीकर्‌ is the first of a host of writers who held, following Y&j. II. 24, that adverse possession for twenty and ten years in the case of immoveable and moveable property respectively conferred ownership. 562 Vide THAT (1.0, cat. No. 301, folio 147 a ) मृतसन्तानाभावे तवितसन्तते- war सद्भावे च तव्पितामहसन्ततेः . . . इति श्रयाणामदकं कार्यमित्यादिना दार्शेतम्‌ । एतदृष्वं श्रयाणामपि जन्यजनककरमेणेव पूर्ववत्संनिधानाद्थमाहिनिनि सगिण्डःमवि सकुल्यानां धनमागितेति अनन्तरः HATS इत्या दना दशितम्‌ | 69 ये पुनः स्मृतिसमुच्चयकाराः शम्मुशौकरदेवस्वाम्याद्यः सं“नयुद रदिषम वेम गयं : शिष्टाचारं मन्यमाना उद्‌ ादिविषयाणि स्मतिवाक्यान विचार्गयतं म्रश्थ.व त र = HT स्मरति ° ( ध्यु 9 section p. 206}, | 564 भीकण्दश्चीकराचार्यः भुतिस्प्रतिपुराणगेः । स्मतिशाज्ञेष्वनेकेषु विमकीर्णेष्वनेकध। | अनु- STATES Rat भयत्नलः । पुराणन्यायमीमांसासाद्गवेदः पूरितम्‌ ॥ स्ृत्यथ- सार( D. 0. ms. No. 44 of 1870-71 copied in सवत्‌ 1495 bas these verses ), 268 History of Dharmaéastra others. But the Mit. does not connect Srikara’s name with Yajnavalkya as a commentator, though Visvarapa is expressly so connected. It appears therefore more likely that Srikara wrote a digest of smrtis in which he paid particular attention to the expla- nation of the words of Yajfiavalkya. The Rajanitiratnakaras®s of Candesvara quotes the views of Srikara on rajaniti, one of which is that the poor and helpless are entitled to a share of the royal wealth. Hemadris® quotes the view of Srikara on Visnu and disapproves of the faults found therein by the author of the Pandita-paritosa. As Srikara is quoted by the Mit., he is certainly earlier than 1050 A.D. As his views agree largely with Visvartpa’s, he may provi- sionally be regarded as nearly of the same period as Visvardipa’s. He cannot be earlier than Asahaya who is named both by Visvarapa and Medhatithi, though both of them are silent about Srikara. Hence Srikara must be placed somewhere between 800 and 1050 A. D. and probably flourished in the 9th century. This Srikara must be distinguished from another Srikara, the father of Srinatha. 63. Medhatithi. Medhatithi is the author of an extensive and erudite commentary ( bhasya ) on the Manusmrti. It is the oldest extant commentary on that smrti. The bhasya of Medhatithi was first published about forty years ago by Rao Saheb V. N. Mandlik in Bombay and recent- ly Mr. J. R. Gharpure of Bombay brought out an edition of Medhatithi which closely follows Mandlik’s edition. A critical edition of the bhasya based upon all the available Mss. is a great desideratum. An English translation of the bhasya by M. M. Dr. Gan- ganath Jha is in progress and several parts have veen published so far. In the following Mr. Gharpure’s edition has been used. The bhasya as printed is corrupt in many places, particularly in the 8th, 9th and 565 ‹ राजधने दीनानाधादिसिकलप्राणिनामंरित्वं बहूनायकत्वाद्राज्यिना्षश्योति युक्तिरिति गापाललक्ष्मधिरश्रीकरादयः । ` राजनीतिरत्नाकर्‌ PP. 40-41 ( ed. by Jayasval ). 566 अत्र श्रीकरः प्राह । यदा गतकाले अमावास्याद्वयं मवति तदा मिधुनादिररेष्वाषाढी- भावात्‌ । . . , AAT पण्डितपरितोषरूता दुषणममिदितम्‌ । अनुपपन्नरमेतत्‌ । . , ° तेन श्रीकराणां मतमेव साधु । चतुर्वर्ग ० 171. 2 pp. 900-908, 64. Medhititht 268 12th adhyayas In Mr. Gharpure’s edition there is no bhasya on verses 182-202 of the 9th chapter. Buhler in his learned and exhaustive Introduction to the Manu- smrti ( ऽ. B. E. vol. 25 ) brings together a good deal of information about Medhatithi ( pp. cxvii-cxxv1 .). In JBBRAS for 1925 pp. 217-221 I have offered criticisms on some of Bihler’s views and have given certain additional information. In several Mss. of the bhasya at the end of several adhyayas occurs a 67565५7 which says that a king named Madana, son of Saharana, brought copies of Medhatithi’s commentary from another country and effected a restoration (jiruoddhara). This does not refer to the restoration of the text of Medhatithi, but to the completion of the library of the king, who was Madanapila, son of Sadharana and flourished, as we shall see later on, in the latter half of the 14th century. Dr. Jolly ( Tagore Law Lectures p. 6 ) holds Medhatithi to be a southerner on account of the fact that his father’s name was Vira- svamin and on account of the attention paid to his bhasya by southern writers. It cannot be said that names ending in ‘ svamin’ were a monopoly of the south. The Rajataratigini gives several literary celebrities whose namcs ended in ‘ svamin’ ( €. £. V. 34 mentions a Sivasvami ). Ksirasvimin was a Kishmirian. The south has always been famed for preserving Mss. of valuable works from the north. Mss. of the Kavyalarnkara of Bhamaha, a Kaishmirian, are very rare and have been found only in the south. Buhler ( p. (ष्मा ) seems to be right in holding that Medhatithi was a Kashmirian ( or at least an inhabitant of Northern India). In explaining such words as ‘svarastre ’ and ‘ janapadah’ ( Manu VII. 32 and VIII. 42 ) Medhatithi introduces Kashmir. He gives ( on Manu VIII. 400 ) the monopoly of the sale of elephants as a pri- vilege of the kings of Kashmir where saffron abounds.5** He says 59 मान्या कापि भनुरमतिस्तदु्िता व्याख्या Fae सा wae विधेवेशात्‌ wae ey न यत्युस्तकम्‌ । क्षोणीन्द्वो मदनः सहारणसुतो देशान्तराद्‌ाहृतर्मीणि दारमची- करसत इतस्ततपुस्तकरसिते ॥ सहारण 182 Prakrit form of साधारण 208 यानि भाण्डानि राजोपयोगितया यथा हस्तिनः काश्मीरेषु कुङ्कमपरायेषु Tz प्रतीष्येष्वन्वा दृक्षिणत्येषु मणिपुक्तादीनि &c. Should we not read यथा हस्तिनः काश्मीरे SEA ISAT वटोणद्नि 9 The meaning then would be elephants are the monopoly of kings everywhere, saffron in Kashmir &o, 270 History of Dharmaéastra that the rainbow is called ‘ vijfiana-chaya ` in Kashmir ( on Manu IV. 59). He very frequently refers to northerners €. g. on Manu III. 234 he says ‘ kutapa ° is the word for what is well-known as ‘kambala’ among northern people and on III: 238 he says ‘northern people wrap their heads with Satakas’ (garments ), He says on Manu II, 24 that in the Himalayas in Kashmir it is not possible to perform the daily sashdhya in the open nor is it possible to bathe every day in a river in ‘ Hemanta’ and ‘Sigira’. On Manu II. 18 he says ‘ in other countries, some say, people marry one’s maternal uncle’s daughter ; but that is opposed to the words of Gautama’ ( 4. 3 ) and proceeds ‘ even in that country taking food in the same plate with (or in the company of ) one whose thread ceremony is not performed is not at all regarded as dharma ( but as improper conduct )’. This is clearly a reference 10 Baudha- yana Dh. S. (I. 1. 19 ) according to which ‘ matulasut4-parinayana’ and taking food in the same plate with one whose upanayana is not performed are two of the five usages peculiar to the south. It is fair to add that later writers like Kamalakarabhatta (Nirnayasindhu, 3rd pariccheda on sapindya ) regard Medhatithi as a southerner. Mcdhatithi quotes from or names numerous smrti writers, such as Gautama, Baudhayana, Apastamba, Vasistha, Visnu, Sankha, Manu, Yaj., Narada, Parasara, Brhaspati, Katyayana and others. He refers to Brhaspati as a writer on ^ varta’ ( Manu VII. 43 and IX. 326 ) and to Brhaspati and Uéganas as writers on politics and govern- ment ( Manu VIII 285, VII. 2 and 155 ). On Manu VII. 43 he refers to Canakya as a writer on ‘ dandaniti’. %In numerous places he seems to have drawn upon Kautilya’s work. For example, on Manu VII. 155 in interpreting ‘ paficavarga’ as ^ kapatika, udasthita, grhapatika, vaidehika and tipasavyanjana’ he explains them almost in the words of Kautilya (I. 2). On VII. 148 he quotes the five angas of mantra in the very words of Kautilya.s69 Vide also his remarks on Manu VII. 54 ( testing of ministers by upadhas). He names Asahaya ( on 8. 156 ) and certain writers as Smrtivivarana- karah (on II. 25 ). Buhler is not -quite accurate ( p. Cxx,n. 1 ) when he states that ‘ Medhatithi gives only once the name of an a देशकालमिमागः विनिपातप्रतीकारः काय- fen । मेधातिथि , compare कोटिल्य 1.15 + कर्मणामादम्मोपावः ... का्- धिरित Tag मन्वरः ' |, 68. Medhitith: ` $71 early commentator’. On VIII. 3 he refers to the interpretations of Bhartryajfia. He refers to the interpretations of Yajvan (on VII. 751 20 156). Yajvan is only the last part of a name( as in Deva- rajayajvan ). He quotes the interpretation of Manu by Upadhyaya ( on Il. 109, IV. 162, V. 43, IX. 141 and 147). Buhler holds that Medhatithi refers to his own teacher. It is more likely that Upadhyaya , like Yajvan, is the name or part of the name of a previous commentator of Manu. On VIII. 152 the explanations of Rju are twice cited. On IX. 253 Medhatithi cites the view of one Visnusvamin.57° From the tenor of the quotation it appears that Visnusvamin was a writer on Mimatisa and not a commentator of Manu as Biher thought ( p.cxx,n. 1). Some Mss. read the word preceding Visnusvami as ‘kovara’, others as ‘kavara’. It is probably ^ kavera’ ( residing on the Kaveri river ) He quotes (on Manu I. 19 ) a verse from the Sankhyakarika ( ‘prakrter mahan &c ). He speaks of Vindhyavasas7' as a Sankhya and says that he १०८३ not ‘dmit a subtle interim body (antarabhava- deha ). This is probably taken from Kumarila’s words.572_ He repeatedly refers to the purdayas, tells us (on III. 232) that they were composed by Vyasa and contained accounts of creation. He quotes (on XII. 118 ) a verse from the Vikyapradipa.573 He tells us( on II. 6 ) that the Paficaratras, Nirgranthas ( Jains ) and Pasupatas were outside the pale of Vedic orthodoxy.57+ Medhatithi had drunk deep at the fountain of the Parva- mimamsa. His bhasya is full of the terms vidiit and arthavada. He quotes Jaimini’s sitras frequently and applies them to the inter- pretation of smrti texts at every step. Vide JBBRAS for 1925 ए. 219 for examples. He cites passages from Sabara’s bhasya ( 6. g. on 1. 1 2). He mentions Kuméarila by name (on I. 3) and as Bhattapada ( on Manu II. 18 ). 570 अतो यावती काचित्कलश्चतिः सा सर्वाथंवादु इति कोवरविष्णास्वामी | 71 सांख्या हि केचिन्ञान्तराभवानिष्छन्ति विन्ध्यवासपभतयः । मेधातिथि on मनु 1. 5, O72 अभ्तरामरवदे्तु निषि विश््यवासिना । भ्लोकवार्तिक ए. 704. 613 उक्तं च वाक्यप्रदीपे-न तदस्ति च varity इत्यादि | Dr. Kielhorn told Dr. Bubler that the verse is not foundin the qyqydiq of हरि (8. 8, E. vol, 26, CXXIII. 2.1) 9५ एवं सवं एव बाह्या मोजकपाश्चराधिकनिमन्थानार्थवादपशिपतपमृकयः । 272 - +. निनय of Dharmatistra Buhler at ‘first took the remark (on Manu XII. 19) about < Sariraka ’ 2557; referring to Sankara’s bhasya on the Vedantasatra, but later on changed his opinion (S BE vol. 25, p. cxxm ) and held that it probably impliesa reference to the Sariraka sitras. Bahler’s considered opinion does not seem to be right. The words ° yatheha raja... apaiti’ area summary of Sankara’s bhasya on Vedantasatra II. 1. 34 and II. 3. 42. and I. 2. rr-12. On Manu II. 83 he refers to the Upanisad-bhasyas7* on Chandogya II. 23. 4 and says that that passage has been differently explained in the bhasya. Sankara does explain that passage of the Chandogya differ- ently. But this is not all. In various other places Medhatithi seems to have in view the Sarirakbhisya of Sankara. For example, on I. 80 he has 577 before him Sankara’s bhasya on the sitra ‘lokavat tu lilakaivalyam ' ( Vedantasatra II. 1. 33). He, however, seems to have favoured the position that the attainment of moksa is पप्र? not to mere correct knowledge but to the combination (samuccaya ) of knowledge and karma ( vide remarkg, on Manu VI. 32, 74-75, 575 ननु च धर्माधर्मयोरिच्छां परति नियन्तृत्वे Sas ह्रीयते । तथा ais ait यथेह राजा सेवानुरूपं ददाति न च तस्येभ्बरत्वमपोति अतो महत्यरमात्मानी पश्यत इति व्यपदिश्यते । 576 उपनिषद्धाष्ये चेतदुन्यथा व्यःख्यातं तच्तिहानुषयागान्न प्रदूदित्‌। मेधातिथि. The उपनिषद्‌ passage 8 ‹ तद्यथा शङ्कुना सवोणि पत्राणि संत्ण्णानि THIET Tal वाक्‌ संत्ण्णा १, मेधातिथे explains + सर्वो दर्यो वाग्न्यवहयरान्तीतो वाचश्च सर्वस्या ओङ्कारो FoI । तथ। च श्रुतिः ॥ तयथ। EA &०. ... अन्त्यानमनुस्मृतिशश्रय- ` भावाप्तिव । कथं पुनः सर्वा वागोङ्कारेण संत॒ण्णा । वेदिक्यास्तावदोङ्कःरपुवंकतमुक्तम्‌। लौकिक्या अपि तदादौीनि वाक्यानि स्य॒रिस्यापस्तम्बवचनात्‌ । ' . शङ्करा चाये explains " यथा MET पणनेन सर्वाणि पर्णानि पणोवयवजातानि संतृण्णानि विद्वान व्याप नीत्यर्थः | एवमेोङ्कारेण बह्मण। परमात्मनः परतीकभूतेन wal वाक्‌ शब्दजातं संतृण्णा | अकारो वा सवो वागित्यादिशुतेः । . 577 लीलयापि कोतुकेनापि लोके राजादीनां मवृ्तिदश्यत इति mesa: । Rete, "यथा लोके कस्यचिदापेषणस्य राज्ञा ... टीरारूप।ः प्रवृत्तयो मवन्ति ' शाङ्करभाष्य. 678 On 1. 50 ° says ‹ परबह्लावापिस्तु मोक्षलक्षणा केवलानन्द्रूपा HA ज्ञानकमे- PASTAS व्यामः । ‰ ०० मनु VI 4-75 ° इदं तु ज्ञानकर्मणोः समुच्चयान्मोक्ष इति" श्क्यं ज्ञापकम्‌ । 5 on XII. 87 Haw बह्यनिह्ठापरेणापिं वेदाभ्यासा- ` Berge । 68, Medhatsthi 273 and XII. 87-90 ). This was probably due, as Kullika remarkss79 ( on I. 3 ), to his being a profound student of Mimarhsa. From Medhatithi’s bhasya it is perfectly clear that the text of Manu on which he commented was practically the same that we have now. He refers to ancient ( ciratitana ) expositors of Manu (on V. 127 ) and to former ( parva ) expositors (IV. 176, Il. 134, X.21 ). He discusses various readings in several places ( vide III. 119, IV. 99, 185, 229, VIII. 53 ). On VIII. 182-183 he 7065585 that the order of the verses was traditionally different. Kullaka also notices that those two verses and the next two were read in one order by Medhatithi and Bhojadeva and in another by Govinda- raja. On 9. 93 he notes that according to some that verse is not Manus. 58: Medhatithi’s bhasya is full of very interesting information. But for want of space it cannot be analysed in detail. The Mit. (on रत). II. 124) refers to the view of Asahaya and Medhatithi (on Manu 9. 118 ) about the fourth share to be given toan unmarried sister at a partition between brothers and follows it in preference to Bharuci's, On Yaj. III. 24 the Mit. tells us that certain texts of Rsyasrnga about varying periods of impurity for Brahmanas and others were not accepted as authoritative by Dharesvara, Visvartiipa and Medhatithi. According to hims®? saiinyasa does not mean the giving up of all the obligatory dutics laid down by sdsira, but the giving of abamkara. He 583 allowed a brahmana to adopt even a ksatriya boy. He explains away the well-known verse ‘naste mrte... patiranyo vidhiyate’ by 79 मेधातियिस्तु कममीमांसावासनय वेदस्य कायमेव तत्त्वरूपोधंस्तं वेत्तीति कायेतत्वा्थाषीदीति व्याचष्ठे 1, 580 The verses are यो निक्षेपं याच्यमानः & ०. and साक्ष्यभावे &५. मेधातिभि says on the first ध्यत्यस्त॒क्रमोयं sales समाम्नाये Geqa । प्रथमस्याषेश्तोकं पठित्वा Teg इति पठितन्यम्‌ । ततः स यास्य इति । एवं पाठो युक्तः | 581 केचिदाहुरमानवोयं श्लोक % अथाप्युख्येत कर्मसंन्यासिनो निवृत्तिमा्गावस्थायिनो नेव केजिच्छश्चार्थविधयः सन्ति । नायं sere: । अहंकारममक्छारत्याग एव संन्थासो वक्ष्यते नाकरेषशाश्चार्थत्यागः मेधा० on मनु VI. 38 8 सदशं न क्ञातितः कि तं कुलानुरूपेशुणेः क्षभिथादिरापि आष्वणस्य दको युश्यते । मेधा० on भनु 9. 168 ° D. ॐ 274. History of Dharmastastra taking the word ‘pati’ in its etymological sense and sayss® that the verse suggests that in order to maintain herself in such calamities the woman may take service with another person as her protector Medhatithi quotes several verses from his own work called Smrtiviveka on Manu II. 6 ( in all 24 verses })and on X. 5. he says that he has dealt with the topic of mixed castes in Smrtiviveka. That work therefore was either entirely in verse or contained numerous verses. The Parasara-Madhaviya (vol. I, part 2, pp. 183- 186 ) has a long quotation in verse on the duties of yatis from a work called Smrtiviveka and the same work several times quotes verses attributed to Medhatithi ( vol. I. part I p. 276 and part 2 pe 172 ). Hence the Smptiviveka cited by the Parasara-Madhaviya most probably is Medhatithi’s work. Lollatas*s an early writer quotes several verses of Medhatithi in his work on Sraddha. In the Tithinirnaya-sarvasamuccaya ( Bhadkamkar collection ) several verses of Medhatithi on obstacles to marriage such as death are quoted.5®° In the Yatidharmasarngraha of ViSvesvara-sarasvati ( Anandasrama ed. p. 27 ) two well-known verses about ‘ asfanga- matthuna’ ( viz. smaranam kirtanam kelib &c. >) are ascribed to Medhatithi and another verse‘*’ is cited (on the same page ) about the six duties of yatis. These quotations show that Medhatithi 68५ तन्न पालनात्पतिमन्यमाश्रयेत सेरन्भकमंदिनात्मवृतत्यथम्‌ | मेधा० ० मनु, 5. 156, 585 वुञ्नामावे सपिण्डा मानुसपिण्डाः शिष्याश्च द्युः, तदमावे ऋष्विगाचायोषिति मेधातिथि स्मरणात्‌ | (folio db of the ms. of श्रटुप्रकरण by Biweray in the आबन्दा- भरम 10275 at Poona); जाताशोमृताशोषविषये त्वाह मेधातिथिः । पादपरक्षालमे MS स्वनलस्थापनं कतौ | मधुपके विवाहे वे आशोचेष्यर्वंमाचरेत्‌ | ( १४१०. folio 109). 686 quad घटिते Bra वरस्य गेहेण्यथ कन्वकायाः | मृत्युर्यदि स्याम्भनुजस्य चत्त- ( fat art दुयात्टु जातमङ्गलम्‌॥ ( ?०11 45 »); वाम्दानानन्तरं यन्न कुलयोः weal yeaa: | तद्‌ संवत्सरादूर्ध्वं विवाहः शभदो भवेत्‌ ॥ ( ०11० 468); चि च धतबश्धे च विवाहे अतकर्मणि । मार्या रजस्वला यस्य प्रायस्तस्य च (न ! ) शोभनम्‌ ॥ (folio 47 ® ) ; पृथग्मात॒जयोः कायो विवाहुस्तवेकवासरे | एकष्मिम्मण्डपे चेव पृथन्वे- दिकयोस्तथा ॥ ( {0110 51 8). The first two verses occur in गदाधर 8 come mentary on the पार्स्करगृह्य ० the last three are cited in the ecalati- भाणे Of शिवराम { D. ©. ms No. 221 of 1179-80, folios 54 b, 55a, 56 b. ) 587 भिक्षाटनं जपो भ्यानं स्नानं शचं THAT । कतभ्थानि Ras. afte FTTH ॥ अतिधमसंब्ह, 68, (१, , / | अह wrote an extensive work in verse on several topics of dharma. It is to be fervently hoped that this work of Medhatithi would be brought to light some day or other. Coming as it does from such an crudite and ancient writer, it would throw a flood of light on the development of dharmasastra. As Medhatithi names Asahaya and Kumirila and most probably quotes the views of Sankaracarya, he is later than 820 A.D. As the Mit. looked upon him as an authoritative writer, he must be earlier than 1050 A.D. Most probably he flourished between 825 and 900 A.D. Kullakas®® on Manu III. 127 says that Medhatithi is much earlier than Govindaraja ( 1050-1100 A. D.). [नाभ is mentioned as a predecessor in the Smrtyartha-sara of Sridhara, which was composed between 1150-1200 A.D. So Lollata is much earlier than 1150 A.D. He looked upon Medhiatithi as a writer whose work was as authoritative as a smrti. A work called Prakasas*9 which is quoted in the Kalpataru appears to have mentioned Medhatjthi. Hemadri quotes at great length Medhatithi’s comments in several places.s%° Hence the above date is amply corroborated. Thisconclusion is further strengthened by the fact that, though he names Asahaya, he does not mention Visvardpa, Bharuci or Srikara. If by Misras9* in his comment on Manu XII. 118 he refers to Vacaspati-migra, the author of the Bhamati and other works, then he will have to be placed after 850 A. D. 64, Dharesvara Bhojadeva. The Mit. ( on Yaj. II. 135) says that Dharesvara tries to recon- cile the conflicting texts about the right of the widow to succeed to her husband's estate by saying that she succeeded if her husband was separate and if she was willing to submit to niyoga. On the same verse the Mit. says that following Manu 9. 217 Dhareésvara placed the paternal grand-mother immediately after the mother as an heir and even before the father. On Ya4j. III. 24 the Mit. says that certain texts of Rsyasriga about impurity on death were not 588 मेध।तिधिप्रमुतिमिर्गोषिन्द्राजादपि बटूतररनभ्युपेतलवात्‌ ॥ 589 Vide note 185. 590 Vide चतुवर्ण° IIT, 1. 1062-63 where मेपातिधि8 comment on मनु IIT. 265 is cited. 591 परमाणाम्तराणामपि एकलतवमतिपाद्नपरतादेव भाहिणः प्रत्यक्षस्य मिभः रत एव pT 276 History .of Dharmatistra accepted as authoritative by DhareSvara, Visvaripa and Medhatithi. Vide (sec. 60 on Visvariipa) about the remarks of the Smrticandrika on Dharegvara and Visvaropa. ‘The Haralatas9? (p.117) remarks (as ` does the Mit. on Yaj. III. 24 ) that Bhojadeva, Visvara pa, Govindaraja, and the Kamadhenu did not cite certain texts as Jatukarna’s and that therefore they were not authoritative. That Dharesvara is to be identified with Bhojadeva of Dhara, ` perhaps the most famous Indian prince as a patron of learned men, follows from several considerations. The Dayabhigas93 cites Bhoja- .deva and Dharegvara without making any distinction between the two. Some views that are ascribed to Dharegvara in one work are ascribed to Bhojadeva in another. The Vivadatandava of Kamalakara ascribes to Bhojadeva the same views as to the widow’s rights as are ascribed to Dhireévara by the Mit. Mss. of the Rajamartanda (commentary on the Yogasttras) have colophons saying that the work was composed by Dharesvara Bhojaraja. Dharesvara is styled acarya by the Mit. (on Yaj. II. 24) and sari by the Smrticandrika (II p- 257). Works on numerous branches of knowledge were composed by (or in the name of) Bhoja of Dhara. On poetics we have twe extensive works of his, viz. the Sarasvatikanthabharana and the Srhgaraprakasa. A verse at thes9+ beginning of the Rajamartanda tells us that Bhoja composed a work on grammar, a commentary on the Yogasiitra and a work on medicine called Rajamrganka just as Pataiijali wrote on these three subjects ( vide Mitra’s Notices of Mss, vol. I, p. 115 for the medical work of Bhoja called Rajamartanda alias Yogasara). He composed a work on astronomy called Rajamrganka. A work of his on the Saiva agama called Tattva- prakasa has been published in the Trivandrum Sanskrit Series. There are several other works ascribed to him, which need not be 592 यानि जातूकणनाम्ना वचनानि लिखितानि AN मोजदेव-विन्वरूप-गोविन्द्राजः क।म- धेनुरुद्रिरलिसितस्वान्मतस्यपुराणविरोध।च्च निमूान्येव | 593 दायभाग (7. 53, ed. of 1829) ‘ अयं वा धरेण्बरपुरस्रतो वचनार्थः | FSA विभाग- दानपरवृत्तस्य पितुः पतामहधने सदशं स्वाम्बं पुत्रैः सह न तत्न स्वोपाजितधन इव ग्यूना- धिकविमागमिच्छातः कर्तुमहंतीति । °; द्‌ायभाग (2. 280) ˆ अत एव भोजदेवेनापि SUSI CUBR ब॒हस्यतिरिप्यमिधाय यथा पितृधने स्वम्यामति वचनं लिसिनम्‌ । 59५ शब्दानामनुशासनं दिद्धता पातजलठे कुर्वता वृत्ति राजमृगाह्कसज्ञकमपि व्यातन्वता वैयके । वाक्चेतोवपुषां मलः; फणभृतां भर्व येनोद्धतस्तस्य भ्रीरणरङ्गमह्कनूपतेर्वाचो जयन्त्यज्ज्वलाः ॥ Intro. 4th verse. 64, Dhiretvara Bhojadeva 277 set out here. That he composed an extensive work on the principal subjects of dharmasastra follows from the numerous references to him contained in the Mit., the Dayabhaga, the Haralata and other works, The Suddhi-kaumudis9s ( B. I. edition ) of Govindananda frequently speaks of a work called Rajamartanda of Bhoja on sraddha. The Jayasithha-kalpadruma ( p. 26 ) quotes Rajmartanda and Bhoja- rajiya on the same page. Whether Bhoja composed on Dharma- astra one work or two (as he composed two on poetics ), and whether his work was a commentary or an independent digest it is difficult to say. M. M. HaraprasadaSastri in one of his reports threw out the suggestion that the Kamadhenu was the work of Bhoja, but this is entirely wrong, as the words of Sridatta in his Pitrbhaktis9® will show. Besides the two points noted above (about widow's rights and about the grandmother ), there are others on which the Mit. and Dharesvara disagreed : viz. Dhare$vara held ownership to be known only from sastra, while the Mit. held it to be laukika ( vide Viramitro- daya pp. 528, 536); Dharesvara held that the word ‘duhitarah’ in, in Yaj. stands for putrika in the order of succession ( Smpti-candrika 1. p. 295-96). On other points the views of Dharesvara coincide with those of the Mit., viz. on the usage of giving a special share to the eldest son having fallen into desuetude, on the daughter’s son’s right to succession, on the father’s inability to give a greater or smaller share to his sons in ancestral property on a partition during his life-time. Vide my article on Bhojadeva in JBBRAS for 1925 pp. 223-224 for details of these and other views ascribed to Bhoja- deva. A few other references may be noted here. The Nirnaya- mrtas97 ( p. 68 ) quotes a Bhojarajiya text. Inthe Kalaviveka of 595 अत एव राजमार्तण्डे मोजराजः-भ्ा ट विप्रे समुत्पन्ने मृतस्या्िदिते दिने । अमावास्यां प्रकवीति वदन्त्येके मनीषिणः ॥ ए. 18. Vide also the भाटुक्रियाकोमुदी p. 480 for the same verse from the राजमातेण्ड, Which is perhaps more frequent- ly quoted by गोषिन्दानन्द than any other nibandha. 596 तदेतानि वाक्यानि राह्ञालिसितत्वान्ादेयानीति केचित्‌ । तदयुक्तं wre राज- मिवम्धवच्छिषटपरिपहात्सं शयं नाहभ्तीति बेत्‌, न राजालिखितत्वस्यादशेनेनाप्युपपततेः | न हि यावन्ति स्मतिवाक्यानि तावन्ति सर्वाण्येव रज्ञा Certs प्रमाणमस्ति । पितृभा ( folio 38 of the D. 0, ms No. 153 of 1892-95 ). 9 यन्तु मोजराजीयं- न दिवा न निशासु च विशता न च स्मीशल्यसमोपहतोति । इं सममशिल्यनिषेधपरम्‌ । निरणथामृत, ‘978 | History of Dharmatielra Jimatavahana two verses about taking food at the time of eclipses are cited from Bhojadeva ( 7. 539). In several works certain views are stated to be those of a Bhapalapaddhati or of Bhapala or of Raja. The reference seems to be to a work of king Bhoja. For example, in the Danaratnakara a Bhapala-paddhati and Bhapala are frequently quoted.59® The Samayapradipas99 and Acaradarsa of Sridatta speak of both Bhapala and Raja. In other works also the views of Bhoja are often referred to as those of Raja(the king par excellence). For example, the Ekavali‘ee ( a work on Poetics) says that in the Srigara-prakasa the king accepted only one rasa. The Varsakau- mudi ( p. 107 ) says that a certain verse is cited by the Gangavakya- vali without naming the author, but as it is not cited by the Raja and the rest, it is unauthoritative. The several tattvas of Raghunandana mention two works of Bhojadeva or Bhojaraja. For example, the Tithitattva ( Jivananda vol. I, p. 17) cites a text as quoted in the Bhujabalabhima by Bhojaraja ; similarly in the Sraddhatattva, ( Jivananda vol. I, p. 266) ॐ two texts are cited as quoted qy Bhojadeva in Bhujabalabhima. Raghunandana also mentions Rajamartanda of Bhojaraja ( vide Ahnikatattva, vol. I, p. 451). He often cites the Rajamartanda and the Bhujabalabhima on the same page without the author's name (e.g. vide Udvahatattva, vol. II, 2. 124). Raghunandana often speaks of a Brhad-Rajamartagda along with the Rajamartanda on the same or the next page (vide Tithitattva, vol. I, pp. 25-26 and Jyotistattva pp. 605 and p. 655 ). That the Bhujabalabhima and the Rajamartanda are two different works appears to be clear. Whether the Brhad-Rajamartanda and the Rajamartanda are distinct works is not quite clear. ( Vide Tri. Cat. of Madras Govt. mss, for 96.पदमसनगतासतददर्‌ AMMO | कोकपालान्सरताश्च स्ववाहनसमग्वितान्‌ ॥ इति श्कोकार्धपाद्‌) भूपालपदतियोगीन्बरयोदष्टः । दानरलनाकर ( 2. 0. ms. No, 11“ of 1884-86 ) folio ३4 b; vide folios 19a, 28a, 29a, 50 9 for AMS. 99 तदेवं गोडीयवषनानि ममाणयतां तदुनुसरेण भ्यषस्थोक्ता । भूयालादिमते तु समन्य कादुश्योवांचनिकी व्यवस्था तिथ्यन्तरेषु मधानकालानुपन्यायादुदयकालब्यापिनयाद्र इति । समगमदीपि (D.C. ms, No, 871 of 1875-76 ) folio 8 ? ; केचिस्च राजाय हिसितवाक्यवलात्‌ युगेषु युगान्तेषु संक्रन्तिषुः पिण्डं न मन्यम्ते । समयप्रदीष folio 5५ 9 ; इदं च बोधायनवाश्यं राजायलिकितमपि बहुजनसंमतत्वाहिकितम्‌ | earerray (D.C. ms. No, $42 of 1875-76 ) folio 29 a. 800 राजा तु शृङ्गारमेकमेव शृङ्गारमकाे रसमुरीषकार | FHS P- 98 ( 8, 8. 89169 )- 64, Dhiretvara Bhojadeva 279. 1919-22, p. 4562, No. 3079 for Bhujabalanibandha of Bhojaraja in 18 adhydyas on astrological matters in relation to dharmasastra such as strijataka, karnadivedha, vrata, vivahamelaka-dasaka, grha- karmapravesa, sathkrantisnana, dvadasamasakrtya ). The Bhuja- balabhima is also mentioned by Salapani and by Rudradhara in his Sraddhaviveka. Bhoja of Dhara, according to the Bhojaprabandha, had a long reign of 55 years. There are three certain dates of his. A grant of Bhoja is dated samvat 1078 (i. €, 1021-22 A. D.). Vide I. A. vol. VI, p. 53; videalso I. A. vol. 41, p. 201 for Bhoja’s grant dated sathvat 1076 Magha (Jan. 1020 ) and E. I. vol. XVIII, p. 320 for Betma plate of Bhoja dated 1076 Bhadrapada (September 1020A. D.). His astronomical work, the Rajamrganka, takes sake 964 ( 1042-43 A.D.) as its initial ५४६८६.०० Bhoja’s uncle Muifija was slain by Tailapa between 994-997 A. 0. and Muiija was succeeded by Sindhu- raja or Sindhula also styled Navasahasinka. An inscription of Jayasirhha, the successor of Bhoja, is dated sashvat 1112, 1. €. 1055- 56 A. D. (vide E. I. vol. Ill, pp. 46-50). Therefore Bhoja must have reigned between 1000 and 1055 A. D. There is a work named Dharma—pradipa by Bhoja ( Deccan College No. 26 of 1874-75). It isa work by another Bhoja later than 1400 A. D., as it quotes Vijianesvara and the Madanaparijata. It was composed by an assembly of pandits at the bidding of king Bhoja of Agapura, son of Bharamalla. The ms. was copied in Samvat 1695 (i. ९. 1638-39 A. D.). 65. Devasvamin The Smrticandrika tells us that Devasvamin composed like Sri- kara and Sambhu a work in the nature of a digest of smrtis (smrti- Samuccaya ). Vide note 563 above. The commentary of Narayana of the Naidhruva gotra, son of Divakara, on the Asvalayana- grhyasatras? says that it relies upon the bhasya of Devasvamin on the same work. Gargya Narayana, son of Narasirhha, in his commentary on the Asvalayana-srautasatra, tells us that he follows the bhasya of Devasvamin thereon. It is hardly Ol शाको वेदतृनन्दोनो रबिन्नो माससंयुलः । अधो देवान्वितो feateeterstee ॥ रजमृगाङ्क ( 0. 0, ms. No. 105 of 1873-76). %> आश्वलावनगृह्यस्य भाष्यं भगवता कृतम्‌ । देवस्वामिसमारूपेन विस्तीर्णं तत्मसाद्तः॥ 280 History. of Dharmatisiva likely that two writers of the same name flourished about the same time. Hence it may be assumed that Devasvamin wrote bhasyas on the Aévalayana Srauta and Grhya satras and a digest of smrtis, where he discussed all topics of dharma, suchas acara, vyavahira, asauca &c The commentrry of Bhattoji®°s on the Caturvirhgatimata refers to the view of Devasvanin on Sraddha and asauca. Hemadri‘* (vol. Ill, part 2, p. 324 ) and Madhava (on Paraéara, vol. I, part 2, p. 328 ) also quote Devasvamin. The Smpticandrika quotes the views of Devasvamin on vyavahara and asauca several times. For example, Devasvamin®s explained the word Yautaka differently from the Nighantu ( which explained it as the wealth that was given to a woman when she was seated on the same seat with her husband at the time of marriage ). Devasvamin explained that the words of the Sarngraha®°¢ that, when a son was born to one of several full brothers, he stood asa son to all and that the same rule applied to several co-wives when one of them had a son, meant that in both cases another son should not be adopted. Devasvamin held the view (like Bhojadeva) that the word ‘duhitr’ in Yajnavalkya’s verses On succession meant putrika.°7 Devasvamin explained 603 देवस्वामिम।धवपारिजातकारप्रभृतयस्तु मासिके आशाोचेनापहृते सूतकानन्तरश्रदिदिन एव कर्तव्यं परस्तदहरेव वेति | चतुर्विशतिमतव्याख्यान 7. 135 ( Benares ed. ) 604 यदि Gale पवंसाश्धिः समाप्येत तद्‌ नितरामेव च शोभन यदि पुनरपरात्रे Tal वा तदहृकषपोभ्य श्वोमूते याग इति । BAe ( कालनिणंय ) 111, 2, ए. 324; vide pp. 496 and 565 of the same volume for mention of देवस्वामी 605 देवस्वामी तु पितुगृहष्ठव्यं reeset पृथग्धनतया मातुयोतकं मातृधनं मातुर्‌- वेत्याह तच्चिन्त्यम्‌ । स्मरतिच ° 771, ?. 285 ; vide digo ए. 696 “मतुगडलब्धासृ- थग्धनतया Tagged मात॒धनं योतुकम्‌ | योतशब्दस्यामिश्रणमधप्यथंः | यु मिश्रणा- मिश्रणयोरिति धातुपाठात्‌ । यतसिद्धाविति प्रयोगाच्चेति देवस्वाम्याह तदसत्‌ । 606 The verses of the संग्रह are; ययेकजाता बहवो MATEY sau: i एकस्यापि सने जाते सर्वे ते पत्रिणः स्मतः ॥ बह्वीनामेकपत्मीनामेष एव विधिः स्मतः । एका चेत्पुत्रिणी तासां पिण्डदस्तु स इष्यते ॥. The स्मरति ° ( 1, p. 289) says (तस्य पूर्वोक्तेन सहाविरोधाय देवस्वामिना तात्पयार्थं उक्तः उभयन्न नान्यः पतिनिधिः काये इति ग्रन्थेन ” The same words ocour in the स, वि, ( para 398 and p. 305 ) and in the दत्तकमीमांसा ( p. 42 ) 607 एवं सोपपत्तिकी Terns वुहितृगामितां बवता बुहृस्पलिनेवं द दुहितगामि धन- मिति विधायकं वशनजातं तल्पत्रिकाविषयमेव न पनरपन्रिकाद धरेश्वर- देवस्वाम्देवरातमतं स्मतितन्त्रत्वामिङ्णत्वामिमानोभ्मादकल्पितं निरस्तं वेदितन्यम्‌ | समृति ° 11. 66. Devasvamin 281 Manu®*'9, 141 as saying that the adopted son (in the particular case mentioned by Manu) took all the wealth and the gotra of his adoptive father. Vide Smrticandrika (Mysore ed.) on aSauca p. 22. The Vaijayanti ot Nandapandita (on Visnu 22. 32) quotes the view of Devasvamin that on the death of unmarried daughters mourning was to be observed for ten days.°°7 The Smrticandrika quotes a verse from Devasvamin‘®’° on sraddha also. In the Prapajicahrdaya (Tri. ऽ. series, p. 39) we are told that Devasvamin composed a brief gloss on the 12 adhyayas of the Parvamimamsasttra and the four adhyayas of the Sarhkarsakanda, seeing that the bhasyas of Bodhayana and Upavarsa were vast. The Govt. collection of Mss. at Madras has Devasvamin’s bhasya on the Samkarsakanda ( vide Tri. Cat. vol. III, part I, Sanskrit C, p. 3841). There are not sufficient data available to establish the identity of this writer with Devasvamin, the writer on dharmasastra. As the Smrticandrika quotes Devasvimin so profusely, he cannot be later than 1150 A. D. His earlier limit can be determined in several ways. Gargya Narayana’s comment on Asvalayanasrauta (II. 1.14) is quoted by Trikandamandana, who is himself quoted by Hemadri. Therefore Gargya Narayana could not have flourished later than 1100 A. D. ( vide Bhandarkar’s Report on search for mss., 1883-84, pp. 30-31). Therefore Devasviamin probably flourished about 1000-1050 A. D., if not earlicr. The fact that Devasvamin held certain views similar to Bhojadeva’s also corroborates the chronological position thus assigned to him. 66. Jitendriya Jitendriya is one of those writers who at one time held an eminent position but in course of time sank into unmerited oblivion. The works of Jimatavahana bear abundant testimony to the fact that Jitendriya wrote an extensive work on dharmasastra. In his Kala- viveka ( p. 380) Jimatavahana says that Jitendriya®"* wrote on the 608 अन्न तृतीयपादार्थो देषस्वामिना विवृतः तदीयं सर्वे रिक्थं Ast च इरेतेवेति । 609 देवस्वामी त्वमरलास्वपि द्शाहमाई 610 mater समुत्पन्ने अन्तरा मृतसूतके । अमावास्यां weal YAS मनीषिणः । e Il. p. 388 ५4 जितेन्द्रियशङ्ख धरान संभ्रमहरिवेशधवलयेोग्लोकेः । BSA कालनिपणमधुमा निःसारतां याति ॥ H. 0, 36. 382 History of Dharmatisira topic of kala (i. €. on determining doubtful points about the months, the tithis, sarnkrantis, &c. and the religious rites to be performed on them ), In several passages of the Kalaviveka the very words of Jitendriya are quoted. Jitendriya said that a rite that occupies in performance only a short time must be performed at the principal time indicated for it** (and not ata gauga time). From another quotation it appears that Jitendriya controverted the views of a predecessor Sambhramabhatta.°:3 Jitendriya is said to have enumerated the names of the fifteen mubartas of the day from the Matsyapurana‘'4 ; vide pp. 257, 367 of the Kalaviveka for other places where the views of Jitendriya on kala occur. In the Dayabhaga of Jimatavahana also Jitendriya is frequently mentioned. The Dayabhaga says that, if a man takes another's gold believing it to be iron or takes what is another's believing ( in good faith ) that itis his own, Jitendriya held in his remarks on the section of prayascitta that he is not guilty of theft.65 The peculiar doctrine of the Dayabhaga that the widow of a person, whether he was separate or a member of a joint family, succeeded to her deceased husband's estate had been already expounded by Jitendriya.**© The view of Jitendriya was that whatever is acquired by a person without using means or materials jointly owned by all members of a family is his exclusive property and that maitra (gifts ofa friend) and audvabika are 612 तथा जितेन्दियेणाप्युक्ं यप्पुनरस्पकालीनमेव रतयं स्वकाले TATUNG शक्यते तश्नो- Sith: कमेवेतत्यस्यासामथ्यंस्याभावान्मुर्यकाल एव कमीनुहठानमित्यन्तम्‌ । । काटलविवेक p. 489. 613 अभ्यान्यपि एवंविधानि संभ्रमभटकल्पितान्युपेक्षणीयानि art, तद्यमतिमन्दतमो wa: कथं सुन्द्रमतिना जितेन्द्रियेण।भिनन्दित; । का।लबिषेक 7. 266. 614 अत एव Praia ' रोद्श्ेत्रश्य मेत्रश्य ... भटः पञ्चदश स्मृताः ॥ › एताम्भत्स्थ- पुराणोकनेढेकशर्तपरिमितान्‌ यावक्नियतक्रमसंक्ञानमिधाय aA काङविवेक p. 370. 615 अत एव प्रायग्नित्तकाण्डे जितेद्धियेण भणितं यादि स्वणैमेव aed लोद्यविबुङ्गधा गृह्णाति असुवर्णं सुव्णेबुदथा आत्मीयसवुशं परकीयमेवात्मीयबुद्धया Tent we नापडादनिष्पातिः सर्वत्र यथावस्तु परकीयबुदधेरमादात्‌ । दायमाग 9. 360 ( od. of 1829 , p. 224 of Jivananda ). | $16 अतोऽविशेषेणेव विमकत्वायनयेक्षयेवपुश्रस्य a peal walter मिते. Parates आद्रणीयः । दायमाग ए. 256. । 68. Jidtendriya 89 only cited ( by ४३.) as examples of this proposition.6*7 Jitendriya held the daughter’s son entitled to succeed after the daughter, just as Vigvarapa, Bhoja and Govindaraja did. In the Vyavaharamatrka of Jimatavahana also Jitendriya’s views are cited (on pp. 302, 334 ). This shows that he wrote also on procedure in law courts. Jitendriya is also referred to in the Dayatattva of Raghnnandana.®" But no other early writer quotes Jitendriya. Therefore it appears that Jitendriya was probably a Bengal writer and flourished about tooo-r050 A. D. and that he was completely eclipsed by the brilliant Jimitavahana. 67. Balaka. Balaka like Jitendriya is no more thana name to us. Jimdtavahana’s works make frequent reference to him. He held the view that the daughter’s son, not being expressly mentioned as an heir by भत्र, came in after those expressly mentioned from the widow to the brother.°"9 The Dayabhaga notices that Balaka read a text of Apastamba in a wrong way.°?° Balaka said that the words of Sankha ‘ svaryatasya-aputrasya bhratrgimi dravyam. .. jyestha va patni’ apply either to a widow belonging to a caste other than her husband’s or to a very young widow or in case her husband was undivided or re-united.©?! Balaka says that when some property is acquired by one brother by means of learning, other brothers are not entitled 617 जितेन्धरियेणापि werent Rais तद्स्य यःवदुक्तपपचस्य संहेपेणायमर्थः पत्येतन्पः य्छिबिदुनमसाधारणोपायाजितं तदसाधारणं प्रदुर्शितमितयन्तेन । दायभाग ?. 189. 618 अत एव परक्डीयत्वेन विशेषतो जानतस्तद्पहारे सतेन्यं न तु स्वद्रम्य्नमेण परद्वन्यभ्यव- TATA जितेन्द्-( जितेन्द्रिय ! )दायमागप्रायश्ित्तविवेकरम्भतम्‌ । द्‌। पतस्व ?. 182 ( vol, ए of Jivananda’s ed. ); compare the view of eae set out below from the दायभाग ( note 683. ). 619 ae बालकद्नं Te Tears पितर भ्रातरस्तथा EN नियतक्रमाद्घस्तन एव दोहितरस्याधिकार हति तद्र बृहस्पतिविरोधाद्‌ यालवचनमेव | दायभाग ए" 282. 620 इदं बालकेनाकूलीकृत्य पठितं यस्तु धर्मेण Ae प्रतिपादयति ज्वेष्स्तं पितसम- भागं waite तद्नाकरम्‌ । दायभाग ». 161. The sutra is Ap, 79. 8. II. 6, 14.15 ‹ यस्त्वधर्मेण व्रभ्याणि प्रतिपादयति ज्येष्टोपि तमभागं कुर्वति. ` ^ यञ्च ॒बालकेनोर्त- असवर्णाविषयं वा युवत्यमिपायं वा अविभकतसंसुषटविषयं वा द्ध, देवचनं हति तेनाभ्यवरिथतशाख्ाथेकथनेनात्मनो भालङपत्वमेव Til सम्देहादेकतरानुष्ठानानुपपत्तेः । दायभाग ४. 268. Here thereis a play on the word wae, 23% History of Dharmaétistra to that क्वाणो. = The Dayabhaga refers toa passage from ‘Balaka in which the latter relies on the Parvamimarhsa example of ‘miudga and masa.*3_ In the Vyavaharamatrka of Jimuatavahana ( p. 346 ) it is stated that Bala held the same views as those of Srikara-misra ‘onacertain point. In the Prayaécitta-niripana of Bhavadeva a writer named Valoka is mentioned ( vide JASB 1912 at p. 336) This seems to be a Bengali scribe’s way of pronouncing the name Balaka. Bailaka is mentioned in Raghunandana’s Vyavaharatattva (-p. 47) also as holding the view with Srikara and others that adverse possession for twenty years conferred ownership in the case of immovable property.*4 Sulapani in his Durgotsaviveka twice quotes the views of Balaka and once refutes the latter.625 Hence it appears that Balaka was an eastern or Bengal writer, composed a work on several branches of dharmaégastra ( such as vyavahira and prayascitta ) and flourished before r100 A. D. 68. Balarupa. In the Smrtisira of Harinatha( I. 0. cat. No. 301, folio 128a ff ) there is a long passage setting out the views of Balaripa on the question of the succession to a childless man. In the Vivada- candra®*6 of Misaru-misra the opinions of Balarapa ( Balarapamata ) 622 बालक्रेनप्युक्तं न द्येकेन भात्रा aia ठब्धेऽपरेषामधिकारसंमवः प्रमाणाभावादि- व्यन्तेन | दायभागं ४. 190. | 623 अतो यदुबालकवचनं यथ। ATI माषप्रतिनिधौ Feat माषाणां च यज्ञसंबन्धे- अयहिय। वे माषा-इति माषा निषिद्धाः, तथात्मीयानात्मीयहृरणेपि अनात्मीयापहारो निषिद्धः, तद्वाटदवचनमेव पुबष्याहूतस्य रतेयपदारभस्यवाभावात्‌ | दायमाग ?. 356. 624 तस्मादयाह्नवल्क्यादि्विचनाष्टंशतिव्षदशवषादिकालर्मोग एव स्वत्वं जनयति तथा काल- met चीजमङ्करं जनयति तरवश्च कुसुमभिति स्वामिना चापरित्यक्तेपि शाज्ञोक्त- कालीनमगास्स्वाम्यमन्यस्य भवति यथा जयेन राकः परराष्र्षने इति । एवमेव भीकरबालकजेग्लोकभवदेवभटथूलपाणिकुष्ठकमटचण्डेभ्वरमन्त्रिनव्यवधंमानोपाध्याय- TAT | CATT लादृगेव भ्यवहारतस्व p. 223 ( Jivananda vol. IT). 6४5 इति अर्नविनाधिकारीयिष्णुधमेत्तरिवचनमाच्रदुर्शिना यालकेनान्र विषये पूर्वदिने नवभी- कृत्यं युग्मादिति age ˆ भगवःयाः प्रवेशादिविसर्गान्ताश्च याः क्रियाः ' इत्यादि वचनेन विराधात्तद्धेयम्‌ । दु्गोःसव विवेक p. 16 ( Sanskrit 88111४5 87271 १86 ed. ). Vide p. 9 also for reference to gras view on देवीपुजा, (06 बुहितृणाममावे तदेन्वयस्ततुत्रादिर्विभजेदित्यरथः। मातुरन्वय इति ATT | विवाद्चन्द्र ( 2. 0. ms. No. 57 of 1883-84) folio 88a; बालङ्पमते तु संसु सहोद्रत्वमपि संसृष्टविभागमहृणे हेतुः । 10. folio 35a, - 68. ‘Balartiga त 205 that the words of रद]. ( II. 117 tabhya rte’nvayah ) mean the off- spring of the mother and on the succession to reunited coparceners are cited. In the Vivadacintamani of Vacaspati*®7 the views of Bala~ rapa are frequently cited. Relying on the words of 24124414, Balarapa held that an unmarried daughter was entitled to preference over a married one as an heir to a sonless man. As regards the verse of Harita that ifa young widow was karkasa ( quarrelsome, ‘suspected of unchastity ° according to others ), then she was to be ‘given maintenance alone ( out of her husband’s estate ), Balaripa’s view was that it refers tothe widow of a re-united coparcener.§*® Balardpa was of opinion that a@tmabandhus, pitrbandhus and matr- bandbus succeeded in the order stated.6*9 The Kaladarga of Aditya- bhatta names Balarapa among the authorities on which it relies. This shows that Balardpa wrote not only on vyavabara but also on kala. As Harinatha and the Vivadacandra mention Balaraipa he is certainly earlier than about 1250 A. D. The important question is whether Balaka and Balaripa are identical. I think, though with some hesitation, that they are identical. The difficulty is caused by the fact that Harinatha speaks of ‘the author of Balarapa,’ which implies that Balaripa is a work and not an author, while the others speak of Balaripa as an author. The Dayabhaga always speaks of Balaka and never of Balaripa, while the Mithila writers, Misaru-miéra, Vacaspati and Harinatha, speak of Balarapa and not of Balaka. Balaka is not mentioned by any writer belonging to a province other than Bengal. It is not likely that there were two early authors belonging to the same locality on vyavahara bearing two names so nearly the same as Balaka (or Bala ) and Balarapa. Moreover if we read one quotation from the Dayabhaga between the lines ( vide note 621 ) where Jimatavahana makes fun of Balaka by charging him with having exposed his Balargpatva ( being Biala- ripa, being childish ) it appears that the Dayabhaga looked upon Balaka and Balarapa as identical. If so Balaka or Balaraipa 67 अपुत्रस्य कुमारी tet sefianent चोढा चेति ceanTeTeday करम इति Wiser । विवादुिन्तामाणि p- 153. 628 सृ्टिमायापरमिति बाढपः। विवाद्जिन्तामणि ए. 152. % एतेषां करमेणाधिकादः । बाठक्कपोण्येवम्‌ । Rare Greg P- 155, 206 History of Dharmatistra becomes an ancient writer, who flourished certainly before 1109 A.D. Asheheld the same views as Srikara and an antiquated view about the rights of the daughter’s son he must not be later than roso A. D. 69. Yogloka Yogloka like Jitendriya and Balaka is a writer about whom we know only from the works of Jimitavahana and Raghunandana. He is the last of the series of writers enumerated in one place by the Kalaviveka as having dealt with the subject of kala (vide note 641 above ). The Vyavahara-matrka of Jimatavahana very frequently®s° cites the views of Yogloka and generally twits him with thinking himself as being a logician or a new-fangled ( nava-tarkikash-manya ) logician, Both in the Kalaviveka and the Vyavaharamatrka Yogloka is generally cited for being refuted (€, g. pp. 457-58, 465, 483 of the Kalaviveka ). It is only very rarely that Jimatavahana agrees with Yogloka (as on p. 369 of the Kalaviveka ). From certain passages of the Kalaviveka it follows that Yogloka composed two works, one called Brhad-Yogloka (larger work ) and the other styled Svalpa- Yogloka (a smaller-work 2.4" It appears that Yogloka was later than Srikara and accepted certain illustrations given by the latter. The Vyavaharatattva of Raghunandana informs us that like Srikara and Balaka, Yogloka held the view that twenty years’ adverse possession of jmmoveables conferred ownership (vide note 624 above). The same work tells us that the Maithilas followed the view of Yogloka that the verse of Katyayana ( yadyekadesa- vy4ptapi... nrpam) was intended to apply to a case where a litigant threw down the challenge that if even one out of several 630 Vide pp. 291, 203, 295, 310, 318, 313, 341, 69 Ghaleay तु स्वस्पवहद्‌ ्म्थभेदेन हइ यमेवोकं बल।यलनिरूपण।क्षमल्वात्‌ | SVS p. 365 ; तस्मान्मुलाधार्मिककम्पितं योग्लोकस्य बृहद रगे aie । अस्यैव लल्य- we अन्येषु थ ॒मियन्धेषु दृशेनाद्‌ योग्ठोकीयचहदूपन्थवुरातनुर्ती्वमावात्‌ | तस्मार्स्वयमेवेतदू योग्लोकेनापि बृहदु ्रन्थ लिलितम्‌ । काल विषे 7, 275; vide also pp. 177, 221 490 for references to योग्टोक 658 ag giant asec योग्लोकस्य adit कमागता भूरिति भाषां nailed द्शवर्षभुज्यमानत्वात्‌ इति श्रीकरोदृाहृरणस्वीकरणं तदसंभतम्‌ | व्यवहारमातृका p. 502, 69. Yoogloka 287 items of property charged were brought home to him as having been stolen by him, he would restore all the items claimed.%35 The foregoing establishes that Yogloka wrote at least on kala and vyavahara and composed two treatises on kala. Jimatavahana‘s+ says that a predecessor of his styled Diksita criticized a certain reading of Yogloka’s, i.e. Yogloka preceded Diksita, who was a predecessor of Jimttavahana. Jimitavahana further refers to ancient ( purdiana ) mss. of Yogloka’s work. Hence Yogloka must have preceded Jimatavahana by at least a hundred years. He is later than Srikara(note 632 above). Therefore he must have flourished between 950-1050 A. D 70. Vijnanesvara The Mitaksara of Vijiianesvara occupies a unique place in the Dharmasastra literature. Its position is analogous to that of the Mahabhasya of Patanjali in grammar or to that of the Kavyaprakaga of Mammafta in Poetics. It represents the essence of dharmasastra speculation that preceded it for about two thousand years and it became the fountain head from which flowed fresh streams of exegesis and developments. Under the decisions of the Courts in British India, the Mitaksara is of paramount authority in several matters of Hindu Law (such as adoption, inheritance, partition etc. } throughout India except where, as in Bengal, the Dayabhaga prevails. The Mit. professes to be a commientary on the Yajiiavalkya- smyti. In the colophons of several mss. it is described as Rju- mitaksara, Pramitaksara or simply Mitaksara. These names are probably due to some of the verses appended at the end of the commentary.§35 The Mit. isnot only a commentary explanatory 633 sqegitqeq P. $17 ( Jivananda vol. II ) ‘ay येषां मध्ये एकमपि भथा गहीतं विभावयसि तवा सवेनेव दातभ्यमिति प्रतिक्ञाविकयत्वमेकदेशविभावितत्वं वयनस्योति जोग्कोकमतानुस्मिथिलमतं युकमिति वश्यम्‌ । › OM mre इति तु पितं बोग्लोकेन तद्वहुष्ववश्न भवतीति sete । काठनिवेक OF इति याहवल्क्यमुनिशाकलगता fey कस्य विहिता विदुषः । भ्रनिताक्षरावि लाथेवती परिविशति भवणधोरमतम्‌ ॥ गम्भीरामि भिताक्षरा। अनल्पार्थामिरत्पाभिर्विदुतिर्विदधिता भथा ॥ 268 Bistory of Dharmatistra of the verses of Yajiiavalkya, but it isin the nature of a digest -ot smyti material. It brings together numerous अप passages, explains away contradictions among them by following the rules of inter- pretation laid down in the Parvamimarhsa system, brings about order by assigning to various dicta their proper scope and province ( visayavyavastha ) and effects a synthesis of apparently disconnected smyti injunctions. The Mit. quotes a host of smrti writers®3® and six predecessors, who were commentators and authors of digests on dharmasastra, viz. Asahaya, Vigvarapa, Medhatithi, Srikara, Bharuci and Bhojadeva. Besides it quotes Vedic works (like the Kathaka ), the Brhadaranya- kopanisad, the Garbhopanisad, the Jabalopanisad, the Nirukta, Bharata ( author of Natyasastra ), ४०९०५114, Panini, Susruta, the Skandaporana, the Visnupurana, Amara, Guru (i.e. Prabhakara ). The author styles himself Vijfianayogin in the concluding verses of his commentary and later writers frequently refer to him in that way. He belonged to the Bharadvaja gotra and was son of Padma- nabhabhatta. He was a paramabhamsa (i. €, an ascetic ) and was the pupil of Uttama. Hetells us that when he wrote the Mitaksari, king Vikramarka or Vikramadityadeva was ruling in the city called Kalyana®37 ( now in the Nizam’s dominion ). The verses at the 636 The स्मरति and WHS quoted by name are: अङ्गिरस्‌, युद्दङ्गिःरस्‌, मध्य. MRT, अत्रि, आपस्तम्ब, MATT, उपमन्यु, उशनस्‌, ऋष्यशृङ्गः, कश्यप, काण्व, कात्यायन, SOMA, कमार, हृष्णद्वपायन, BI, ard, Taare, गोभिल, गोतम, चतुरविंशतिमत, च्यवन, छागल ( Basa ), जमद्म्नि, जातू- कण्यं, जाबाल, ( ०-लि ), Hina, दक्ष, Seana, देवल, धौम्य, नरद्‌» पराशर, पारस्कर, पितामह, Fares, Wa, Waly, पचेतेस्‌, य॒हत्मचेतस्‌, बृ दुमचेतसू+प्रजापति, WKS, TWAT, वुदधबृहस्पाते, WIAA, AVA, MHA, मादान, भगु, मनु, TEA, ृद्धमनु, THY, माकंण्डेय, यम, HTH, याज्ञवल्वय, FEAT, qareaera, feiea, sina, वसिष्ठ, sede, szulee, ष्ण, seers, वृद्विष्णु) वेयध्रपादु, देशम्पायन, ध्याघ्र ( ° व्याघ्रपाद्‌ ), ध्यास, TEFEN, VW, , शङ्कलिसित, शण्डिल्य, शातातप, BEAT, वृद्धशातातप, शनःपुर्छ, शोनक, ` षटर्िशनम्मत, dad, aga, सुमन्तु, हारीत, बृहद्धारीत, Faerie. 637 नासीदस्ति wena क्षितितले कल्थाणकस्यं पुरं नो दृष्टः श्रुत एव वा क्षितिपतिः श्रीदिक्रमाकोपमः । विज्घानिन्दरपाण्डितो न भजते िंचा"यदम्योपमश्याकर्पं स्थिरमस्तु कृत्पलतिकाकञ्पं तदेतज्नयम्‌ ॥ 4th verse at the end. 70, Vijfanetvara 289 end containing the personal history appear to be genuine. They occur in the oldest Mss. of the Mit. such as the Government of Bombay Ms. dated sakasamvat 1389. The author of the Mit. was a profound student of the Puarva- mimamsa system. Throughout the Mit. discussion of Parva- mimarhsa nyayas and their application to dharma$astra are sown broadcast. For example, the Mit.on Yaj. I. 81 (whether it is a niyama ot parisamkbya ), 1. 86, I. 114, II. 126, Il. 265 &c., may be consulted. The Mit., as the very name implies, is generally concise and to the point. Butin his desire to make his work a repository and synthesis of varied smrti dicta the author does not mind if he has occasionally to expand his commentary to enormous lengths. For example, the Mit. on ४३]. III, 265 and 290 occupies several pages of closely printed text. As the Mitaksara names Visvarapa, Medhatithi and Dhiareévara, it must have been composed after 1050 A. D. The Smrticandrikas38 of Devannabhatta ( which as will be seen later on was composed about 1200 A. D. ) several times criticizes the views of the Mit., viz. the latter’s remarks that the giving of an additional share to the eldest son is disapproved of by the people, the reasons given for preferring the mother to the father and the definition of daya. Vijfianegvara is named in the Kalpataru of Laksmidhara%s9 ( compos- ed in the 2nd quarter of the 12th century ). This shows that the Mit. was composed before 1120 A.D. A greater approximation can be arrived at in several ways. The Kalpatarn mentions 68 aqateraies mrad विषमो विभागः ... Ba: | एतदपि वाश्चात्रेणेतबु- दवारविषमविभागादौ लोकविदवेषोस्ति त्युत वियागुणपुण्यकर्मसंपन्नज्येषठादौ भागा- fet लोकानुरागो दृश्यत हति यत्किचिदेतत्‌ । स्मृतिश्च ° 17. p. ४66; ‹ न च दाय- शब्देन यद्धनं स्वामिसंयन्ध।देव ,,. तदुच्यत इति दायादिशब्दनिरूपणा्भं भिता- ange युक्तम्‌ ' cafes. 77. ?. 267 ; ‹ पिता स्षपत्नीपु्रेष्वपि साधारणो माता तु न साधारणीति परत्यासस्यतिशयोस्तीति विप्रलम्भसदशभिदं न हि जननीजनक- थोजन्यं परति संनिकषैतारतम्थमस्ति। ° स्म॒तिच 7. p. 297. ००४ ^ क्षत्रधर्मस्तु art meet TREAT न कारयेदिति विज्ञानश्वरस्वरसः ' folio 580 of the Benares Sanskrit College transoriptof कृल्पतश ( ०४ ब्यवहार ) H, De 37. $90 History of Dharmatiara Vadibhayarhkara®*° who, the Viramitrodaya® tells us, was an admirer and follower of VijiianeSvara and yet found fault with his explanation of Yaj. II. 51 ( rikthagraha rnam &c. ). Therefore the Mit. must have been composed at the latest before 1100 A. D. Among the Calukyas of Kalyana, the only king named Vikramarka or Vikramaditya during whose reign Vijianesvara could have flourished is Vikramaditya VI who reigned for over fifty years from about 1076 to 1127 A.D. Vide Bombay Gazetteer vol. I, part 2, pp. 446-453, I. A. vol. 48 p. 6 (for pedigree of the Calukyas of Kalyana with dates ), I. A. vol. 12 p. 212 (for an inscription of Vikramaditya Tribhuvanamalla dated sake 1047 ) and I. A. vol. 22, pp. 296-298. From all these considerations it follows that the Mit. was composed between 1070-1100 A. D. Out of the numerous commentaries on the Mit. those of Visve- Svara, Nandapandita and Balambhatta are the most famous. Vide sec- tions 93, 105, 111. Considerations of space preclude any detailed state- ment of the doctrines peculiarly associated with the name of Vijiia- 165५41४. There are however some which must be mentioned. He laid down ( on Yaj. I. 52 ) that wherever the word sapinda occur- red, it denoted either directly or mediately connection with particles of one body (i. €, blood-relationship withan ancestor ). He also strictly adheres to the principle that propinquity is the guiding principle in matters of inheritance and succession. He divides daya into apratibandha and sapratibandha and affirmed that sons, grandsons and great-grandsons acquired by birth ownership in ancestral property. On all these matters he is diametrically opposed to Jimatavahana. Aufrecht in his great catalogue makes conflicting statements about a work called Asaucadagaka. On I. p. 55 he notes that Aéau- cadasaka is a work of Harihara with a commentary by Vijfianeévara and again on I. p. 571 he ascribes Agaucadagaka-tika to Vijiianesvara. On I. p. 762 he ascribes the Agaucadasaka and Dasaslokivivarana to Harihara and appears to distinguish him from that Harihara who 640 शोध्यस्य जननी तातः TH वा तत्सोद्रः । भार्या पु्नवती धर्म्या ज्ञातयः परिकीर्तिताः ॥ इति वादिभयंकरे हस्यतिदननात्‌ | tbid. folio 230. 641 विज्ननेन्वरानुयायी यथात्र TTS THRE | अद्य बत जगतख्यातविज्ञनिन्वरवो LAT | Ghats नानुततन्धाममद्धतम्‌ ॥ दीरमिन्रोदय १. 380 ( Jivanands), — 20, Vijhinetvara 491 composed a bhasya on Paraskaragrhyasitra. On I. 0. 795 he corrects himself by saying that Harihara wrote only the commentary on the Agaucadagaka and that the latter is identical with the Dagasloki- ` vivarana. On III. p. 121 he is doubtful whether the Aégaucadasaka is a work of VijaneSvara. Inthe Deccan College collection there is an ancient Ms. ( No. 196 of 1884-1887 ) of the Agaucadasaka. 64 It was copied in sashnvat 1578 Margasirsa (i. e. December 1522 A. D.). It distinctly says that VijfianeSvarayogin composed in ten Sardila- vikridita stanzas a work on 2424८ and that Harihara composed a commentary on it. In the Bhadkamkar collection there is an old Ms. of the Agaucadagaka, the colophon of which ascribes the work to Vijfianesvara. Vide I. O. cat. p. 565, No. 1749 for a ms, of ASaucadasaka with Harihara’s commentary dated samhvat 1589 ( 1532-33 A.D.) That the Aéaucadagaka was a very popular work follows from the several commentaries thereon that are available even now. Raghunatha%4}, son of Madhava and nephew of the famous Narayanabhatta, composed a commentary on the Daéaéloki in Sake 1500 (D.C. No. 82 of A. 1882-83). -There is another commentary on the same work by Bhattoji (09. C. No. 99 of 1582-83 ). Harihara quotes in his bhasya, besides several well- known smrtikaras, a work called Visvadarsa ( folio 4b ).64+ Harihara, the commentator of the Paraskaragrhyasitra, is described as the pupil of VijfidneSvara in several mss. Harihara in his bhasya on Paraskaragrhya quotes Vijianesvara and Kalpataru. The Visva- darSa praises Vijianesvara very highly.°45 Therefore it appears that 642 The ms. begins: अथ विज्ञनिश्वरविरचितमुनिज( न )वाकयेर्भेताक्षरमध्यात्‌ । आशोचदृशकनरत्ति वदति sted इरि नत्वा ॥ अन तावद्िज्ञानेश्वरयोगीन्द््तुवंणा- SY जन्मनि सूता भवं TAS मरणे TI मवं शावं चूतकशावसिद्धंधथं aque शादलविक्रीडितेन QS तन्ना FAAS मातुगैमेविपत्स्वघ &6. Thecolophon at the end is इत्याशोचद्शकभाष्यं श्रीहरिह(र ) विरचितं समाप्तम्‌ । ०५० रघुनाथ criticizes वि्ञानेश्वर यत्तु विज्ञानेभ्ब्रेण प्रतिलोमानां AMAIA एवेत्युक्तं तद्रबनविरोधादुपक्षणीयम्‌ । प्रतिलोमा भमेहीना इत्येततु पाकयज्ञायभिश्रायम्‌ ' folio 19, ०4 संमति विशेषो विन्वादशौत्‌ ‹ परतस्लीणां Bret पिवुविपदि मवेत्‌ ° . यथा ( तथा ! धन्य प्रतिगृहं स्फुराष्विन्वादुशो स्फुरतु तव कतिः eaten: ॥ TV. 53; श्रीरामस्य qr अ यथा रामायणे मारते ङीर्विमोति यथा च gages सा कारिका भूषणम्‌ । भीमदन्य मिताक्चरादिषु यथा afew स्तथा विन्वदज्खनिषन्धने wa peels जयन्त्यू्जिताः wmf विश्वाद्श (in Bhadkamkar collection ), 262 History of Dharmatistra Vijiianegvara composed the Asaucadasaka alias Dagasloki and that Harihara, who was either VijfidneSvara’s pupil or not very far ~ removed from him ( 25 he is quoted by Hemadri ) composed a com- mentary thereon. The first verse of the DagaSloki is cited below as a specimen of the concise style attempted by the author.*4° Aufrecht (II. p. 50 and I. p. 236 ) credits Vijfianegvara with a bhasya on Trirhsat-sloki, a work in thirty Sragdhara stanzas on asauca. This work together with the commentary was printed in pothi size at Benares in samvat 1918 (1861-62 A. D.). The printed text contains*+7 the same colophon at the end and date as ‘tthe D. €. ms. No. 217 of 1879-80, which was copied in sarmhvat 1711 Caitra (i.e. April 1655 A. D.). It is extremely doubtful, however, whether Vijfianegvara wrote a bhasya on the TrirhSat-sloki. In the bhasya Vijfianesvara and the Mitaksara are cited by name.*48 The manner of referring to them rather suggests that the commentary on the Trithsat-Sloki was composed by some person other than Vijiianesvara, who, however, drew largely on the Mit. There is a ms. of the Trirhgat-sloki with a commentary in the Bhau Daji collection which is ascribed to Hemadri on the cover ( vide BBRAS. cat. vol. II. p. 209, No. 667 ). In the Madras Govt. mss. library there is a ms. of the Vyavahara- siromani of Narayana, who says that he learnt dharmasastras under VijfianeSvara (adhitya dharmasastrani Vijianesvara-sadguroh ) The work deals with the vyavahara portion and was composed for the benefit of the un-initiated (balabodhartham). The ms. contains the portion dealing with the king’s duty tolook into the disputes of people, the time for doing that, sabha, definition of prad-vivaka (judge ), the plaint and its defects, asedha ( restraint of the 646 मातुगै्मविपत्स्वघं त्रिदिवसं मासत्रयेतो यथा मासाहं Ry सूतकावधिरतः स्नानं पिः सवेदा । ज्ञातीनां पतनादि जातमरणे पित्रोदेशाहं सद्‌ा नाम्नः प्राक्‌ तदुपति सूतक- वशाद्भातुदंशाहं परम्‌ ॥ 647 Tho colophon is इति विह्वानेभ्वरकूते नरिरच्छोकीयमाध्य संपूणम्‌ । 648 rs दशरात्रं वा ... GTS मातुरेव हि ॥ हत्येतदृष्याख्यानसतमये विज्ञनेभ्वराचा्े .स्पष्टीरूतम्‌ ॥ . Sb of the printed text and 20 ० thems. The verse refer- red to is याज्ञ, III. 18, On verse 14 of the शर्की wehave ‹ एत्व भावार्यपिश्युपाभ्यायान्‌ ,.„. न च तेः सह MNT ॥ इत्येतदरभ्यार्यानमिताक्षरायां VET p. 9b of the printed text and 5a of the ms, 20, Vijntinetvara 298. defendent ), means of proof the eighteen titles of law, ०451732, niksepa, sarnbhaya-samutthana, dattapradanika, abhyupetya-asusrasga, vetanasya-anapakarma, asvamivikraya, vikriyasarhpradana, kritva- nusaya, samayasyanapakarma, simavivada, stri-purhsayoga, dayavi- bhaga. ‘The work breaks off in the middle of the explanation of the verse ‘patni duhitaragcaiva’. He closely follows the Mitaksara in allthat he says; but in one place he expressly differs from his teacher, viz. whereas the Mitaksara mentions four different times for partition, Narayana says that there are really two times of partition, when the father desires partition and when the son or sons desire it.648a On sarkbhayasamutthana he quotes a passage from Kautalya ( the ms. uses this form ), which agrees closely with the printed text ( vide Arthasastra III. 14, p. 186, ed. by Shama Sastri ).°4*b q1. Kamadhenu This was an ancient digest on the various branches of Dharma- Sistra. Unfortunately no ms. of this work has yet come to light. The Kalpataru of Laksmidhara refers to the view of Kamadhenu and others that what was bestowed upon a slave ( dasa) by his master through favour was also under the control of the master.64? The Hiralata which was composed in the third quarter of the 12th century several times mentions the views of Kamadhenu.°s¢ 68a अनया चातु्विष्यमस्म्रुश्चरणर्मिताक्षरायां प्रतिपादितं पितुरिष्छायां पुत्रेच्छायां च विभागः संभवति नान्यथेति कालद्वथमेव विभागस्येति तु युकम्‌ । न च पित्रनन्तरकाल एक इति भेविध्यमिति वाच्यं पिज्रनन्तरकालेपि पुज्राणामिच्छाभवे विभागस्येवामावेन THEA एवानन्तरकालस्याप्यन्तभवात्‌ | 8b अन्न विशेषमाह कोटल्यः । अभिष्टोमादिषु दीक्षणीयाया ऊर्ध्वं य आपन्नः Tag लमेत सोमविक्रयादुष्वं चतुथं परवरमयोदासनादृभ्वं तृतीयमभिष्टोमीयादुध्वं पादोनं माध्यं Pangea सममेनीतासु दृक्षिणासु भवतीति । 049 On the verse of कात्यायन ! दासस्य fe धनं यत्‌ स्यात्‌ स्वामी तस्य प्रमु्म॑तः ' the कृत्पतर्‌ „859 ‘ war प्रसादे स्वामिना दासस्य कृते दत्तं तन्न दासधनेपि स्वामी भमुरिति पकाशहछायुधकामधेनुपारिजातम्रभूतयः; ॥ > 1011० 876 ofthe कट्पतड्‌ ( Benares College transcript ). 650 @. g. on p. 41 “जत एव जातमूते मृतजाते a कलस्य त्रिरान्रामेोति हमरतिषथनं काम. dapat गर्मसावारी प्रकरणे लिखितम्‌ | १, . Vide pp. 111, 174, 200 algo for other references to the Bray and note 596 above, $04 History of Dharmatastra Sridharacarya, in his Smrtyarthasara,°s* enumerates the Kamadhenu among the works and writers who dwelt upon the teachings of the अण, The Vivadratnakara‘s? of CandeSvara speaks of the Kamadhenu several times. In the Sraddhakriya-kaumudi certain verses from the Kamadhenu are cited in connection with the rites on certain tithis of the month of Agvina (0. 261 ). Salapani in his Sraddhaviveka names as his authorities the Kamadhenu and other digests after the smrtis.653 The Samayapradipa‘s¢ of Sridatta notices that the Kamadhenu read ‘dvitiya caitramasasya,’ while the Kalpataru read ‘ trtiya.’ The same reading of the Kamadhenu is noticed in the Smrtisara of Harinatha (I. O. cat., No. 634, folio 79b ). In the Rajanitiratnakara the Kamadhenu is quoted on the definition of ‘raja’ and on the two varieties of rulers (pp.2 ands). In Hemadri there is 3 quotation from Smptikamadhenu ( vol. IV, p. 992 ) about the freedom in kali from incurring sin on account of contact with great sinners. The question arises who isthe author of the Kamadhenu. If we rely upon a highly paronomastic passage of the Vyavahararatna- kara®ss of Candesvara, Gopala was the author of the Kamadhenu. In the Rajanitiratnakara (2. 81 ) Gopala is said to have held, with 651 कामथेनो प्रदपेब्धो कल्पवृक्षलतासु च । शम्मुदरविडकेदारलोष्ठरायैश्य भावितम्‌ # मन्वायनेकस्मृतिषु व्याख्यातृभरतिपादितम्‌ । स्मत्यथस्षारं वक्ष्यामि सुखानुषठानशिदधये ॥ Intro. verses 4-5 ( Anandaérama ed.). प्रदीषे is a wrong reading for प्रदीपे 65४ यं कामयेनुरनुयाति सकल्पवृक्षो८( क्षा! ee Bax निजफलाय स पारिजातः । तं भैरिगोन्रमिदमुष्चसदखदशिं चण्डेश्वरं तुलयितुं कतमे भवन्तु ॥ Maer ( verse at the end); there is a play on the words कामधेनु, कल्पवृक्ष ( कल्पतर ) ५५ पारिजात Which are names of works on धर्मशाञ्ज 8180; vide विवादृरत्नाकर्‌ PP. 78, 80, 135, 498, 651 for other references to the कामधेनु 655 The श्राद्धविवेक begins विलोक्य ध्मशाञ्ञाणि कामघेन्वादिं ग्रहान्‌ | विवेकः पार्णा- दीनां क्रियते शूलपाणिना ॥ 68५ अन्न च ert द्वितीया चैश्रमासस्येति लिखितं कल्पतरो तृतीयेति लिद्धितं वद्र qrege ऽथोतिःशाज्ञे मधौ त्तीयेति पाटाश्ये्रतृतीयेव मर्या । समयमदीपि 2“ ^. ms. No. 471 of 1875-76, folio 589, 655 यन्न्यायामतसेचनात्सफलतां पुष्णाति कल्पद्रुमः सथः पहठदमातनोति Pract श्रीपारि- जातोपि सः । गोपालस्य च दामधेनुरमणं काम्यार्थदुग्धं स्वयं eA स्वयमेष कस्य भवने सेव्यो न रत्नाकरः ॥ व्यवहाररत्नाकर ( 241४१०० Notices, vol. VI. p. 66). erga ( BeIag ), पारिजात, क।मधेनु and रत्नाकर have two senses, 71, Kamadhenu 295 Laksmidhara and Srikara,*s* the view that on the state wealth poor and helpless people have a claim and that the state perishes if the supreme authority is wielded by many (and not by one). The same work (p. 84 ) cites the opinion of Gopala that the coronation rites mentioned in works on rdajaniti are merely illustrative and that according to the particular usages of countries and families a king may be proclaimed without those rites by merely being seated on athrone.°s7 The Pitrbhakti of Sridatta expressly mentions that itis based on the works of Gopala and others. The Viramitrodaya cites the view of Gopala that vyavahara comes under what is called jalpa in the technique of the Nyaya system and that the view of Misra that Vyavahara is comprised under the term vada of the same system is wrong. Whether the Gopala mentioned by Mitramisra is the same as the author named by CandeSvara it is difficult to say. But it seems to me that they are identical. Aufrecht in his great catalogue (I. 93 ) ascribes the authorship of the Kamadhenu to Sambhu. Whence he derived this information is not clear. The authors and works cited by him do not, so tar as I know, ascribe the Kamadhenu to Sambhu. ४ is true that Sambhu is credited by the Smpticandrika with a digest on dharmasastra ( vide note 563 above ) and the Smrtyarthasara also names him as one of the authorities on which it relies. Hemadri$s9 also tells us that Sambhu was a nébandha- kara and refuted the views of Medhatithi on Manu III. 125. The Smrticandrika frequently cites the views of Sambhu on vyavahara and generally refutes them. For example, on the word ‘pitarau’ occurring in Yaj. II. 135 Sambhu remarked that no difference should be made between the parents (father and mother) as heirs, since whoever out of the two took the wealth of their son it would come 656 Vide note 565 above. 657 गोपालमते स्वभिषेकादिपयन्तमुपलक्षणं यथदेशकुलाचारं सिंहासनदानादि ACETATE rae aq गोपाठेन तश्वनिर्णयेषु कथात्वाद्वादुत्वमेवास्येति मिश्रमतत्वेनोपन्यस्य जयभङ्ग- फलेकत्वात्‌ स्थापनावसनरवाश्चं जल्प एवायमिति तन्निरस्तं तद्‌ ह्रयभण्ययुक्तम्‌ । Ato P. ४, 50 दो देवे ... कृमुभयन्न धा ॥ यदप्येकेकमुभयन्र वेत्ययं विधिरेव न भवलीति सेनेवोक्तं तत्तु शम्भुनमतिभिनियिन्धकारेः पराकृतमिति अस्माभिननाद्रियते । wate 171. 1, ». 148 ; तदेवं तावद्‌ qe होमस्तदभावे तूपासनाप्राविति शम्भकषद्कधरपमतयः aay IIL. 1. ए. 1331. 296 Eiistory of Dharmatastra to both.6 Vide also Smrticandrika II, pp. 205, 216. Therefore Sambhu also, being mentioned by the Smpticandrika and the Smptyarthasara, is certainly earlier than r150 A. D. In this state of the authorities I am doubtful whether Sambhu was the author of the Kamadhenu. Iam inclined to hold that he was not the author of that work and that Gopala was the author. This conclusion is somewhat strengthened by the fact that the Smrtyarthasara mentions both Kamadhenu and Sambhu as authorities on which it relies. If Sambhu had been, in the opinion of the Smptyarthsara the author of the Kamadhenu, the mention of both would have been super- fluous. Mr. Jayasval (in JBORS for 1927, vol. XIII, parts 3-4, p. VII ) ascribes the Kamadhenu to Bhoja, but this is wrong ( vide p. 277, note 576 ). As the Kamadhenu is named as an authority by the Kalpataru and the Haralata it is certainly not laterthan 11004. D. It cannot be very much earlier since it is not mentioned by Medhatithi and the Mitaksara. It may therefore be assigned to the period betwecn 1000 and 1100 A. D. 72. Halayudha The Kalpataru®** of Laksmidhara in its vyavahara section quotes the views of a jurist Halayudha several times. The Vivadaratnakara of CandeSvara mentions Halayudha dozens of times. In the Smrti- sara of Harinatha®*? Halayudha-nibandha on possession is quoted. The Smrtisara also says ( folio 140 ४ ) that Halayudha favoured niyoga by the widow of a son-less deceased person and deprived the widow of succession to her deceased husband if she did not submit to niyoga. This was the view of Dhiaresvara also. According to Halayudha®s parents succeeded before brothers to a deceased person 060 यत्तक्तं श्म्मुना अध्यक्तधनत्वाद्‌ दुम्पत्योर्थेन केनचिदमाणमुमयाथमिति न विशेषो THeq इति तदृयुक्तमू । क्मतिब 9 II. p. 298. 661 Vide note 649 above ; and folio 380 ( of Benares Sanskrit College trans: OFipt }. : 668 अन्र इलायुधनिबन्धे स्वरसः | STTAETONEHTS सागमेव मुकिः प्रमाणं श्रपुरेषिक- भोगे तु आगमास्मरणे मुक्तिः प्रमाणं स्मार्तकाले क्रिया भूमे$ ,,. पुरषागता इति कात्यायनवभेनात्‌ । हानिप्रतिपादकानां च वाक्यानां पनाणपरिपालनकर्तष्यताशेषःवात्‌। सार (1, 0, cat. No. 801, folio 107 9). 663 याज्ञवल्क्येन poi Raid Se ai भरातर इति भर पिप्रोरधिकार उक्तः स पिवृषितामहार्जत- . भविस) ; to afer: wa agente । स्मृतिसार्‌ @ | । 72. Balayudha 997. if the property in the hands of the deceased was ancestral, but that if it was acquired without detriment to ancestral property then brothers succeeded even before parents. Halayudha is cited in the Vivadacintamani also, €. g. Halayudha®** held the view that the -werse of Yaj. (II. 126 ) was intended to convey that where joint property was concealed by a member and was discovered after partition, he did not incur the guilt of theft. This same view was held by Jitendriya and others. Raghunandana quotes Halayudha in his Divyatattva, Dayatattva and Vyavaharatattva. The Vira- mitrodaya®s also quotes Halayudha. The foregoing shows that the work of Halaiyudha, the jurist, was avery valuable one. This Haliyudha must have flourished before 1100 A. D., since the Kalpataru (1125-1150 A. D.) looked upon him as an authority. As Halayudha is not mentioned by any of the early commentators like Medhatithi-and by the Mit. and as he held opinions similar to those of Dharesvara, Jitendriya and others, he cannot well be placed earlier than 1000 A. D. ‘Therefore he flourished between 1000 and 1100 A. D. He was probably a Maithila or Bengali writer, as, among the comparatively early writers on dharma, it is the writers of the north, particularly of Mithila and Bengal, that rely upon him asa great authority. The name Halayudha (an epithet of Balarama, the brother of Krsna ) was a common one in India. It seems to have been borne by several eminent writers and this fact has created a great deal of contusion. ‘There is one Halayudha who was the author of the Abhidhanaratnamala ( edited by Aufrecht ), the Kavirahasya (edited by Sourindra Mohan Tagore in 1879 and by Heller in 1900 ) and probably the Mrtasafijivani, a commentary on the Chandab-satra of Pingala. In the Kavirahasya he gives the various forms of roots in the several conjugations and connects all verses with Krsna, . the 66 ~ e CT om o 1 अन्यान्यापहूृतं . . - स्थितिः ॥ अचाविभक्तत्वादेव विभागे wa वचनारम्भोत्र चर्य द्‌।षामा्वं ज्ञापयतीति हलायुधः । विवाद्चिन्तामणि ४, 148. Vide दूयततत्व (४. 182 Jivananda, vol. IT ) for the same view of Sora, 66 ° eX, $ Cc ५ ° अक्षः Ta निदितस्तुलाधारपटह इति मिताक्षरा । दाढभयोजकः कीलक इति हलायुध । ` वर» ए" 854; - वीर्‌० 2. ४ says इलायुध readin Ay ^“ 7 स निर्वास्यः for स निर्वास्यः ( निभौज्यः), ४. D. 38, 268. History of Dharmatistra emperor of the Deccan ( Daksinapatha ). This Krsnaraja was most probably the Rastrakata emperor Krsna whose dates range from 940 A. D. to 959 A. D. ( vide JBBRAS, vol. 18, page 239; Bom. Gazetteer I., part 2, p. 210; I. A. vol. 11, p. 109 and Bhandarkar’s Report, 1883-84, pp. 8-9. ). In the colophon to the Mrtasanjivani the author is described simply as bhatta-Halayudha. In that com- mentary verses are quoted as illustrations wherein Mufija alias Vakpatiraja is highly extolled.**7 Mufija was slain by Tailapa between 994-997 A. D. Hence Halayudha, the author of the com- mentary on Pingala, must not have flourished much earlier than the latter half of the 10 century. It is not unlikely that Halayudha after being at the court of the Rastrakatas migrated to Avanti when the star of Mufija, who was himself a scholar, rose on the horizon of central India and when the fortunes of the Rastrakatas waned. But this Halayudha who hailed from the Deccan cannot be the first Halayudha who appears to have flourished in Mithila or Bengal. There is another Halayudha, author of a famous work called Brahmana-sarvasva printed at Benares in sarhvat 1935. But this was not available to me and hence I used a Ms. of it in the Deccan College collection ( No. 9 of A 1883-84 ). He gives some account of himself and his family in the introductory verses. He belonged to the Vatsya gotra and was a son of Dhanafijaya who is described as dharmadhyaksa (judge ). Laksmanasena, the king of Bengal, gave him dharmadhikara ( 1. e. made him judge ३.५८ He had two elder brothers®*s Pagupati and Isana of whom the former composed Sraddha-krtya-paddhati and Pakayajiia-paddhati and the latter the 666 अद्स्यगसरस्यम॒निभ्योस्स्नापवित्रे TAUNTS । रुष्णराज इति ख्यातो राजा ETT दीक्षितः ॥ verse 6 { Heller's ed.). Verse 164 ( Holler ) desoribes him as राष्टकूटकूलादरह. 69 og. जयति मुवनेकवीरः सीरायुधतुलितविपुलबठविमवः। भनवरतविन्तवितरणनिर्जित- WUT FI ॥ स जयति वाक्यतिराजः &०.--मृतस्तजजीवनी 4th chap. 668 area स्यापितराजपण्डितपदू श्वेताशुमिम्भोज्ज्वलच्ठग्रोत्सिकमहामहखनुपदं दत्वा नवे योवने । यस्मे यौवनशेषयोम्यमलिलस्मापालनारायणः शीमौक्मणसेनदेबनूपति्मो- धिकार wat | verse 12; vide also Peterson’s cat. of Ulwar mss. p. 188, extract No. 356. 600 भ्राता Tarr: पशुपतिः MAE भ्यधादीशानः PITT forest FINI: Talay | verse 34. १8. Haldyudha 301 Dvijahnika-paddhati. He tells us in the Brahmanasarvasva that i, composed Mimarhsasarvasva, Vaisnavasarvasva, Saivasarvasva, Pan- ditasarvasva.°7° Unfortunately no Ms. of any of these works has so far been discovered. The chief object§7! of the Brahmanasarvasva is to explain the meaning of the mantras used by Brahmanas in daily observances from the brushing of the teeth to going to sleep and in the sarskaras on birth, marriage, death etc. He wrote for the Vajasaneya Kanva Sakha and acknowledges‘7? his debt to Uvata who wrote a bhasya on the Vajasaneya Sarhhita in Avanti while Bhoja ruled the earth ( mahirh Bhoje praSasati). In some intro- ductory verses and the several colophons of the sections of the Brahmana-sarvasva Halayudha styles himself avasathika, mahadbar- madhyaksa or simply dharmadhyaksa, dharmadhikarin and his brother Pasupati also is styled avasathika. It is very difficult to say what is the exact meaning of this last word. It probably means one who regularly performs all the grhya rites.673 Vide Tri. cat. of Madras Govt. Mss. for 1919-1922, pp. 5165 for a ms. of Pandita-sarvasva which deals with the usages of varnas and asramas, tithi, Suddhi, the time for Sraddha, jyotihéastra, marriage, gifts, prayascitta, pratistha &c. But whether it is Halayudha’s work it is difficult to say from the extracts given. The time when Halayudha the author of the Brahmanasarvasva flourished can be easily settled as he was the dharmadhyaksa of Laks- manasena of Bengal. The Adbhutasagara was begun in sake 1090°7+ 670 sinteretes वेष्णयस्वस्वमकृत शेवसर्ेस्वम्‌ । पण्डितसर्वंस्वमसो सर्वस्वं सर्वधीराणाम्‌ ॥ » verse 19. ५1 द्न्तधावनमारभ्य यावदन्त्ये्टिमीरिता । मन्प्राणां तावता तस्मिन्‌ ष्याख्यानम॒पद्ितम्‌ ॥ 672 ष्याख्यातो मतिशालिनायमुवटाचार्येण वेदः परम्‌ । अस्पष्टं तदपीत्यनेन विदुषा विश्व प्रसिद्धेः पदेः । सन्भ्यादिद्धिजकर्ममन््रवसां व्याख्यानमेतत्‌ कृतम्‌ &. 675 Compare पारस्करगृह्य 1. 2. 1-४ « आवस्षथ्याधानं दारकाले । दायायकाल एकेषाम्‌ | › 014 शके सनेवखन्टुष्दे अरेभेदुतसागरम्‌ । गोदधन्बकुन्जरालानस्तम्मंबःहुमहीपितिः ॥ अन्येस्मिश्नसमास एव तनयं सामाज्यरक्चामहादीक्चापर्वणि दीक्षणान्‌ निजकृतेर्निष्पि- मभ्यथ्यं सः | मयादाममिनाम्बुसस्लम्तः (1) भुयौत्मजासङ्गमं गङ्भायां विरचय्य नि्जरपुरं भायानुयातो गतः ॥ भीमङ्कक्मणसेनमूपतिरतिश्लाभ्यो wear Pers इतसागरः कृनिरसौ बलालमूमीभुजः | &०, folio 3a of 2. 0. ms. No, 231 of 1887-91, History. of Dharmasdastra “Yi. €. 1168-69 ) by Ballala-sena and it was ultimately finished by his son Laksmanasena. That these verses are not spurious follows from a reference in the Todarananda-samhita-saukhya about the position of the constellation of the Great Bear according to the Adbhutasagara in the sake year 1082 (1160-61 A.D.) while Ballalasena was ruling.75 The Saduktikarnamrta of Sridharadasa‘7® who was acontemporary of Laksamanasena, furnishes us with the exact year of the accession of Laksamanasena viz: that sake 1127 corresponded with the 27th year of Laksamanasena’s reign, i. e. he -began to reign in 1178-79 A.D. Therefore the literary activity of Halayudha, the author of the Brahmanasarvasva, lies between 1175-1200 A. D. There is, lam aware, a very heated controversy about the dates of Ballalasena and his son Laksamanasena, butI am inclined to hold, particularly on account of the explicit reference contained in the body of the Adbhutasigara‘77 itself and in the Todarananda, that Laksamanasena came to the throne about 1178-79 A.D. The Brahmanasarvasva and the Panditsarvasva of Hala- yudha are quoted by Raghunandana in the Ahnika (pp. 389, Jiva- nanda, vol. I ), Prayascitta ( pp. 531, vol. 1 for Panditasarvasva ) and other Tattvas. Sourindra Mohan Tagore (introduction to Kavi- rahasya p. I-II ) says that Adigira brought to Bengal five Brahmanas from Kanoj of whom Bhatta Narayana was the most famous and was the author of the Prayogaratna and also of the Venisamhara and that Halayudha was 16th in descent from that Narayana. These traditions of the matchmakers of Bengal and panegyrists of big families are entirely worthless for literary and chronological purposes, 675 ‹ arena चाद्रतसागरे मजवसुदशमित १०८२ शके श्रीमद्रह्ालसेन- राज्यादौ वर्धकषष्िमोगा मुनयस्त्वासन्‌ विशाखासु तस्य चाभिप्रायोयम्‌। folio 99४ of टोडरानन्दसंहितासोख्य 0, ©, ms, No. 915 of 1886-92 676 शाके सषरविंशत्यधिकशतोपेतदशशते शरदाम्‌ । ्रीमलक्ष्मणसेनक्षितिपस्य रसेकविरेब्दे ॥ सवितुगेत्या फास्णुनविशेषु TI कुतुकात्‌ । श्रीधरद्‌सेनेदं सदुक्तिकर्णामतं चक्रे ॥ Vide Indian Historical Quarterly, 1927, vol. IIT, p. 186; vide also S@ASBB 1921, p. १, Ind. Ant. vol. 48 ( for 1919 ) at 171-176 and Ind. Ant. 1922, p. 146, 158 for discussion of the date of TEAST, Vide &. I., vol. XV. p. 278 for the views of Mr. R. D. Banerji who holds that लह्मणसेनं ascended the throne in 1118-19 A. D. €77 19 the printed edition of the अद्रतसागर ( at p. 285 ) we have अतुस्तश्र तेने तद्‌ मरन्थारम्भशकाद्‌ वषाधिपगणनं सनवदशशेषशाके &. ( published in 1905 by Prabhakari and Oo. ). 72. Haldyudha 301 particularly for events of comparatively early times. In their zeal to extol their patrons’ families to the skies they were most unscru- pulous and threw to the winds all chronology. The Prayogaratna was composed at Benares by Bhatta Narayana whose family migrat- ed from Paithan in the 16th century, while the Venisarhhara was composed about a thousand years earlier. Yet both works are fathered upon Narayana, the ancestor of the rich and influential Tagore family. There is yet another Halayudha. On the Sraddhakalpasitra of Katyayana a commentary called Prakasa was composed by Hala- yudha, son of Sankarsana ( vide BBRAS cat. No. 518, p. 170 ). In this commentary he refers to Karka, Kamadhenu, Kalpataru, Govindaraja, Laksmanopadhyaya, Mitaksara, Sankhadhara and Pasupati. He is therefore later than 1150 A.D. He cannot be identified with the author of the Kavirahasya, asthe latter flourished much earlier under the Rastrakutas. Nor can be the same as the jurist Halayudha, since the latter is named in the Kalpataru, which in its turn is quoted in the Prakasa. The dharmadhyaksa of Laksa- manasena was a son of Dhanajijaya, while the author of the Prakasa was a son of Sankarsana. The Sraddhakasika of Krsna ( Gujarati Press ed. p. 430) on the Navakandika or Sraddhakalpasatra of Katya- yana says that first Karka‘7* explained the sitra in pregnant words and then Halayudha explained it and yet it remained as difficult as before. Krsna is mentioned in the Nirnayasindhu and the Sraddha- maytkha of Nilakantha. Therefore Halayudha, the author of the Prakasa on Katyayana must have flourished before 1509 A. D. and later than 1150 A. D. Vide J. A. S. B. 1915 pp. 327-336 where M. M. Chakravarti brought together interesting information about Halayudha. 73. Bhavadevabhatta The Vyavaharatattva of Raghunandana and the Viramitrodaya tell us that Bhavadevabhatta composed a work called Vyavaharatilaka on judicial procedure. The Vyavaharatattvas79 tells us that Bhavadeva 8 कर्को व्याख्यदिदं गमीरवचनैः ast यतोस्मादमद्‌ gad च ततो हलायुध TA ष्याख्य- तथाण्यस्कुटम्‌ ॥ 679 ‹ अस्तव्य्तपदेष्यामि अनम्वितार्थपद्भ्याप्तामिति ध्यवहारतिलके भवदेवमहः ' । ष्यवह्मर- तरव ( 7. 207, vol. II, Jivananda); भवदेकेन तु अस्वभ्यस्तपद्ग्यापीति पादं लिसित्वानन्वितार्थपदुन्यापमिति ध्यास्यातं श्यवहारतिकंके | Vite ए. 5९. .. 302 Eictory of Dharmatistva tread ‘astavyastapadavy4pi’ instead of ‘yadvyastapadamavyapi’ in Katy&yana’s verses enumerating the blemishes of uttara ( defendant’s reply). The VyavaharatattvaS*¢ mentions Bhavadevabhatta’s discussion and illustration of a reply (uttara}) with a weak plea (karana ). The same work informs us that Bhavadeva held the same views on adverse possession as Srikara, Balaka and others did ( vide note 624 above). The Vivadacandra of Misarumiéra‘*: several times refers to the views of Bhavadeva. The Viramitrodaya‘®? gives in great detail the remarks of Bhavadeva on the well-known text of ` Sumantu about killing an 41412010, The Sarasvativilasa®®s and the Vaijayanti of Nandapandita quote the very same views of Bhavadeva- bhatta on Sumantu’s text. The foregoing brief discussion shows that Bhavadeva’s Vyavahara- tilaka must have been a valuable work on judicial procedure. Unfortunately that work has not yet come to light. Bhavadeva also wrote several other works. In the Deccan College collection there are two Mss. ( No. 9 of 1895-98 and No. 263 of 1887-91 ) of a work of Bhavadeva variously named Karmanusthanapaddhati or Dasakarma-paddhati or Dasakarma- dipika. M.M. Chakravarti in his informing article on Bhavadeva (J. A. 9, B. 1912, pp. 333-348 ) says that the work has often been printed. Iwas notable to secure a copy. That work°*4 deals with 680 दुरबेककारणोत्तरं यथा ममेयं मः कमागतत्वादिति वायुक्ते ममेयं॑भ्दरावर्षमुज्यमानत्वा- दिति rot तत्तु धनमाश्रप्युक्तं पश्यतोबुवतो इानिधनस्य दशवार्षिंकीति याहृवस्कीयं att किं तु नेतयुक्तं परेण मुज्यमानाया मूमेविंशतिवा्िकीति मूमिमाञ्नविषयकं तत्वरार्धनापादितत्वादिति मवदेवभटाः । ष्यदहयरतश्व . 208 881 यस्य दृश्येत सपाहादुक्तस्ष्यस्य साक्षिणः । अन्न यथपि भवदेवेन रतदिष्यस्योति feed तथाप्यक्तसाक्ष्यस्येष्यमिधानादरूतदिन्यस्यापि gud कूतदिष्यस्येति प्रायो- वादं । विवादचन्द्र ( folio 51a of D. ©. ms. No. 57 of 1883-84) ; भवदेषेन J न रोगाभनिज्ञातिमरणं af वस्य विनिरदिशेदिति लिकितम्‌ू 1° ‰१० ( folio 55 ४). 689 अग्र॒ भवदेवभटः । न॒ च सुमम्तुवचनेन नाततयिवधदोषोन्यन्न emerges विरोधः सूधरच्छेद्ापरिञ्वानात्‌ | तथाहि सुन्नन्रयमिदम्‌ । आाततागिवधे नेत्येकम्‌ | दोषोभ्यन्रेत्यपरम्‌ | TOTEM: TTT कु्यौदित्यम्यत्‌ । बीर ० P- 22 693 Vide स. वि, 2. 154 ( Mysoreed.).and वेजयन्ती ०४ विष्णुधमेसुध्र 5. 189 (1, 0. cat. No. 915 folio 50a ) 68 It begins चतु्ववनलदस्थभतु्वेदकुटुम्यिने | Rorpvawretentet बरह्मणे नमः गृयसुखार्थमालोश्य उन्दोगानामियं कमात्‌ । रता ATTN कमनिुष्ानपदुतिः ॥ 18, Bhavadevabhatia $63 the ten principal rites and ceremonies to be performed by Brahmanas who study the Samaveda. The principal subjects are:—The Homa to the nine planets ( Navagraha-homa), matrpaja, panigrahana and other essential rites of marriage, homa on the fourth day after marriage, garbhadhana, purhsavana, simantonnayana, sosyantihoma ( homa when a woman is on the point of delivery ), jatakarma, niskramana, namakarana, annaprasana, ctdakarana, upanayana, samavartana (the student's returning from the teacher’s house after finishing his studies ), Salakarma (first entrance in a new house ). Another work of Bhavadeva, who is styled Balavalabhi-bhujanga therein, is the Prayascittanirupana (I. O. cat. No. 1725 p. 554; Mitra’s notices, vol. IX, No. 3138, pp. 214-15). In that work he mentions over 25 smrtikdras, the Matsya and Bhavisya puranas, Vigvarapa, Srikara and Baloka (? Balaka). This work was held in high esteem, as the Smrtiratnakara®*s of Vedacarya places Bhavadeva after Manu among the authorities on prayascitta that he follows. The Varsa-kriya-kaumudi of Govindananda (B.'I. series ) quotes a text from Bhavadevabhatta on the prayascitta for eating in a solar or lunar eclipse ( p. 106 ). There is yet another work of Bhavadevabhatta called Tautatita- matatilak, a ms. of which exists in the India Office ( cat. No. 1591 ). It is doubtful whether that ms. contains the whole of the work. That work is concerned with elucidating the doctrines of the Purva- mimarhsa system from the standpoint of Kumarilabhatta (who is also called Tautatita). From the colophons at the end and elsewhere it appears that the work was intended to explain Jaimini I. 4 and II. 1, but in the body of the work contained in the Ms. only siatras from the first pada of the 2nd adhyaya are dwelt upon. Bhavadeva is styled Balavalabhibhujaiiga here also and invokes a terrific curse®*é upon those who would borrow from his work without acknowledg- 685 म्रन्वदिस्मृतिशाश्चाथं भवदेवादि्तेमतम्‌ । प्रायभ्यित्तमहं वक्ष्ये विज्ञाय पापनिष्छतो ॥ स्मृतिर्नाकर्‌ ( 1. 0. cat. p. 413). 686 The colophon at the end is इति श्रीयालवलभीभृजङ्गापरनम्नो मटृशीभवदेवस्थं कृतो तोतातितमततिलके द्वितीयस्याभ्यायस्य मथमः पद्‌ः । यो नाम कश्चिदिह संविदितं ममेयं अभ्भान्तरे fea षा बदति स्वयं वा । मत्कर्तृतामननुकीत्यं स कीतिंलोपान्निःसेततिर्जगति जन्मशतानि भूयात्‌ ॥ 904. History of Dharmatiséra ing their debt. The work opens with the well-known sitra ‘bhavarthah karmagabdah &c. (Jaimini II. 1. 1). It goes on explaining the principal topics of Jaimini’s 2nd adhyaya, first pada. The satras explained are II. 1. 1, 5, 9, 10, 13, 24, 30-35, 38, 40 46- 49. It mentions the bhasyakara (Sabara), Vartika (folio 12 a), Gurumata (17b), Prabhakara ( 210), Vartikakarapada (22 b, in the plural). It frequently quotes karikas from the Tantravartika with the words ‘taduktam.’ Heméadri®*7 quotes Bhavadeva’s expla- nation of the words of Kumiarila allowing an option between jaghanya and ajya and disapproves of it. Vide Tri. cat. of Madras Govt. Mss. for 1919-1922 p. 5527 for the same work. Unexpected light is thrown on the personal history of Bhavadeva- bhatta by an inscription found in the temple of Ananta Vasudeva at Bhuvaneévara in the Puri District of Orissa edited by nielhorn in E. I. vol. VI, p. 203, which eulogises Bhavadevabhatta, the identity of the author Bhavadeva with the person eulogised being established by the unique epithet, Balavalabhibhujanga applied to the latter. The eulogy is composed by a person called Vacaspatikavi. Bhavadeva belonged to the Savarna gotra of the Kauthumi school of the Samaveda. The family belonged to Siddhalagrama in Radha (west of the Hugli and south of the Ganges). Bhavadeva’s remote ancestor Bhavadeva obtained in gift the agrahara of Hastinibhitta from the Gauda king. The father of Bhavadeva was Govardhana, a warrior anda scholar. His mother was Sangoka, daughter of a Vandhyaghatiya Brahmana. With the advice of Bhavadeva king Harivarmadeva is said to have reigned long in prosperity. Bhavadeva is stated in the above mentioned inscription to have composed works on hora (astrology ), smrti, and mimathsa. Bhavadeva is eulogised as a great builder. He constructed a reservoir of water in Radha, he set up a stone image of Narayana and founded a temple in which he piaced images of Narayana, Ananta, ann Nysithha. He also gave 687 तथा च जाघभ्याधिकरणसिदान्ते जाघन्याज्ययोधकस्पे TETAS मषदेवेनोक्तम्‌ | इदं सिह वक्तव्यम्‌ । कथं सामान्यविषितेनाञ्येन विशेषविहितजाधम्यिकल्पः सर्वत्र सामान्यविशे षशाश्योर्वाभ्यबाधक मावेच्छेदुप्सङ्गात्‌ | नतत्‌। योरपि विशेषशाञ्जतवात्‌ | &o. चतुर्वर्ग ° ( कालनिणय ) ?. 120. Vide also p. 404 for another reference to भवदेव 998 यस्य लु यालवलमीमुजङ्ग हति माम नाहतं केन । भीमासिवापि सपुलकमाकर्णित- वणितोद्रीतिम्‌ ॥ verse 24 78. Bhavadevabhatia ` $08 to Harimedhas female attendants, dug a tank and laid ‘out a garden. Neither Kielhorn nor Chakravarti has attempted any explanation of the epithet Balavalabhibhujafiga. I hazard an_ explanation. Bhavadeva probably made some innovation in the structure of the roofs or balconies of the temples he built and he was therefore styled a lover (a gallant or paramour ) of little ( ba/a-small sized or girlish ) valabhis. From the nature of che character Kielhorn conjectured that the inscription belonged to the 12th century A. D. The date of Bhavadeva can be approximately settled to be about 1100 A. D. as he is quoted by Hemadri, the Vivadacandra of Misaru and the Smrtisara of Harinatha. He is certainly earlier than 1200 A. D. A period of at least half a century must have elapsed before a Bengal writer like Bhavadeva came to be looked upon as an autho- rity on mimarmsa by Hemadri who wrote in distant Berar. It appears that he was quoted in the Karmopadesini of Aniruddha (1. 0. cat. No. 1853, ए. 474 2). But that Ms. is bound up with another work by a later author and the reference in the cat. is not quite clear. If we rely on the Viramitrodaya, a work called Pradipa criticised the views of Bhavadeva on the verse of Yaj. II. 24 ( about adverse possession for 20 and 10 years), Bhavadeva held that twenty years’ enjoyment of immovable property by a stranger implied that the real owner meant to abandon it for the benefit of the stranger enjoying it, that such abandonment for the enjoyment of another leads to the inference of the extinction of previous ownership and that the property being abandoned by the owner in favour of the stranger who takes hold of it, ownership also ( of the stranger ) arises. The Pradipa®®9 points out that it does not invariably follow = er An EA —— 689 भवदेवस्तु ... तस्मादेवं TY यद्यं यथाक्तो भोगः पूरवस्वामिनो भोक्तुद्शेन त्यागात्‌ तत्स्वत्वध्वंसम्थापयति अनुमापयति वा । ... तथा च AAMT AP तत्परिमरहणा- देव परस्य तन्न स्वत्वमप्युपपयते । ,.. अन्न प्रदीपरूतः । यत्र हि मल्रत्ये- ( ष्ये ! ) दानीं AT फलसम्भाषना तदधुना .तावत्पर एव भुक्त्वा (मुक्ता ! ) पश्चादेतत्सकाशा- त्सफलोपभोगां भुवं मरहीष्यामीत्यमिसैधाय water तत्र परोपभोगं क्षमते तन्नापि विंत्यभ्यधिको भोगोस्ति antag त्यागश्च नास्तीति व्यमिचारान्ने- arin पूर्वस्वामिस्वत्वत्यागे प्रामाण्यम्‌ । किं च मूस्वामी सचेता; किमिति वृथेव तत्र स्वत्वं TM । न द्यत्र CURL नाण्यदृष्टं धर्मशाञ्ञोक्तेतिकर्तव्यताविरहान्‌ |... नापि यदुदधेशेन यत्त्यज्यते तत्तस्य स्वामिति नियमः । उदेश्येन गृहते भ्यमिचारात्‌ । fize p. 212-14, ४.०. 39. 306 History of Dharmatistra that, because a srranger is allowed to enjoy land, the owner intends to abandon the land for the stranger, nor is it an invariable rule that what is abandoned for another becomes the property of that other. It will be shown later on that the Pradipa must have been composed before 1150 A.D. Hence it follows that Bhavadeva flourished about 1100. He cannot be very much earlier than that, as he is not mentioned by any writer of the r1th century and as he not only mentions Kumarila and Prabhakara, but also writers who criticised Prabhakara’s views. There were several other later persons named Bhavadeva who wrote on topics of Dharmasastra such as Bhavadeva, author of Danadharmaprakriya ( middle of 17th century ), and Bhavadeva, the author of Smrticandrika, who flourished in the first half of the 18th century. On Bhavadeva’s Karmanusthana-paddhati there is a commentary called Sarhsarapaddhatirahasya. 14. Prakasa. A work called Prakasa has been quoted by very early nibandha- karas. The Kalpataru quotes the interpretation of Prakaga, Hala- yudha and Kamadhenu ona verse of Katyayana.% The Vivada- ratnakara of Candegvara cites the views of Prakaga scores of times ( € £. 7. 131, 145, 456, 460, 462, 474, 485, 504 etc ). Frequently Prakasa is coupled with Parijata (e. g. p. 497 ). On page 518 of the Vivadaratnakara a remark of Prakasa wherein both Asahaya and Medhatithi are named is cited.69' The Danaratnakara of Cande- Svara quotes a passage of Sathvarta with Prakaéa’s explanation of it.692 In the Sraddhasaukhya of Todarananda Prakaga’s explanation 690 Vide note 521 above. On पणे जितः, one of the 15 kinds of dasas enumerat- ed by नारद्‌, the कल्पत quotes the remarks of the प्रकाश ‹ यद्स्मिन्विवादे पराजितो भवामीरयादिपरिमाषणेन anfiga: gather इति प्रकाशपारिजातो ।' ( folio 368 of Benares Sanskrit College transcript ). 691 fan दत्तमिति क्ञीधनमान्नोपलक्षणमित्यसह्मयमेधातिधिरिति ८ ° थी हाति ) पभरकाश- कारः । वि, र. ( on मनु 9.198). Vide 7. 509 of वि. x, where प्रकाश ०1४७४ मेधातिथि ००९ « पत्युरनुहञातेनाप्यदत्तोप्यलङ्कारो चो Aes. धृतः सोपि दाया- देनं हर्तब्य हाति मेधातिथिरिति sewage: ». 698 ‘dag: । सर्वेषामेव दानानामेकजन्मानुगं seq) इाटकक्षितिगौरीणां सप्तजन्मानुगं फलम्‌ ॥ गोयोन्न ग।वः प्रकरणात्‌ । गोरी अश्वौ कम्योति भरकाशः । › दानरत्नाकर ( D.C. ms. No. 114 of 1884-86 folio 52 b ). [1 ६ . . she 24, Prakita 307 of the word ‘ Yanevata ’ occurring in a passage of Sankha about the fruits allowed in Sraddha is quoted.®93 These quotations establish that Prakasa was a work that not only dealt with vyavahara, but also with such topics as dana, sraddha etc. Whether the Prakasa was an independent work or acommentary is somewhat doubtful. But froma passage of the Vivadaratnakara it seems to follow that it was a commentary on the Yajfiavalkya- ऽपि, There we are told that the Kalpataru®4 read ‘abhijanata’ for ‘avijanata’ in Yaj. I. 258, but that since that reading is opposed to Yajfiavalkya-prakasa, Halayudha and Parijata it must be, regarded as a wrong reading. As it is a reading of Yaj. himself that: was being discussed, it would be somewhat strange if it were said that it was opposed to Yaj. and Prakasa and therefore it is necessary to suppose that Yajiiavalkyaprak4sa is one work. The Vivadacintamani in several places gives the explanation of Prakaga.°95 The Smptisara®%® gives at great length the explanation of Prakasa on the controversial verses of Yaj. (II. 138-139 ) The Viramitrodaya®s7 quotes at length Prakaga’s explanation of Manu (9. 207 ) and disapproves of it on the ground (among others ) that the verse can more clearly be explained so as to convey 693 'आन्रान्यानेवतानिश्चूमृदढीकामष्यदाडिमान्‌ । . . . श्राद्रकालोपपादयेत्‌ ॥ यानेवतः काश्मीरे ate इति प्रसिद्धः 1 प्राचीनामलकमिति परकाशकारः। › श्रादरसोख्य folio 42 a (D.C. ms. No, 257 of 1884-87 ). 09५ कल्पतरो तु अविजानतेति स्थाने अमिजानतेति पाठो ala: स तु याह्नवस्क्यप्रकाश- इलायुध-पारिजातविरोधात्‌ प्रमादपाठ इति लक्षितः । वि, x ४. 198. ९95 विद्यापि साधारणधनानुपन्केषेण यदर्जितं तदेवाविभाज्यमिति प्रकादाकारः | तन्न उभयोपादानानथक्यात्‌ । वि. जि, ?. 155 ; ‹ परिसंरूयनयलाचितृशरातु पितुष्यरेव विभागपु्वंकं धनमेलनं संसगं इति प्रकाशः 1’ वि. चि. ए. 157 ; vide pp. 180, 140 also. ; 06 प्के तु मृतस्य cate धनं dqeanta weiter । विभागकाठे अज्ञातगमोधां Remit पश्वादुत्प्नस्याससषटथेव दयात्‌ । सोदरस्य तु defen धनं संसृष्टी सोद्रो retary मिग्नोदरः संसूष्टथपीति geen: । अन्योदयेस्तु संसृष्टी धनं गृह्णीयादिति शेषः । नान्योदृ्येधनं हरेदिति संसृष्टयपीत्यनेन संवध्यते & ०. arcane (I. 0, cat. No. 801, {०11० 148 b ). 097 Vide चीर्‌० p. 572; the same also opours in षि. चि, . 180, 06 History of कटक a meaning similar to that of Yaj. II. 116. The Prakasa is mentioned in the Dayatattva (vol. II, p. 173 ) and in the Suddhitattva (vol. II Pe 288 ) As the Prakaga is quoted in the Kalpataru it is certainly earlier than 1125. It mentions Medhiatithi. Besides the Mit. does not refer to it. There is room for thinking that it follows the Mit. Yaj. II. 116 is, according to the Vivadaratnakara,°9* explained by the Prakasa in almost the same words as the Mit. It is possible that both borrow from the same original. At all events the Prakasa must have been composed between 1000 and 1100.A. D. Hemadri frequently cites a work called Maharnavaprakaéa.°99 According to the latter the sandal unguents, flowers, incense, lamp presented in Sriddha are to be offered to the Brahmanas invited and not to the pits. In another place Hemadri quotes the explanation of the word ‘ nimantraua’ 7०० given by the Maharnavaprakaga. In some places Hemadri refers to a work called Smrtimaharnava or simply Maharnava.7° It appears to me that all these three are the names of the same work. The question then arises whether the Smrtimaharnavaprakisa is the same as the Prakasa mentioned by the Kalpataru and Candesvara. In the present state of our knowledge it appears that they are identical. The Madanaparijata (p. 93) quotes a verse from the Smrtimaharnava about upakarma. 75. Parijata. Several works bear the appellation Parijata such as the Vidhana- parijata (composed in 1625 A. D.), the Madanaparijata ( about 1375 A. 0. )andthe Prayogaparijata ( between 1400-1500 ). But = 698 अच्रापि प्रकाशः किंचिद्सारमापि zen पृथक्क्रिया विभागः कर्तन्यः agent विवाद्‌- निदृस्यर्थमिति । वि. र. ?. 485 ; यक्किचिदसारमपि दत्वा पृथक्क्रिया विभागः कायः fat तत्पजरादीनं दायजिघक्षा मा मदिति । मिताक्षरा 699 किं गन्धपुष्पधूपदीपार्टद्नानि बाह्यणेभ्यो देयान्युत पित॒भ्य इति । तश्र ATA धेदरनन्यायोपलब्धेबोष्वणेन्यो Balt महा्णंवमकाशकारो मन्यते । Vase III. 1. 1081 700 निमन्त्रणं नाम देवपितृकायार्थोऽपत्याख्येथो नियोग इति स्मतिबन्दरिकाकारः | अभ्ये- षणपूर्वकमभ्युपगमरंपादनमिति मेधातिधेनहाणंवभकाशकारो । चतुर्वर्ग 711, 1 1131 ; vide also 7. 1151 for another reference to मह्मणैवप्रकाश, | 701 तथा च स्मृतिमहार्णवे आह युधः । AMER वये वसन्ते ब्रह्मण आत्मानमृपनाययेत्‌ | चतुग ° TII. 1. 11४ ; on pp. 183, 545 of the same only महूर्णव occurs, 26. Parijata $09 there was an ancient work called Parijata quoted by even some. of the earliest nibandhakaras. The Kalpataru several times quotes the views of a work called Parijata. The Prakasa and Parijata are frequently mentioned? together in the Kalpataru and the Vivada- ratnakara. The lattes regarded the Kalpataru, P4arijata, Halayudha and Prakasa as‘its most eminent predecessors.7°95 The Danaratna- kara7°* quotes several times the views.of Parijata on gifts. The Smrtisira of Harinatha sets out at length the order of succession to a sonless man according to the Parijata ( vide I. O. Ms. No. 3०, folio 134 ४ ). One of the striking opinions of the Parijata was that the widow ofa sonless man should raise offspring by mniyoga and give the wealth of the deceased to the son so born. From the above it appears that the Parijata was an independent work on vyavahara, dana and other topics. Being quoted by the Kalpataru it was earlier than 1125 A. D. and as it held views similar to those of Bhojadeva and Halayudha on the widow's rights and as itis not quoted by the Mit. or other earlier works it must be assigned to a date between 1000-1125 A.D. In I.L.R. 12 Cal. 348 at p. 356 the learned judges hold that the Parijata frequently cited as: an authority by the Vivadaratnikara is the Madanaparijata. But this is entirely wrong. The latter work, it will be shown ( vide sec. 93 ), was composed about 1375, while the Vivadaratnakara was composed about 1320 A. D. Hence the Parijata of the Vivada- ratnakara is the ancient work mentioned in the Kalpataru. 76. Govindaraja. The commentary of Govindaraja on the Manusmrti was published by Rao Saheb V. N. Mandlik anda portion of it was published by 708 कत्याथनः । Ropar चेव नम्नत्वपसिर्दूनम्‌ । पायो दासीसुताः कुर्युः wae ग्रहणं च यत्‌ ॥ नग्नत्वपरिमदने परिधापनम्‌ । Ae परिमर्दनं संवाहनमिति पारि- जात! । Beqas folio $68 ( 26087९68 8, College Transcript ) ; vide notes 649 and 690 above 08 Seaga वाप्यथ पारिजाते इलायथे वाप्यथवा प्रकारो | TaNTHETATS च Te हुधाति रत्नाकर एक एवं ॥ Verse at the end of वि.र "५ ऋव्वगभ्यस्तु दक्षिणामान्नम्‌ । भरूपालसागरपारिजातादयोण्येवम्‌ । द्‌नरत्नाकर folio Sos अथवा मुलापुरूषवदर्धं TA Meera दयादिति पारिजातः | Mid folio 28 b ( about कामधेनप्रदान ) 310 History of Dharmattstra Dr., Jolly in the Manutikasathgraha. In his commentary?s on Manu III. 247 and 248 he tells us that he has treated at greater length the subject of those verses in his own work called Smrti- manjari. पपिः in his comment on Manu IV. 212 twits Govindaraja with having explained ‘ugra’ in one way in his com- mentary on Manu and in a different way in his Mafijari. A Ms. of a portion of the Smrtimaiijari exists in the India Office (cat. Pp. 477 ). From these two works a brief account of the personal history of Govindaraja can be extracted. The colophons at the end of the Manutika describe Govindaraja as the son of bhatta Madhava. The first verse7°? of the Smrtimanyari and one at the end ( though some- what corrupt ) give the information that he was the son of Madhava and grand-son of Narayana and appears to have lived on the holy banks of the Ganges.7°° Those who like Sarvadhikari identify Govindaraja with Govindacandra, prince of Benares, are therefore entirely wrong since he was a Brahmanaand not a Ksatriya. The first verse7°? of his Manutika contains an obeisance to god ( or Siva ) and states that he had received the S4stra of Manu in an unbroken tradition of teacher and pupil and that he had examined previous commentaries of Manu. 105 “ साधितं चैतत्सविस्तरं स्मृतिमअर्यामूजपजिका्यां च । इह तु म्रन्थकारमयानन प्रतायते ( भरस्ती्येते ! ) ' om मनु 777. ४47 ; ‹ इति सपिण्डीकरणसावत्सारिकेपि स्म॒ति= मजजर्थामरजुपजिकायां विस्तरतो निरूप्येते * on मनु TIT. 248. 706 गोविम्द्राजो AWA राजानमुकवान्‌ | Ayre च शूद्रायां क्षन्नियोतयन्मभ्यधात्‌ ॥ 101 स्मृतिविरचितस्तसते्वाक्यर्दिरक्तिपरा्लीमशिलकललब्यालुसाथोमतेो ब्रतसंहतिम्‌ । अक्ि- खद्‌ चितां गोविन्दाख्यग्पिरं गरुतं भयाबुपचिततनुङ्ञीनामोदः स माधवनन्दनः ॥ स्मति- मञ्जरी ist verse. 108 स्मृतिमञजरी folio 150b ¢ स्व्वाहिनीपुद्धिनलान्छनलब्धकीरतिनारायणस्य TTT उञ्चिकाय । वाक्यावलीमसिलसण्चरणावतंसाषर ( त्ता ! ) गोविन्दराज FE माधवं इह भूभिः (! इह माधवमभूमिरायः ) ॥ › . 709 संसाराष्वगतागतङ्खमतुषापीयूषमीशां शने््यात्वानर्गलसंमदायगुरुतः प्राते मनोः शासने । रा भन्धरूदाशयाननुङतिं स्यार्यान्तराणानिमां टी शाजरुद्‌।श्थागुसरिणी TAT भ्यधात्‌ ॥ 76. Govindardja 311 The Smptis mentioned by him in the two works of his are given below.7"° Besides he mentions the Vayupurana (on Manu III. 232) and Purana in general (on Manu lI. 74 and 80). He frequently quotes the Grhyasatras, also the Bahvrcagrhyaparisista, the Yoga- stra. He says (on Manu 2. 23) that Mleccha countries like Andhra and others were not fit for performing sacrifices. He appears to have held like Medhatithi the view.that moksa was to be attained bya combination of jana and karma.7** As compared with the bhasya of Medhatithi his commentary is very concise. Kullaka largely drew upon Medhatithi and Govindaraja, mentions them hundreds of times, criticizes7"* both of them and _ particularly holds up Govindaraja to ridicule often enough.7"3 Kullaka notes that Govindaraja in opposition to Medhatithi and Bhojadeva arranged Manu 8. 181-184 differently ( putting 8. 182 as the last of those four verses ). In the printed edition there is no comment of Govindaraja on the verses of the 9th chapter from verse 72. Butit appears that the Dayabhaga had that part of the commentary, as it quotes the views of Govindaraja on the rights of the daughter’s son which could have appeared only on Manu IX. 130-136. A few words may now be said about the Smrtimaiijari, Mss. of which are rare. At the end of the India office Ms. a summary of the contents of the whole work is given ( for which see footnote 710 PTA, आपस्तम्ब, TATA, HIE, काश्यप; गानम, चतुर्विंशतिमत, देवल, नारद्‌, TWA, WETS, प्रचेतस्‌, FETAL, बृहस्पति, बोधायन, यम, याज्ञवल्क्यः वसिष्ठ, विष्णु, व्यास, शङ्क, शातातप, वृद्धशातातप, Ise, dad, सुमन्तु» हारीत. 711 On मनु 9. 28 गोविन्दराज ००५० ‹ ज्ञानकर्मसमुष्चयान्मोक्षावाततिः' 712 Note the following where गोविन्दराज ॥ criticlzedby कुलक, भन्‌, 1.1 22, 127 ; IIT. 11, 53, 127, 129, 285 ; IV. 7, 162; VI. 14, 79,86; VII. 94, 211; VITI. 37, 142-143, 184, 333 ; IX. 68, 136, 141, 162, 206; X. 3; XI. 82, 180; AIT, 86 713 On मनु II. 128, ITY. 50 and VIII. 87 गोविन्दराज is held upto special ridi- cule. हन्त means विशेषमविवृण्वता । ष्यक्तमङ्गीकतमृतो CICA यतेः ॥ on मनु UI. 50 ; स्वेषु तिष्ठद्ट्विति cated न विवक्षितम्‌ । इमां गोविग्द्राजस्य राजाच न द्वियामहे ॥ ०८ मनु ४. 104. It should be noted that the printed text of गोविन्दराज on मनु V. 104 is corrupt 88 1४ reads + स्वेषु तिष्ठत्सु विवक्षितम्‌ ’. 312 History of Dharmatistra below ).7"* It appears that the Smrtimafijari dealt with all principal topics of dharmasastra such as the sarhskaras, the daily duties viz: bath, sarndhya, brahmayajiia, the duties of the student, householder, the forest hermit, and the sarnyasin, the duties of the four vargas, pifts, the purifications of various materials, fcods forbidden and allowed, impurity on birth and death, sapindus and samancdakas, funeral rites, sraddha and its various details, prayaécitta. The ms. in the India office deals with the adbikari for prayascitta, the parsat (i.e. the assembly of learned men who are to determine what prayascitta is to be prescribed ), the means of atoning for sins and violations of religious duties, the prayaScittas for the mahapatakas (viz. the murder of a Brahmana, drinking wine, theft of gold, incest) and for other lesser and similar sins, meaning of the word prayascitta, prayascittas for killing men of Ksatriya, Vaigya and Sudra classes and for killing women, prayascittas for the killing of a cow and of various beasts and birds, prayas- cittas for eating forbidden or polluted food and for selling articles forbidden to be sold, secret prayasctttas. The India Ofhce Ms. which deals only with préyascittas contains 152 folios. This gives us an idea as to how extensive the whole work must have been 714 अस्य सुप्रतिपत्तये काण्डानि लिख्यन्ते । anal षरिभाषाकाण्डं गमाधानादि उप- नयनादि । संभ्योप।सनविधिः। अन्ये बह्यचारिधमा; । अभ्ययनाि । पुनरन्ये बह्वबारि- धर्माः । बह्ययज्ञावेधिः 1 विषे।हादिगहस्थधर्माः । शद्रधम; । वृत्युपदेशाः। स्नानविधिः यमनियमकाण्डम्‌ । पास्थानिकम्‌ । दानविधिः TNA: पोषितभतृंकाधमोः । द्वभ्य- ge: wey अचमननिमित्ताने द्विरा्चमननिमित्तानि आचमनापवाद्‌ाः। आच मनविर्धिः | अचैव प्रतिषेध्यः | कमण्डलचर्या । अन्यद्‌ाचमनगतम्‌ | NAYS? सवेठानि । प्रक्षालनादिशोचम्‌ । इति कायिकम्‌ । सोवर्णादिशोषं वेलादिशोचं तथा ernie भृम्यदि उदकादि अशुद्धयपवादाः | भोजनविधिः । मत्यामत््यपकरणम्‌ | मेतशुद्धिः । बाह्षणाशोचं BRIAN जननाशाचं, भनुज।तायाशोच॑ Aas सपिण्डसमानोदकत्वं बीजसंबन्भ्याया्चौचं देचान्तरमताक्चौ चमाचायौक्ञोचमनेकान्चोच- संनिपातायाश्ोचम्‌ । gone । अनुगमनाद्ाशोचम्‌ । उद्कृक्षियादिं पिण्डद्‌ानादे | अस्थिसंचयः | उद्कादिनिषेधः । स्यश्चा्ोचम्‌ । यमनियमाः । agate | कालादि । MANIA । भोजनीयाः । वर्षामिमन्त्रणादि ae: कालः । AAA SATA । ब्रह्णसंख्या । पुनरन्येतिकरैन्यता । अमादास्यादिशाक्लम्‌ । एको सपिण्डाकरणम्‌ । आष्दकि भात्श्राद्धम्‌ । अन्ये श्नाटुधर्माः । वृद्धिश्चादुम्‌ | वानप्रस्थ काण्डं मवजितकाण्डम्‌ । शृद्रधरमकाण्डम्‌ । अनुलोमपतिलोम । तद्स्युपदेश्चकाण्डम्‌ | प्ायश्ि्काण्डम्‌ । रै 28. Jtmutavithana 381 The Vyavaharamatrka as its very name implies deals with the elements of vyavahara (i.e. judicial procedure ). It speaks of the eighteen titles of law, the derivation of the word pradvivaka (judge ), the persons fitto be appointed judges, different grades of courts, duties of sabhyas, four stages of vyavahara, parvapaksa (plaint ), pratibha (surety ), blemishes in a plaint, uttara (reply of the defendent ), four kinds of uttara, blemishes in uttara, kriya ( proof or burden of proof), divine ( daivi ) and human ( manusi ) proof (viz: Ordeals, inference, witnesses, documents, possession), persons incompetent to be witnesses. Ordeals have not been dealt with by the author. The first verse of the work74" styles it Vyavahara- matrka. The last verse74? but one suggests the name Nyayamatrka which practically is a synonym of Vyavahara-matrka and the colophon at the end of a ms. in the Deccan College collection calls it Nydyaratnamalika. About twenty smrtikaras743 are mentioned in the Vyavahara- matrka. Katyayana, Brhaspati and Narada are the three smrtikaras most frequently quoted, nearly two-thirds of the quotations in the entire work being derived from them. Among the nibandhakaras the following are named :— Jitendriya, Diksita, ( p. 302 ), Bala ( p. 346, the same 25 Balaka ), Bhojadeva ( pp. 284, 305 ), Manjari- kara ( i. €, Govindaraja ), Yogloka, Visvaripa, Srikara ( pp. 292, 334 or Srikaramigra p. 342 ). About Visvarapa he 59544 ‘I have put forward this conclusion of the ancient writers, I have a en 14 व्यवहारमातकैषा सकलविवादेषु धर्मवादाभम्‌ । लोकद्वयेपि रक्षति सुतमिव शुश्षया माता ॥ 742 परिभद्रकुटोदुलः श्रीमान्‌ जीमूतवाहनः । विदुषां परितोषाय निर्ममे न्यायमातुकाम्‌ ॥ 743 They are उुशनस्‌, कात्यायन, बहत्कात्यायन, कौण्डिन्य, गोतम, नारद्‌, पितामह, प्रजा- पति, weet, ममु, यम, याज्ञवल्क्य, fee, यदटूसिष्ठ, विष्ण, व्यास, शङ्ख, FE शातातप, संवत, हारीत, | 4 मया प्राचां निबन्टुधृणामियं वापि ( वाणी ! ) पुरस्ता । वृषणं विश्वरूपादेर्नरारूत्य प्रप जितम्‌ ॥ Pp. 352. M. M. Chakravarti is not right in taking ( JASB 1915 p. 9 ) ' prfvam * to mean‘ eastern ‘in this verse, as in the previou Verse also जीमतवाह्न्‌ ‘refers ‘ toall munis’ and ‘ former works’ ‘ इति ©५ सकटलमनीनां भक्तिवाकयं विमृश्य स्वरसन इह aul गम्यते FIT † स TAHT. निबन्धो. (2b?) गृह्यतां बुद्धिमद्धिमवति यदि न जाङ्धं naar needy’ # 5. D. 41, ; $39 History of Dharmatastra refuted the objections of Vigvarapa and others and dealt with them at length.’ Yogloka and Srikara are generally quoted for being refuted and the former is frequently jeered at as ‘ tarkikarh-manya ' or ‘nava-tarkikarh-manya’. In this work Jimatavahana displays , great familiarity with the ancient dialectics. In some cases what the printed text exhibits745 as prose really constitutes verses, Sir Asutosh Mukerji is not accurate when he says in the preface that ‘ Jimatavahana refers to a number of jurists not mentioned by any other author, e. g. Jitendriya, Yogloka, Balaka, Visvarapa, Srikara and Manjarikara.’ It has been shown above that both Visvarapa _and Srikara have been mentioned by the Mit. which is certainly earlier than Jimatavahana and by a host of other writers who were either earlier than or contemporaries of Jimutavahana. The Vyavaharamatrka is quoted in the Vyavahartattva74* ( pp. 199, 214, vol. II ) and the Dayatattva of Raghunandana. The Dayabhaga isthe most famous of Jimttavahana’s works. In matters of Hindu law such as inheritance, partition, stridhana, re-union, it is of paramount authority in modern British Indian courts in Bengal, except in those cases where the Mitaksara is applicable. The names of more than a dozen commentators of it are known and Pandit Bharatacandra Siromani published it with seven commentaries ( 1863-1866 ). It was translated into English by Colebrooke. In many editions ( such as that of Jivananda ) it is divided into sections though there were no divisions in the original work. ‘The contents of the Dayabhaga are :— Definition of daya; father’s power over ancestral property ; partition of father’s and grand-father’s property ; division among brothers after their father’s death ; definition, classification and devolution of stridhana ; persons excluded from inheritance and partition on the ground of disabilities; property which is impartible (in its very nature or because it is self-acquired ); order of succession to one dying sonless; re-union, partition of coparcenery property concealed but discover- ed afterwards, indicia of partition. 745 e.g. on p. 348 the words ^ तस्मद्‌कशकुसुमसमान एव STOTT SEATS | मुक्त- दूरनिरस्तं लिशितादिभ्यो बलीयस्त्वम्‌ |¢ constitute an Ary&. Similarly on वी तस्मादस्मातरियमुकता मुक्ते प्रमाणता चान्तः । , , , ध्यवचनमान्रा- धीनस्वत्वकलतास्ममाणं सा ॥ › make two Aryas, 746 ‹ युक्ते्यायः स च ठोकष्यवहारः इति स्यवहारमातुका ' STEHT P- 199, vol. II. 78. JimUtavithana $28 Some of the peculiar doctrines of the Dayabhaga which are of fundamental importance and which sharply distinguish it from the Mit. are : sons have no interest in ancestral property by birth, sons can claim partition only after extinction of. theit father’s ownership ( 1. €, after his death or on his becoming patita or a samnyasin ) or partition can take place between father and sons if the father so desires, a widow succeeds to her husband’s interest on his death even if he be joint with his brother, the right to take a deceased person’s estate is regulated by the spiritual benefit con- ferred by the person claiming as heir ( by means of the offering of pindas )and not by the principle of consanguinity (asin the Mit.).747 Besides the smrtikaras,74® the Mahabharata and the Markandeya- purana the following authors are referred to by name in the Daya- bhaga :—Udgrahamalla, Govindaraja (as author of Manutika), Jiten- driya, Diksita, Balaka, Bhojadeva or Dharesvara, Visvarapa and Stikara. Udgrahamalla is referred to on the distribution of stridhana and it is said that Udgrahamalla (i. e. his view ) is throttled749 by the text of Devala. It appears therefore that Udgra- hamalla was not a smrti writer, but a nibandbakara. Diksita75° is credited with the view that, among daughters, those who have sons or are likely to have sons are preferred to those who are either barren, widowed or who give birth to daughters alone and the Dayabhaga approves of this yiew. There isone more writer who is referred to twice with great respect as Niravadyavidyoddyota. 747 Note the following ‹ तदेवं पितृस्वत्वापगम एकः कालोऽपरश्वानपगत एव पितु स्वाम्ये पितुरिश्छयति कालद्वयम्‌ । › दायभाग ?. 38 ; अतोऽविशेषणेव विभक्तत्वायनपेक्ष- थेवापु्रस्य मतैः रुत्सनधने पत्न्यधिकारो जितेन्द्ियोक्त आदरणीयः | P- 256 ; उप- SEA धनसंबन्धो मन्वादीनामभिमत इति मन्यते इति निरवयविद्योदुदयेतिन योतितो- यमधो विदहविरादरणीयः । ४. 396. 148 The स्म्रतिकार8 named are: उशनस्‌, कात्यायन, वृदधकात्यांयन, गोतम, दक्ष, देवल, नारद, WHA, SHA, मनु, TERY, यम, याज्ञवर्क्य, विष्णु, व्यास, शङ्खरिसित, वृदटुशातातप, हारीत, 9 एतावताष्ु्वा्मष्ठस्य देववचनं Tee: यथा सामान्यं पुञ्रकन्यानां मृतायां whet द्याम्‌ । दायभाग ?.191. 0 अतः पुश्रवती संमावितपुन्ना चाधिकारिणी । व्भ्यात्वविधवाततुदितृपसुतवादिना विपर्यस्त- TA पुनरनधिकारिण्येवेति दीक्षितमतमाद्रणीयम्‌ । दायभाग ए. 271. $24 History of Dharmaéastra Whether this is a mere description or title (‘the refulgence of whose learning is spotless”) or whether the author’s name was Uddyota and ntravadyvidya ( ‘ whose learning is spotless’ ) is an epithet, it is difficult to say. Fora correct knowledge of the origin and develop- ment of the theory of spiritual benefit propounded in the Dayabhaga, it would be extremely desirable to know who this writer was, as Jimutavahana tells us that that view was brilliantly set forth by Nirava- dyavidyoddyota. The same writer is also quoted on the well known verse of Yajnavalkya ‘bhirya pitamahopatta &c.,’ which is the sheet-anchor of Vijiianesvara’s theory about the son’s rights by birth in ancestral family property.75' Jimatavahana gives very little information about himself. In the colophons of his works he is described as Paribhadriya Maha- mahopadhyaya and at the end of the Vyavaharamatyka (vide note 742 above ) he tells us that he was born of the Paribhadra family ( kula ).7> It is said that this name of the family still survives in the Parihal or Pari Gai, a section of Radhiya Brahmanas ( Ghose’s Hindu Law, 3rd edition, pp. xvi-xvmr and JASB 1915 p. 320). It is also said that Edumisra in his Kulakarika tells us that Jimdta- vahana was chief judge in the reign of Visvak-sena of Bengal and that he was 9th in descent from Niarayanabhatta, one of the five Brahmanas brought by Adistra. The information supplied by the match-makers of Bengal is, as shown above, not worth reliance, unless corroborated by independent evidence. It is also said that for fourteen generations the Brahmanas of Pirigrama have becn degraded and so Jimitavahana would not have paraded the fact that he was Paribhadriya if at the time when he wrote his subcaste had been degraded ( Intro. to Kalaviveka p. णा). The fact that Jimutavahana was a native of Radha is testified by his statement in the Kalaviveka that Agastya ( Canopus ) rose in Ujjayini 751 अन्तु याह्ञवल्कीयवचनं-मृया . . . मयोः-तस्य निरवधयविदयोदूयोतेन थोतितस्तश्वतो- मर्थः । यत्र हयोधान्रोर्जवित्पितृकयोरपराघ्षमागयोरेकः Taye विनशोन्थो जीवति अनन्तरं पिता मृतस्तत्र TT एव तद्धनं प्राभोत्यतिसंनिकर्षत्‌ । तदथं सवृशं स्वाभ्यमिति वचनम्‌ । p. 50. 752 In some editions of the दायभाग, the last verse is पारिमघ्रकूलोद्ुतः श्रीमाप्‌ जीमूतवाहनः | दायभागं TEA विदुषां trae ॥ 78, Jimiitavibana $38 when four days of the month of Bhadrapada remained, but that in Radha Agastya rose when seven days of the month were yet to run.?53 Extremely divergent views have been held as to the date of Jimatavahana. He has been assigned to various dates from the 11th to the 16th century. In L. R. 41 I. A. at ए. 298 it is said by their Lordships of the Privy Council that the Mit. was earlier by five centuries than Jimitavahana. Dr. Jolly (९२. u. 9. p. 37 ) assigns him to the 15th century. For astatement of the various dates and their examination the article of M. M. Chakravarti in JASB. for 1915, pp. 321-327 and Mr. Panchanan Ghosh’s learned article in 26 Calcutta Law Journal ( journal portion p. 17 ff. ) may be consulted. Since Jimitavahana mentions Dhare- évara Bhojadeva and Govindaraja, he cannot be placed earlier than the last quarter of the r1th century. Since he is quoted by Sala pani, Vacaspati-migra and Raghunandana, he cannot be later than the middle of the 15th century. The Kalaviveka furnishes impor- tantdata. Ona ms. of the Kalviveka there is a note made about the birth-date of the son of a certain Ghatakasirhha with the horo- scope of the child. The year specified therein is sake 1417, i. €. 1495 A.D. It follows from this that the Ms. itself must have been copied .ometime before this and the original work must be much earlier still. So the Kalaviveka cannot be placed at any rate later than about 1400 A. D. In the Kalaviveka Jimuatavahana tells us that his predecessor Andhuka7s4 exhibited a certain astronomical matter in Sake 952 (i. 6, 1030 A, D. ) and that he declared an intercalary month in Sake 955, Similarly Jimutavahana expatiates upon several755 minute astro- 153 arene राडादिषु सप्तविनावशिष्टे भाद्रे तस्योदयः । उजयिन्यां च दिनिचतुष्टयावरिषटे । त्ाटविवेक P- 290 ; vide p. 291 also. ate एव ante हापश्चाशव्भिकनवदतसंख्याते weet अन्धुक विरदरितवान्‌ | काटषिवेक 7, 51; तथाहि पञ्चपञ्चशदधिकनवशतसंख्यके WES तुलासंकान्तिरमा- वास्यायां मूता , , . अन्धुकेन लिक्षितः । कालविवेकं P- 119. "95 ननु सुयोषन्द्रमसोरभिन्नरारिस्थत्वेपि अमावास्या श्यते । तथा च चतर्दशो्तरसदच्र VEIN Meer रवो Harare चतुर्दशी परलीऽछेयानक्षत्रं सपदण्डाम्‌ परतो मधा $26. History of Dharmatastra 1071641 and astrological details which were observed in the Jake years 1013 and 1014 (1. €. r0g1 and1092 A.D. >). It is impossible to supposse that an author would enter into such minute details about a time which was anterior to hisown by centuries. Generally astronomical works take for their calculations starting points or years which were within their own experience or very nearly so. Therefore it appears to be a sound conclusion to hold that the Kalaviveka was composed soon after Jake 1013 or 1014 (i.e. 1091 and 1092 A.D. ). Hence it follows that the literary activity of Jimttavahana lay between 1090 and 1130 A.D. The Kalaviveka seems to be his first work. The Vyavaharamatrka would. naturally come before the Dayabhaga. He seems to have contemplated writing?’ on rnadana also, as he says in the Dayabhaga that acertain matter would be expounded by him in rnddana. The most cogent argument that can be advanced against the above early date assigned to Jimatavahana is that neither Jimata- vahana nor any of his compositions is mentioned by Bengal writers and works on Dharmasastra belonging to the rath, 13th and 14th centuries such as the Haralata, the commentary of Kullaka etc, No satisfactory explanation can be offered of this silence. But is is a very precarious thing to conclude from this silence that Jimdta- vahana’s works did not exist during those centuries. It is safer to base conclusions about his date on the positive evidence contained in his works rather than rely upon the negative argument from silence in later works. When some of his commentators say that he criticises the views of CandeSvara, Misra and others we should not take them seriously. The commentators had no idea of the exact chronological position of writers long anterior to them. All they mean is that Jimdtavahana criticises views that were shared also by CandeSvara and others. Another important question is whether Jimatavahana who is certainly a little later than the Mit. 1" आ 7 तेनाभ्ठेषासमयेऽमावास्यायां Bee चन्द्रः सिंहे चादित्यः । seas , 81; तथा भ्रयोदशो्तरशकाब्दशेषे मीनस्थे सूर्ये पूर्वोत्रफाल्गुनीष्याता पूर्णिमा तदनन्तरं Aree हृस्तेचिन्रभ्यां युक्ता पूर्णिमा हत्तयोगाकाल्युनोप्यसौ अ्योदशोसरसदलनम्दीयकुम्मादि- SATS चतुदंशोत्तरसदस्राब्दान्तमानभोगपयन्तेन मासद्रयलोपः। कालविषेक PO Vide also pp. 41, 46-49. 756 एतश्च विस्तरेण ( ऋणा-) दाने वक््यते । दायभाग P. 45, 78. Jimitavthana $37 criticizes it. The Vivada-tandava 0057 Kamalakara says that Jimiatae vahana held that the view about the equal ownership of father and son in ancestral property was put forward for precluding the possi- bility ef the uncle taking the whole estate of a man dying (in union) leaving a son or a predeceased son’s son or for precluding the possi- bility of an unequal distribution of ancestral property by a father among his sons and that Jimiitavahana took up this position, being blinded by his hatred of the Mit. The Viramitrodaya75® also says that Jimatavahana criticizes the Mitaksara definition of vibhaga and the view of the Mit. about the times for partition. The Vyavahara- matrka759 also appears to criticizes several times views which were held by the Mit. and the correspondence is very striking. On this point this much may be said that the points selected for attack by Jimatavahana do occur almost in the same words in the Mit. but, since the Mit. is not expressly mentioned and since it is likely that other writers like Asahaya and Bharuci whose works have not yet been discovered might have contained the very same words that are found in the Mit., it is somewhat hazardous to assert that Jimuta- vahana criticizes the Mit. alone and no other work. All that one can advance is thatit is quite within the bounds of possibility that Jimatavahana criticizes the Mit. For Raghunandana one of the famous commentators of the Dayabhaga, vide sec. 102 below. 757 यत्तु जीमूतवाहनः-मृतपिवृके पोत्रे पुत्रे च सति संनिकर्षात पितृन्यस्थेव सर्वधनमाति- famed सम्वाम्योक्तिः पत्राणां विषमविभागनिवृत्यर्था वान त पितुः समभागार्था पुहस्वातन्त्यार्था at तेन ॒पेतामहेपि वपितुर्भागद्वयमिति । तन्मिताक्षरप्रदवेषजान्भ्यङूतम्‌ । folio 109 of the Mandlik collection ms, in the Fergusson College, Pecna. 258 ' यस्च जीमूतवाहनेनेव भिताक्षरोक्तं विभागे नाम द्रन्यसमदायविषयःणामनेकस्वाम्यना तदेकंदेशषु॒व्यवस्थापनमिति विभागशृष्दूरथैः ईति दुषयित्वोस्यते , वीर्‌ 9 ¢. 547; ‹ अश्र Rega एकः कालो निवृत्ते चापि रजसीति द्वितीयो जीवति चेच्छतीति तृतीय इति भिताक्षरायां जीमूतवाहनेनोकतं दूषणम्‌ \ ' dite ४. 552. 159 भ्यवहयरमासृका P. 296 ‹ तदेव ( वं { ) स्वयमेव अभसिदवादर््याहूतत्वात्‌ यदन्यैः कल्पितं अप्रसिद्भिति मदीयं शशविषाणमनेन गृहीतं निरावाधमस्मदीयगृहर्थितो दीपः प्रकाश Rage SOM... तज्र्तां दूषणान्तरं किं तु शास्लायम्यथाकत्पनमराज्ञदृिवेव तेषां कल्पयति । ; › compare मिताक्षरा on याज्ञ. 7.6 ‹ aay मदीयं शश- विषाणं गृहीत्वा न प्रयच्छतीत्यादि निगबाधमस्मवरि दीपप्रकाशनायं स्वगृहे ध्यवहरती- त्यादि, ’ It is to be noted that these examples ocour in अपराकं also. 328 History of Dharmatisra 79. Apararka On the आप of Yajiiavalkya Aparaditya wrote a voluminous com- mentary styled Apararka~Yajnavalkiya-dharmasastra-nibandha ( put- lished in two volumes by the Anandagrama Press, Poona, 1903 and 1904 ). Ina verse7® at the end and in the colophons the author is called Aparaditya, a Silahara king, born in the family of Jimata- vahana of the Vidyadhara race. In the introductory’® fifth verse also the author is styled ‘an ornament of the family of Jimiata’ and is highly eulogised for his devotion to Siva and his brilliant intellect. Apararka’s work, like the Mitaksari, though professedly a com- mentary on Y4j., is really in the nature of a digest. It is far more voluminous than the Mit. It quotes profusely from the Grhya and Dharma sitras and the metrical smrtis. Several features distinguish it from the Mit. The Mit. is generally very chary of quoting from the puranas, while Apararka contains long extracts sometimes extending over pages from several puranas, viz, the Adipurana, the Adityapurana, the Karma, the Kalikapurana, Devi, Nandi, Nysimha, Padma, Brahma, Brahmanda, Bhavisyat, Bhavisyottara, Matsya, Markandeya, Linga, Varaha, Vamana, Vayu, Visnu, Visnudhar- mottara, (५ Skanda. The index at the end of the printed Apararka gives the names of the various smptikaras quoted in the work. Another feature not found in the Mit. is that Apararka quotes long passages of the dharmasatras and explains them at length, e. g. on Yaj. III 294 ( p. 1205 ) he quotes Gautama ( Dh. ऽ. 20. 2-9 ) and then offers a lengthy explanation; on Yaj. III. 294-295, he quotes long passages of Vasistha (Dh. S.15. 11-14 and 17-21) and gives detailed explanations of them. It is probable he had not before him commentaries on these dharmasitras. On p. 11, he 760 oy यस्य Fegan वसुमती कोशः समदः सुहृच्छको दुर्गमनागमं क्षलपरा सेना हिता मन्तिणः । शाश्चाथोमतच्ैणार्थितमतिव्ैकनाथोप्यसौ शीरयोदा्थयशोधनोमुमपरादित्यो निषन्धं व्यधात्‌ ॥ इति श्रीवियाधरवंशपरमवरश्विलाहारनरेग्जीमूतवाहनाग्वयमसुत> श्रीमदपरादित्यदेवविरिषिते याक्ञवल्कीयधर्मशाक्लनिषन्धेऽपराके TTT APT | 761 भक्त्या यस्य सविस्मयः esa SMEAR द्विषतां भणः श्ुचितया मास्वाश्श्वमित्वेन मूः । जीमूतान्वयभूषणं स विपु बोगीन्वरेणोदिते शाश वाक्य- नयानां वितनुते भ्याङ्यां सतं सेमतामू ॥ 79, Apararka 329. vives brief summaries in the style of the Sankarabhasya of the tenets of the Saiva, Pasupata, Paficaratra, Sathnkhya and Yoga systems. He does 40८ appear to have been an ardent admirer of the Advaita Vedanta though he refers to the Sarirakamimarnsa.72 In one place he sets out the arguments of those who hold that correct knowledge alone leads to mokga and of those who hold that a combination of correct knowledge and works is essential for moksa and leaves his readers to choose for themselves whatever view they take.76 It is remarkable that, while ever the Mit. names at least six snibandhakaras on dharmasastra viz. Asahaya, Visvarapa, Bharuci, Srikara, Medhatithi and Dharesvara, Apararka observes a studied silence in the matter of citing the names of his predecessors. He employs such vague expressions as kecit, anye, apare, though he cites views that were ascribed by the Mit. and others to Dharesvara and others, €, g. on pp. 741-42 he says7° that the text of Yaj. ‘patni duhitarah’ according to some refers to the widow who submits to niyoga (this is the view of Dharesvara); on p. 744 he refersto the view of some that the word dubity in पद]. means only the appointed daughter (putrika ) This last was the view of Visvaripa and Srikara. On p. 761 he refers to the reading of some in Yaj. Il. 1 $0 ०5 ‘samanta sthavira ganah’ which is found in Visvarapa (II. 154) and not in the Mit. Apararka names ( p. 926 ) a Vagbhata-smrtisathgraha and a Smrtimimarnsa of Jaimini ( p. 206 ) from which two verses are quoted, variant readings therein are noticed and detailed explanations thereof are offered. He refers to several works and authors on astronomy and astrology such as Garga, Kriyasraya ( p. 872 ), Saravali. On 70. 570 and 572 of the printed text occur two references to a pustaka of rajanaka Sitikantha.7*5 That was probably a marginal 16४ शाच्खं च तस्माहूा एतस्मादात्मन आकाशः संमूतः-दृस्यादिकमेकाकिन एव परमात्मनः सकलकार्यकारितामाचष्टे । तस्य॒ च तकंविरोधः शारीरकमीमांसाभ्यासशाष्धिनाम- परद्र एव । ए. 975 on याज्ञ. III. 68. | 163 Vide pp. 1029-1084 on याज्ञ, 177. 205. On 7. 1034 ४० says ‹ तद्नयो्मतयो्य॑- न्न्याय्यं TEU’. 4 अन्न केचिदाहू+-या देवरादन्यस्माद्वापि सपिण्डादूगुरुभ्वशरादिवचनायुत्रभिच्छति तदवि पत्नी agar इत्यादि वचनमिति । . . . एतेन यदुक्तं केनचित्‌ पत्नी seat इत्यन्न दुितृशन्देन पुञ्निकोज्यत इति तन्निरस्तं वेदितभ्यम्‌ ।. 6 इति राजानकरि तिकण्ठपुस्तके विरोषः । ?. 572. प, D. 42. 850 History of Dharmaé asira note in a ms., the copyist or owner of which found on comparison with another ms. belonging to rajanaka Sitikantha additional matter, Apararka quotes from Bhatta (i.e. Kumarilabhatta ).76° Apararka does not appeal as frequently to the doctrines of the Parvamimarhsa as the Mit. does and he does not generally enter into acute dis- cussions of Pirvamimarshsa in its application to Dharmaégastra as the Mit. does. It must be said that Apararka is much inferior to the Mit. in lucid exposition, in dialectic skill, in subtelty of argument and in the ordered presentation of heterogenous material. Some of the views that are usually associated with Jimttavahana were propounded by Aparirka also. Apararka bases the right to take a deceased person’s property on the superior spiritual benefit conferred by the claimant on the person deceased.767 In several other respects also Apararka differs from the Mit., though in general the two closely agree. For example, Apararka prefers the father over the mother as an heir ( p. 745 ) ; Apararka explains the word ° apratisthita ’ in Gautama’s text ( 18.22) as ‘one who is issue- less or is indigent or a widow, ’ while the Mit. explains it to mean only ‘ indigent. ’ | Whether Apararka knew the Mit. is a vexed question. Some scholars while holding that Apararka does criticize the Mit. explain away the non-mention of the Mit. by saying that Indian etiquette required a royal author not to mention the name of the servant of another king, while the existence of the master himself was ignored ( Dr. Jolly in Journal of Indian History vol. J p. 17). It is doubt- ful whether any such etiquette ever existed and further Apararks studiously avoids the express mention of every ancient commentator. Works of royal authors, such as the Madanparijata or the Sarasvativilisa, do not appear to have followed the etiquette. In 706 ततश्च यदुक्त भटेन-तस्मदगृहे तिष्ठन्‌ मधुमांसादि aay । जिज्ञासेताविश्द्वाटमै- मित्यवगम्यते ॥ हाते तदनेन विङ्भ्यते ?. 76. 767 तश्च प्रत्यासन्नः पूवं धनभाक्‌ । यदाह मनुः । अनन्तरः सपिष्डायस्तस्य तस्य धनं भवेदिति 1... संप्रद्‌नकारकीभूतानां पित्रादीनां याणां चोदकादिदाता यश्च तत्सैततिजोन्योपि तेषमेवोदकादिद्‌।ता स तस्य प्रत्यासन्नः सपिण्डः । तदन्न तु सोदरो भ्नातातिशयेन प्रत्यासन्नः समा नसेप्रदानोद्कदिदातृत्वात्‌ । तत्यौश्रस्तु ततोपि व्यवहितः पितृपितामहपिण्डयार्भिल्नसंमदानकपवात्‌ । तत्तपोत्रस्त्वत्यन्तम्यवहितः पिण्डन्रभेपि संम- SAAT | 20. 744-45, 79. Apartrka 331 ‘my opinion the Mit. was known to. Apararka. Apararka reads Y4j. Ill. 17 as ‘Vaitanopasanah karyah kriy4sca Sruticoditah,’ explains the first word asa karmadharaya compound, gives the explanation of this verse offered by others, disapproves of it and then says that others read ‘ Sruticodanat ’ for ‘Sruticoditah’.7°* एइ reads ‘yaitanikasrayah. .. SrutidarSanat’ and offers no comment on this verse beyond the word ‘spastarthametat’( it is III. 15. in the Trivandrum ed. ). The Mit. does contain the reading referred to by Aparirka and the Stuti passage ‘ yavaj-jivam’ etc. Apararka refers on ४३]. III. 254 to the reading ‘samim’7% adopted by some, says that the latter explain the verse as prescribing the penance for three years and observes that the verse of Manu (IX. 92 ) does not apply, as the latter say, to him alone whose palate has merely come in contact with liquor ( without his having actually swallowed it) Visvarapa (III. 248 ) does not explain the verse as prescribing a three 768 ory केचिद्‌ ष्याचक्षते-विताने वेदे भवाः वेतानाः तथा उपासने TE भवा ओंपासनाः | वेतानाश्चोपासनाश्च बेतानोपासनाः क्रिया इति । तदेतद्ब्याख्यानमनुपपन्नम्‌ । वैतानो- पासन्य इति हि तद्‌। शब्दः स्यान्न पुर््वैतानोपासना इति । , , . यच्च तैः श्रुति- चोवनादिति पाठं रत्वा हेतुपरत्वेन व्याख्यातं तदपि न युक्तम्‌ । एवं हि ते मन्यन्ते । यस्माच्छत्या यावज्जीवमभिहो्रं जुहुयात्‌, यावऽजीवं gay मासाभ्यां यजेत, इत्यादिकयावश्यकायैतया विहितत्वान्न स्मृत्या हा क्यमाशोचेपि तन्नि. weet विधातुमिति । अपराकं ?. 891 : ००८०९१० the मिताक्षरा ‹ वितानैोक्नीनां विस्तारस्तञ्न भवा वैतानाः Safes अनिहोच्रदरशपणमासायाः क्रिया उच्यन्ते | , . . उपासनो गृद्याभिस्तत्र मवा ओपासनाः सायंप्रातर्छेमक्रिया उच्यन्ते ता वैतानो- पासना वैदिक्यः क्रियाः कायाः । कथं वैदिकत्वमिति चेत्‌ । श्रतिचोद्‌नात्‌ । तथाहि TIA जुहयादित्यादिश्रुतिभिरभिोन्नादीनां चोदना Aes ॥ . "“ ' केचिवृच्र समाराब्वं बहुवचनान्तं वषेत्रयपरत्वेन व्याचक्षते । ... अस्मा- देव च सुरापानापनुच्यथौमिति वचनात्‌ रतसुरापानस्येतद्‌ बतमिति गम्यते न पुनस्तालु- माभ्रसंयुक्तसुरस्येति 1 अपरार्क 7. 1072; compare the मिताक्षरा ‘ अथवा rare पिण्डितं Bremen: वरथश्रयपयंन्तं TH भक्षयेत्‌ । ... यत्त॒ मनुवचनं कणान्वा -.. सरुन्निशि । सुरापानापनुस्य्थं थालवासा जरी casi ॥ इति तत्तालुमा्नसंयोगे सुराया अबुद्धिप्े द्रष्टव्यम्‌ १, The printed text of याज्ञ. inthe मिताक्षरा reads पिण्याकं ... मक्षयेभ्रसमा Ht’ ५ the printed अपराके reads WAIT समां निक, while विश्वरूपं reads भक्षयीत समां निशि. The remarks of अपराकं show that he had a ms. ofa com. where the reading was मक्षयेन्च समा निशि. I डी 1 on ee — ee = es yeas -ties omecetentementiets = eee ont 988 Hidtory of Dharmasastra years’ penance nor does he refer to the contact of wine with the palate. The Mit. however contains both these particulars. On p. 1084 also77° Apararka seems to be referring to the view of the Mit. The date of Apararka can be settled within very narrow limits. The Smrticandrika77! in several places quotes the views of Apararka and sometimes contrasts them with those of the Mit. The Smrti- candrika refutes the view of Apararka that the words of शत्र, < jyesthath va sresthabhagena ’ are meant to comprehend all various modes of giving an additional share ( uddharavibhaga )to the eldest son on partition mentioned by Manu and others and it follows Apararka’s explanation of ‘ apratisthita’ in Gautama’s text. It will be shown later on that the Smrticandrikaé must have been composed about 1200 A. D. Ifthe above conclusion that Apararka knew the Mit. and criticizes it be correct, Apararka must have flourished after 1100 A. D. and before 1200 A. D. Here epigraphical research comes to our help. We know from the commentary that the author Aparaditya was a Silahara prince of Jimatavahana’s family. Inscriptions of the Silaharas show that there were three branches of that family, one ruling in the northern Konkan at Thana, the second in the southern Konkan and the third at Kolhapur ( vide JBBRAS, vol. XIII p. 1o-17 for the three branches). All the branches traced their descent from Jimitavahana. Thereis only a single inscription of the second branch which had ten kings reigning from about 808 to 1008 A. 0. (JBBRAS vol. I, p. 209, E. I. vol. III. p. 292 ). There is no Aparaditya in this line. Vide E. I. III p. 207. 211 and 213 for several grants of the Kolhapur branch. Inscriptions 770 ‹ तन्नापि बाक्षणीपुच्नस्य erat nai गच्छतो नववार्थिकं वेश्यां षड्वार्षिकं शूदर Sales गुरुतल्पव्रतं भवतीत्येके मन्यन्ते । अपराकं ए. 1084 ; ४० मिताक्षरा ० arg. IIT. 260 bas ‹ ब्राह्मणीपुत्रस्य क्षत्रियायां मातुः सपल्यां गमने Eo 171 यन्युनरपराकेण जयेष्ठं ्ष्ठभागेनेत्येतदुदवारमव्शनार्थं तेन ज्येष्ठस्य विंश उद्धार इत्यादि भिमन्वादिशाञख्जयविन्त saa विहितास्ते स्वँ चोपलन्षिता भवन्तीति aq: पास्तम्‌ । स्मृतिच० II. 2. 261;compare अपरां ए. 717 ८ जयेष्ठस्य faa... यर्वयिसः इत्यादिभिर्दारशाख्यविन्त SET विहितास्ते सर्वेश्रोपलक्षिता ward. ५ अमतिष्ठिता अनपत्या निर्धना दुर्भगा Rear वा । एवमपरा्कानुसाराद्रीतमवनं न्याख्यातमु^। अस्य विज्ञानेश्वररुता व्याख्या हेया स्वबुद्िमात्रेण।ध्याहारादिकरणात्‌ । ' स्मृति ० 11. 5. 285 ; vide स्मृति ० II. 218, 367, $77, 428 for other refer ences to अपरार्क, Vide चतुर्वर्ग ° 777. 2, p. 495 for mention of STATS, 79. Aparairka 333 of the northern Silaharas speak of two kings who are named Apari- dityadeva. In JBBRAS vol. XXI, pp. 505-516 there is a grant dated sake 1049 ( expired ) of Aparadityadeva who donated a village named Vadavali in the Thana District toa brahmana studying the Madhyandina recension of the Vajasaneya-sarhhita. The king is there styled once as Aparajita and several times as Aparadityadeva. He was son of Anantadeva and grand-son of Nagarjuna and traced his descent to Jimutavahana, son of Jimataketu, far famed in legend and literature as an exemplar of self-sacrifice77?, €, g. in the drama Naigananda. In this inscription Aparadityadeva is styled Silaharana- rendra and Jimatavahananvayaprasata as in the colophon of the com- mentary on ४३]. ( vide note 760 above ) and also Mahamandale- svara and Tagarapuraparamesvara. In the Annals of the Bhandarkar Institute, vol. V, part 2, p. 169 there is a grant made at Somnath- Patan in Kathiawar of Vikramsarhvat 1176 ( 1119-20 A. D. ) while Aparadityadeva of the Silahara family was reigning, almost in the same words as in the grant in JBBRAS vol. XXI 7. 505. InI. A, vol. IX, p. 33 there is a grant of Anantadeva father of Aparadityadeva dated in Jake 1016 (i. €. 1094-5 A.D. ). Vide Bombay Gazetteer vol. I. part 2, p. 15 for a list of 20 kings of the northern Konkan branch from 810 to 1260 4. 2. ` Vide also an inscription of Apari- dityadeva dated Sake 1051 (i. €. 1129 A. D.) in Festgabe Dr, Jacobi pp. 189-193 (1926). Therefore it appears that the dates ot Aparadityadeva I referred to in these grants fall between 1115 and 1130 A.D. It was most probably this king who composed the commentary on Yaj. We know from the Srikanthacarita of Mankha that king Aparaditya773 of Konkan sent Tejakantha on an embassy to an assembly of learned men in Kashmir during the reign of Jayasichnha of Kashmir (1129 to 1150 A.D. ). Apararka’s com- mentary continues to be the standard law-book used by the pandits of Kashmir ( Jolly’s Tagore Law lectures p. 24 ). Apararka’s work 19 जीमूतकेतुतनयो नियतं दृयालुजीमूतवाहन इति त्रिजगत्मसिद्धः । देहं निजं वृणमि- Testy परार्थ यो रक्षति स्म ॒गर्ढात्‌ खल WETS ॥ तस्यान्वये . , कपर्दी शीलारवंशतिलको नृपति्मृव ॥ P- 507. | "9 वच्ोभिनुनुदे दन्तदयुतिश्रीखण्डपाण्डुमिः । वादिनां aaa येन yaieerag ॥ यः भीमदुपरादित्य इति दूत्यमसिदधये । प्रजिधाय घनन्लाघः काश्मीरान्‌ कुङ्कणेन्वरः ॥ तेन श्रीतेजकण्ठेन सेोत्कण्ठमनुबष्नत | इति सोधिकवैशचयनिरव्यमगयत ॥ श्रीकण्ठ- afta 25. 109-11}, | 884 ` Fistory of Dharmatistra betrays familiarity with Kashmir. I have already noticed the reference to rajanaka Sitikantha above. On a passage from Brahma- purana speaking of a éraiddha at Martandapadamala, Apararka notes ( p. 903 ) that774 the latter is well known in Kashmir. It is there- fore most probable that the work was composed about 1125 and was introduced into Kashmir when an embassy was sent from the Konkan king to Kashmir in the reign of Jayasithha. The dates of the second Aparaditya range from 1184 to 1187 A. D. ( Vide Bombay Gazetteer vol. XIII, part 2, p. 427; JBBRAS vol. XI, Pp- 333-335 for an inscription of Aparaditya dated 1109 sake i.e. 1187 A. D. ( wherein he is styled Konkana-cakravarti ). 1 is difficult to hold that this was the author of the commentary on Y4j. The Smrticandrika is mentioned by Hemadri and hence could not be later than the first quarter of the thirteenth century. Therefore if Apararka who is frequently cited by the Smpticandrika were to be regarded as having flourished about 1187 A. D., very little distance is left between him and the Smrticandrika in order that the former should come to be looked upon as an authority by the latter. Therefore it appears probable that Apararka wrote the com- mentary on Yaj. in the first half of the 12th century (abcut 1125 A.D. ). Vide Tri. cat. Mad. Govt. Mss. for 1919-22, pp. 4853-54, for the Nyayamuktavali of Aparadityadeva, which is a com. on the Nyayasara of Bhasarvajiia. | 80. Pradipa The Smrtyarthasara of Sridhara enumerates the Pradipa among its authorities after the Kamadhenu.775 The Smrticandrika in a highly paronomastic verse appears to refer to a work called Pradipa.77© The Sarasvativilisa777 quotes the view of the Pradipa 774 मार्तण्डपादमूलं काश्मीरेषु प्रसिद्धम्‌ | अपरकरं 7. 903. 775 Vide note 681 above. 76 षदे पदे प्रस्खलतां प्रदीपदिस्थितावपि । द्रषटणां टषटिविषये Veet प्रवितन्यते ॥ प्रदीप (lamp and 9 फण) ) and चंन्धका (moonlight andthe स्मूतिचद्दरिका ) are paronomastic. 777 आतिभाल्यागतमपि पोञ्रेणापि दातश्यमिति प्रदीपः । स. वि, 7. 258 ; vide p. 361 for another reference to प्रदीप, 80. Pradipa 335 that even the suretyship debt of a person must be paid by his grand- son. The Jivatpitrkanirnaya77® of Ramakrsna ( about 1600 A. D. ) quotes the Pradipa on the question that when brothers are separat- ed they should perform separately the annual sraddha of their father and other ancestors. Nandapandita in his commentary on the779 Sadasiti cites the view of the Pradipa that the उपा of Paithinasi (a woman delivered of a son bathing after twenty nights from delivery is entitled to perform all religious rites, while one who is delivered of a female child is so entitled after a month ) applies to the wife of one who is not a diksita ( one who has consecrated the Vedic fires). It has been shown above ( note 689) how the Pradipa criticizes Bhavadeva; according to the Viramitrodaya, which in several places cites the views of the Pradipa ( vide pp. 78, 89, 215 & etc. ). The foregoing discussion shows that the Pradipa was probably an independent work on vyavahara, sraddha, suddhi and other topics. Being mentioned by the Smrtyarthasara and Smpticandrika, it cannot be later than about 1150 A. D. As it criticizes Bhavadeva it cannot be earlier than 1100 A. D. Hemadri7® refers to the explanation of the word kala occurring in a text of Gargya offered by a Smripradipa. It is not unlikely that he means the same work as is referred to by others 25 Pradipa. 81. The Smrtyarthasara of Sridhara This well-known work was published by the Anandasrama Press, Poona, 10 1972 A. D. The principal topics discussed by it are: the acts allowed in former ages but forbidden in the kaliage ; the number of sarhskaras, the detailed treatment of Upanayana, the 778 प्रदीपेपि । विभक्तास्तु पृथक्‌ कुर्युः मतिसंवत्सरादिकम्‌ । एकेनेवाविभक्तेषु रते सवेश्तु तत्छतम्‌ ॥ folio 20 b of जीवविितरकनिणय ॥ (in Bhadkamkar collection ). 179 पेठीनाकतिः । सूतिकां पुत्रवतीं विंशतिरा्रेण स्नातां सर्वकर्माणि कारयेन्मासेन श्ीजननी- मिति । इदमपि सवव्णसाधारणामिति seg: । अदीक्षितश्चीविषयमिति प्दीपः। षडशीतिरदीका folio 8a (in the Bhadkamkar collection ) ; vide folio 38 b for another reference to प्रदीप, 80 यदाह गामय; । यज्लकालस्तिथिदेषे ER यादे टक्ष्यते । Tana काथं हनि पवेमुपक्रमेत्‌ | कलान्न मुहूतं न तु Ves)... स्मृतिभदीपर्ताप्यन्न sae महूताथतोका | चतुर्ग ( काल ) Ps 855. 386 History of Dharmasdstra duties of Brahmacarin, holidays, marriage, its various forms, pro- hibitions on the ground of sapiyda relation, discussion about gotra and pravara, daily duties such as sauca, acamana, brushing the teeth, bathing, the five yajnas, daily sarndhya, daily worship; detailed treatment of fraddha, proper time, articles, and brahmanas to be invited at it, various kinds of sraddba, discussion about various tithis ; intercalary month ; forbidden and allowed food ; purification of various substances and of one’s own body; impurity on birth and death ; rites after death; rules about sasinyasa ; prayascittas for various grades of sins and lapses. From the colophon it appears that Sridhara was himself 2 per- former of Vedic sacrifices and was the son of Nagabhartr Visnu- bhatta of the Vigvamitra gotra. This colophon does not however occur in the ancient ms. of the work in the Deccan College collection (No. 44 of 1870-71 ) dated samnvar 1495 ( 1438-39 A. D.). In the 2nd introductory verse ( vide note 564 above ) the author tells us that Srikantha and Srikaracarya filled the gaps in the smrtis that were scattered about (i.e. they composed digests thereof with their own remarks ). He also says ( vide note 651 above ) that he relies on the Kamadhenu, the Pradipa, the Abdhi, the Kalpa- vrksa (i. €. Kalpataru ), Kalpalata, Sambhu, Dravida, Kedara and Lollata and the various commentators of Manu and other smrti- karas. In dealing with samnyasa he says that he would treat of the procedure of sashnyasa following the opinion of Govindaiaja and of Baudhayana.78: At the beginning of some sections ( p. 48 anc p. 49 on sraddha and préyascitta respectively ) he again repeats the verse about Kamadhenu and the other authorities. The Abdhi named therein seems to be the s.ortimaharnava quoted in Hemadri, in the Vivadaratnakara and other works. He refers to Mitaksara also ( p. 56). For Lollata see above ( under Medhia- tithi ). It appears that Sridhara also composed another anda larger work on dharmasastra. For example, Hemadri who7** knew 781 Vide note 723 above. 782 On the words of ज्योतिरगाम्ये “ सौरमासो विवाहादां यश्ञादौ सावनः स्मृतः ' चतरवंग ° (काल ) ?. 20 says आदिशब्दाथेः श्रीधरेण दर्शितः । Margery व्रतनियमप्रतिष्ठागृहकरणक्षोरयान्नामहाषष्ठीमहासपघर्मविजयद्‌शमीद शहराथुगादिमह्ज्य- हामभूत्यादिष्षब्देनोपादीयते । यज्नादावित्यादिशब्देन य।गदुानहोमगभांधानस्षीमम्तो- ` जयनजातकम-ऋण-~कयविक्रयष्यवहर ग्रहणम्‌ । 81. The Smrtyarthasira of Sridhara’ 337 the Smrtyarthasara quotes certain views as Sridhara’s which do not occur in the Smprtyarthasira. The Prayogaparijata, the Nirnaya- sindhu, and the Sarhskarakaustubha quote the views of a work called Sridhariya which are not found in the Smrtyarthasara. Sridhara seems to have been a writer from southern India. The date of the Smptyarthasira can be fixed within approximate limits. AS it names the Mit., the Kamadhenu, the Kalpataru and Govindaraja, it is later than r150 A. D. The Smrticandrika and Hemadri7®3 both quote it asan authority. For example, the Smrti- candrika says that the Smrtyarthasira holds that the Tulasi is among the things the use of which is to be avoided in sraddha. Therefore the Smrtyarthasira must have been composed between 1150 and 1200 A. D. 82. Aniruddha Aniruddhabhatta is one of the early and eminent Bengal writers on Dharmaégastra. His Haralata was published in the Bibliotheca Indica series ( 1909 ) and his Pitrdayita alias Karmopadesinipaddhati was recently published by the Sanskrit Sahitya Parishad at Calcutta (No 6) The Haralata deals with impurity on birth and death, with the acts allowed to be done or forbidden during impurity, with periods of impurity on death in a distant land or on the deaths of infants and women, with rules when two periods of impurity overlap each other, with impurity on the death of sapindas, the meaning of 73 स्मृत्य्थसरे queat वर्ज्यत्युक्तं तन्न ad चिन्त्य भसिद्धरमतिसमुच्चयेषु तुलसीनिषेध- स्यादशेनात्‌ । स्मृतिच ° IT. 2. 435; compare स्मृत्य्धसार्‌ . 53; "त्तु स्मृत्यथेसरे- Pied पाणिहोमे विवष्ममेक्षणविपानुज्ञा न संततिः (ar?) तत्र विपानुज्ञामावो- क्तिरेतद्रबनाद्शननिबन्धनेत्यु्ेक्षणीया । ,.. यच्च॒ TTA परिसमूहनपयं- क्षणे स्त इति तदषि चिन्त्यम्‌ । १ स्मृतिच ० II. p. 465 ; vide “or the very words quoted स्मृत्यथसार p. 52. wafearyo II. 366 quotes some passages from स्मृत्यथेस।र Pp. 57 and 60. | चतुरवरी ° vol. IV. p. 99४ ( प्रायग्ित्त ). स्मृत्य्थसारे कलिय॒गे संसर्गदोषो नास्ती- त्युक्तम्‌ › , compare स्मृत्यथसार ४. 2. ‹ संसगेदोषः पापेषु मधुपक site|... कलो युगे विभान्‌ धमौन्‌ वञ्योनाहुमेनीषिणः |. मदनपारिजान (४. ४9) quotes the words संसगदोष dco. expressly from स्मृत्यथसार, H. D. 43. 338 ` स्वम of Dharmatasira sapinda, persons who have not to observe periods of impurity, cremation and burial, offering of water to the deceased, observances during mourning, persons entitled to perform rites after death, observances after the period of mourning, persons to whom no water should be offered. The Pitrdayita is a work intended for the followers of the Samaveda. Its contents are :—the duties on rising from bed, brushing the teeth, bath, samdhya, tarpaya, vaisvadeva, parvana- Sraddha, eulogy of gifts, sapindikarana and other sraddhas, antyesti and rites during the days of mourning after death, the letting loose of a bull. The printed work appears to be the same that is described in the I. O. cat. at p. 474 25 Karmopadesini. But the India Office Ms. appears to have certain various readings e. g. a reference to Kamadhenu and Kalpataru at the end of the section on antyesti does not occur in the printed text.78. The first verse of the Haralata states that the author consulted the commentaries on Manu and other smrtis.7#5 Besides the well- known smrtikaras such as Manu, Yajiiavalkya, Narada etc., the authors and works named in the Haralata are :—Asahaya as the Bhasyakara of Gautama, Kamadhenu, Govindaraja, Bhojadeva, Vigvarapa and Sankhadhara. The Pitrdayita7®* says that it was composed after consulting the Gobhilagrhyasatra, the Chandogyapari- Sista, the smrtis, puranas, the sastras of Gautama and Vasistha and various sarhgraha. works. In the work itself, besides the above. Katyayana, Varahapurana and the smaller (svalpa) Matsyapurana are quoted. From the last verse78? of the Haralata we know that Aniruddha was a resident of Viharapataka on the bank of the Ganges and was 784 कल्पतरुकामधेन्वादिसम्रहारुष्टे महोपध्ययेन विरचित शुद्धिमकरणेश्त्येशटिषिधिः । folio 1147. 785 प्रणम्य पुण्डरीकाक्ष पूर्वाचार्यभ्रवतिंताः | व्याख्या मन्वादिशाश्ञाणां समालोकय विविष्मते ॥ 286 गोभिलगृद्यसूत्ं शष्ट STINET TEI स्मृतम्वि बहशः परिसंख्यानं पुराण- वाक्यानि ॥ गोतमवसिष्ठशाञे नानासंग्रह्वचांकि चालोक्य । युक्स्या स्वयं निण्य ज्ञात्वा सर्वे मतं च ब्रद्धानाम्‌ । राता पद्वतिरेषा सम्यक्‌ कर्मोपदेशिनी रुचिरा | 78? सुरापगातीरविहारपाटके निवासिन! मटनयार्थवेदिना । रूतानिद्दरेन सतामुरःस्थले विराजतां हरलतेयमपिंता ॥ 68. Aniruddha 339 a student of the doctrines of Bhatta (Kumirila). From the colophons7® at the end of the Haralata and the Pitrdayita it appears that he was a Dharmadhyaksa and a Campahattiya ( a section among Varendras ) Brahmana of Bengal. The ms. in the India Office has a colophon in which Aniruddha is styled Dharmadhikaranika (Judge ). From the Danasagara of Ballalasena we learn (verses 6 and 7 ) that Aniruddha was a guru of that king of Bengal and rendered assistance in the composition of that work. The Danasagara7*? was composed in Sake 1091 ( i.e. 1169 A.D. ). From this it appears that Aniruddha was at the height of his fame in 1168, 1. €. his literary activity may be placed in the third quarter of the rath century A. D. This conclusion is corroborated by the fact that the Hiralata names Bhojadeva, Govindaraja, and the Kamadhenu as authorities and is therefore later than r100 A.D. The Haralata is named as an autho- rity in the Suddhiviveka of Rudradhara79°, The Sraddhakriya- kaumudi of Govindananda ( about 1510-1545 A.D.) frequently quotes Aniruddha and includes him among ancient authors.79! The Pitrdayita is named in the Sraddhakriyakaumudi ( p. 503 ). In the Ahnikatattva (vol.I, p. 421) and Suddhitattva (vol. II, p. 314) of Raghunandana the views of Pitrdayiti are quoted. There is a commentary on the Haralata called Sandarbhasicika composed by Acyuta Cakravartin, son of Haridasa Tarkacarya ( videlI. 0. cat. ?. 567, No. 1753 ). 188 इति चाम्पादृटीयमहोपाभ्यायधर्माभ्यक्षश्रीमदनिश्दमटविरचिताशोचम्यवस्था इर्छता समापा; इति चाम्पादृहीयमहामहोपाध्यायश्नीमदनिडदभटविरचिता छन्दोगानां aie qatar समाप्ता । 189 निखिलमूपचकतिलकश्रीमद्बह्ालसेनदेवेन | पूर्णे शरिनवदशमितशकव्षे दानतागरो Tas ॥ Bt the end of the दान्षागर, vide I. 0. cat. p. 542 and Mitra’s Notices I. p. 151. This very verse is quoted by श्रीनाथ STAYS. Vide JASB 1915, p. 347 n. 1. 190 सन्त्येव रत्नाकरपारिजातमिताक्षराह्ारलत।दयोन्ये | तथापि त्नाटस्तमानसानां भवेत्म- मोदाय मम are: ॥ 1. 0. cat. p. 563, No. 1743 ; Mitra’s Notices vol. V. p. 25. No. 1736. "9 किं तु अनिर्दादीनां प्रा्ामनुसारात्‌ & ०. श्नादु करियाकौमुदी ?, 988; vide p. 188 (अतो गोमिलगृह्यसुखविष्डेदमनाकलय्याधुनिकेन गोडमैधिलसंग्रहकारानिरदश्रीदस्तादीनां fag महभाष्यादीनामसंमतं चोकं हेयमेव । $40 History of Dharmasietra In the proceedings of the ASB ( for 1869 p. 137 ) a Caturmasya- paddhati of Aniruddha is noted. Mitra notices a work called Bhaga- vattattvamaiijari on Vaisnava philosophy written by Aniruddha ( Mitra’s Notices vol. III. p. 155, No. 2700 ) 83. Ballalasena This famous king of Bengal compiled at least four works. His Acarasagara is mentioned in the Smrtiratnakara of Vedacarya and in the Madanaparijata (p. 58). He also wrote the Pratisthasagara. Both these works are referred to as already composed in the Dana- sigara.79* The Danasagara deals with the sixteen great danas and other lesser gifts. The subjects dealt with by the Danasagara are as follows : eulogy of brihmanas, eulogy of the merit arising from gifts, proper objects of gifts, exceptions, the nature of gift, the donor, faith as to the utility of gifts, proper times and places for gifts, things proper to be donatcd, what cannot be gifted away, bad donations, religious rites and procedure followed in making gifts and in accepting them, the technical terms of the subject of gifts, the sixteen mahadanas, lesser danas of various kinds ( the author him- self says at the end that he has described 1375 kinds of gifts ), the names of various puranas and their extent. The Danasagara con- tains extremely valuable information about the Mahabharata and the puranas. As it quotes extensively from the puranas, it serves as an excellent check for the textual restoration of puranas. For example it says that the Bhagavata, Brahmanda and Naradiya puranas do not contain danavidhis and hence they are not drawn upon in the work. In another verse he says that it is well-known that the Visnurahasya and Sivarahasya are of the nature of mere compilations and so have not been relied on in the work. The Devipurana, he says, is approved of by the heterodox systems and is not included in various lists of purinas and upapuranas and hence it is not included in the Danasagara. He says that the subject of the dedi- cation of reservoirs of water and of temples has been dealt with at length in ihe Pratisthasagara, so it is omitted in the Danasagara and that the gifts made in accordance with the divisions of the year (into ayana, season, month, paksa &c. ) are not spoken of in their entirety in the Danasagara, as they are described in the Acarasagara. The work is mentioned in the Danaratnakara 792 Verses 55 and 56 of his SAMA (I. 0. oat. 542, No. 1704-5). 88, Ballalasena 341 of (27066९४३ and in the Nirnayasindhu. His Adbhutasagara has been printed by Messrs. Prabhakari and Co. ( 1905 ). The autho- rities on which he relies therein are noted below.793 The Adbhu- tasagara is mentioned in Todaranandasamhita-saukhya and Nirnaya- sindhu. This was his last work which he left unfinished and which was completed by his son Laksmanasena. It deals with the rites and observances appropriate on certain celestial and terrestrial portents for removing the evil foreboded by them. Ballalasena began the work in 1090 Sake and the Danasagara was composed in 1097 sake. Therefore Ballalasena’s literary activity must be placed in the third quarter of the rath century ( vide notes 674, 676 above ). Vide also IHQ vol. V, p. 133 for the date of Ballalasena. It appears that Raghunandana believed that the Danasagara was really the work of Aniruddhabhatta though published in the name of Ballalasena.79* In the Danasagara itself it is distinctly stated that Ballalasena composed it under the directions of his .guru ( Aniruddha ).795 In the colophon he is styled maharajadhiraja and and nihsanka-sankara. 84. Harihara From quotations in the Vivadaratnakara it appears that Harihara wrote on vyavahara. For example, the Vivaddaratnakara first quotes (on p. 220 ) the definition of ^ sarhsarana’ given by Brhaspati and then cites three verses of Katyayana defining a catuspatha and a rdjamarga and prescribing punishments for causing obstruction and 793 आधरवणादुत, उशनस्‌, SSM, कालावकि, काश्यप, ग्ग, Tart, चरक, देवल, नारद्‌, पराशर, पालकाण्य, बादरायण, Teer, aA, ब्ह्मसिद्रान्त, मार्गवीय, मयुरचिन्न, यवनेश्वर, राजपुत्र, वराहमिहिर्न्थ, वसन्तराज, वसिष्ठ, विन्ध्यवासि, विष्णगुष, वेजवाप, शालिहोत्र, Takreer, सुश्रुत, सूर्यसिद्धान्त, 194 Vide एकद्शीतत्तव (vol. IL 2. 44) ‹ विष्णुरहस्यानार्षत्वस्य द्‌ानसागरे अनिद मटेनामिहितत्वाश्च १, The words of the दानसागर ०९७; लोके प्रासिदमेतद्धिष्ण- रहस्यं च शिवरहृस्यं च । gale न परिगतं संमहृरपत्वमवधायं ॥ 195 अधिगतसकलपुराणस्मृतिसारः श्रद्धया गुरोरस्मात्‌ | कलिकल्मषावसादं दाननिबन्धं विध- ते नु ॥ . . , धीबह्छालनरेभ्वरो विरचयस्येतं गुरोः क्षया eens दानसागरमयं भरदावतां अयसे ॥ verses 7 and 9 of दानसागर I. 0, cat. p. 543. $48 History of Dharmatistra committing nuisance thereon. Then it notices that the verse ‘ yas-tatra * cited by it from Katyayana is cited by Harihara as from Prajapati when the topic immediately preceding is ‘ sarhsarana ’ 796 The Vivadaratnakara quotes a sitra of Sankha-Likhita prescribing the punishment for sexual intercourse with a virgin against her will and Harihara’s explanation of the word ‘dvyangulaccheda ’.797 From these it is clear that Harihara wrote some work on vyavahira, which has not yet been recovered. He must have flourished earlier than 1300 A. D. There is a commentary on the Paraskargrhyasttra composed by Harihara who is styled agnihotrin in the colophons. In one ms, copied in Sake 1707 ( 1785-86 A. D. ) he is described as the pupil of Vijfianesvara. In the introductory second verse he says he relies on Vasudeva. In the body of the: work he refers ( Gujarati Press edition ) to Karkopadhyaya ( 7. 200 ), Kalpatarukara, Renudiksita, and Vijnanesvaracarya ( 2. 370 ). Therefore he is later than 1150 A.D. Harihara’s views are mentioned by Hemadri,79* the Samaya- pradipa and Acaradaréa of Sridatta and in the Smrtisara of Hari- natha. Therefore this Harihara must be earlier than 1250 A. D. Whether he was really the pupil of VijfianeSvara is doubtful. In his bhasya Harihara refers to words current in Kanoj.8°° Hemadri mentions Harihara’s explanation of nepalakambala wherein the latter says that it is well known among the northerners.8°? Harihara- 196 इरिहरादिभिः संसरणानुबृ्ता प्रजापतिरिति भस्तके दस्वा यस्तन्नोति वा्यमवतारितमिद न फलतो बिरष इति | वि, र्‌, ४. 221. १97 शङ्खलिखितो — कन्यायामसकामायां ROTTS) SUS |... BREET दथङ्गलपरि- माणलिद्गच्छेद्‌ इत्याह । वि. र. ४. 402. 198 तस्मात्‌ THAN श्राद्धं न कु्यन्मोपतिषठते इत्येव बहुमन्थदृष्टः काश्मीरलिकितश्च पाठो ज्यायान्‌ । तथा च हृरिहरादिमन्थेष्येवमेव पाठो गद्यते | wate ( काल ) vol, III. 2. p. 52 ; vide pp. 447, 483 of the same vol. for other references to altar and also vol, III. 1. pp. 159, 1131, 1139, 1177, 1280. 799 as stent मेषादिच्छन्नस्यापि रनिमित्तत्वमाह मरासावच्छिन्नकालस्य गणितप्रमितत्वात्‌ । समयप्रदीष ( 0. C. ms. No. 371 of 1875-76 folio 52a ). 800 सभाविश्रामार्थं काष्ठ पाषाणविन्यासविशेषः पटकः । पटर इति कान्यकुष्णे प्रसिदट्‌ः । p- 376 of हरिहर * पारस्करभाष्य ( Gujarati press ed. ). 801 Re तु पार्वतीयाजलोमधपर्निरमितः कम्बलाकारः पट उदीश्येषु vite इत्यव ^ व्याख्यातः | खतर्वगेऽ III. 1. p. 1177, 84. Harihara $4$ paddhati is mentioned in the Sraddhatattva ( vol. I, p. 281 ) and Harihara in the Yajurvedisraddhatattva (vol. IT, p. 488 ). We have seen- above that a Harihara commented upon the Asaucadagaka of Vijfianesvara. This fact together with his being not far from Vijfianesvara’s time may have led to the belief that he was a pupil of Vijfianesvara. It appears probable that the jurist Harihara who flourished before 1300 and Harihara the bhasyakara of Paraskara who flourished between 1150 and 1250 A. D. are identical. The views ascribed to Harihara by Hemadri in his section on $Sraddha are not found in the bhasya on Paraskara. Therefore Heméadri is referring to some other work of Harihara. From a passage of Hemadri it appears that Harihara wrote after the Maharnava* ( Prakasa ). Heméadri also tells us that Harihara refuted the views of Jayantasvami on a certain verse.6°3 The same Harihara who commented on Paraskara also wrote a commentary on Katyayana’s Snanavidhisitra wherein he mentions the Kalpatarukara ( vide D. C. ms. No. ror of 1891-95). Several Hariharas are known. There is Hariharabhattacarya, the father of the great Bengal writer Raghunandana. A Hariharacarya composed an astrological work Samayapradipa in Sake 1481 ( 1559-1560 A. D. ). 85. The Smrticandrika of Devannabhatta This is a well-known digest on Dharmaégastra. An English trans- lation of the portion of it which is concerned with dayabhaga was published in 1867 by T. Kristnasvami Iyer at Madras. The text has been published by Mr. J. R. Gharpure (up to éraddha ) in Bombay and also in the Mysore Government Oriental series ( up to asauca ). In the following Mr. Gharpure’s edition has been used and the Mysore edition for agauca section. The Smrticandrika isavery extensive digest. It is almost the earliest (except the Kalpataru ) among digests on dharmagastra of which mss. have yet been discovered. The printed text deals with the topics ( kandas ) of Satskara, Abnika, Vyavabara; Sraddba, Asauca. [ए appears that 802 भथान्यान्यपि हरिहेण कटटूमहणपरण्येवानिन्ञातकवैत्वेन महाणेवलिलितत्वेन भोपालभ्य केश्िदुक्तानीत्युकवोपन्यस्तानि | warty IT. 1, 183. ५09 इह जयन्तस्वामिमतं हरिदरेणोषन्यस्तम्‌ । अभ्न्यभवि तु विमस्थेति श्लाकस्य कदाजित्छ- बिद्संनिहिताभिः entice विषयः |... तदेतव्जयन्तल्वामिसेमते भरवर्णिकमान्नषिषय- त्वमस्य तेनेष दूषितम्‌ | चतुग 771. 1. 1399. 344 History of Dharmatastra he wrote on prayagcitta also. In the colophons of mss. of the work the name of the author is variously written as Devanna, Devana, Devananda or Devagana ( vide I. O. cat. pp. 405-406 ). He is also described therein as the son of Keéavadityabhatta and asa Somayaji. | The Smpticandrika quotes most profusely from numerous अप karas and affords valuable assistance in reconstructing some of the smrtis and checking mss. and editions thereof. For example, it quotes about 600 verses from Katyayana on vyavahara and about the same number from Brhaspati. Among works, commentators and authors of digests named by it the following may be noted: Apararka, Trikandi, Devarata, Devasviami, Apastambakalpabhasyar- thakara ( Agauca p. 84 ), DhareSvara, Dharmabhasya, Dhtrtasvami, Pradipa, Bhavanatha, Bhasyaon Apastamba Dharmastatra, Dharma- dipa or Pradipa ( Agauca p. 63), Bhasyarthasarhgrahakara, Manu- vrtti, Medhatithi, Mitaksara, Vaijayanti (a lexicon ), Visvardpa, Vigvadarsa ( Asgauca p. 164), Sambhu, Srikara, Sivasvami, Smrti- bhaskara, Smrtyarthasira, He mentions a Bhattacirya on Asauca (p. 1,2), probably Srinivasa, the author of Suddhidipika who wrote about 1159-60 A. 0. ( 1458 1975 p. 334 ). He quotes a passage from the work of an author, whom he styles Guru ( proba- ly his own teacher or father ).°°¢ The Smrticandrika often criti- sizes these works and authors and advances its own views after considering the positions of others. Devannabhatta was a southern writer and his work is according to judicial decisions of great authority in southern India.8°s But it has been held that in spite of its high authority it cannot override the Mitaksara even in the Madras Presidency.®* The contents of the Smrticandrika are : various Dharmas, such as those of vargas, asramas; usages of countries; sarhskaras, garbha- 804 ततश्च द्वादृश्षरात्नादिष्प्येतत्पूचितमिति गुरुणा व्याख्यातं ततश्च दुशमेहनि यदि दिवाशोचोत्पत्तिस्तदापि द्वाभ्यामित्येतदूवोदितन्यमित्येतद्न्तेन ata । aaa ( आशो ?. 63 ), 805 Vide 11 Moo. I. A. p, 487, 2 Mad. H.C. R. ४, 206 at p. 209, I. L. R. 3 Mad. 290 ( P. C.) at p. 302, I. L. R. 33 Mad, 489 and I. L. R. 44 Mad, 753 (P.C.) for the high authority of the स्मृतिचन्दरिका in southern India. 806 Vide I. L. R. 3 Mad. 265, 269 (barren daughter not excluded by ४ daughter having sons), I. L. R. 85 Mad. 152 at p. 160 for this proposition. 85. The Smrticandrika of Devannabhatia 345, dhana, puthsavana, jatakarma, namakarana, cidakarana, upanayana, marriage, etc., duties of student-hood and holidays; daily dutics such as Sauca, acamana, brushing the tecth, bathing, sasidhya, Srauta and smarta rites; duties of householder; the five daily yajnas ; rules about taking food, forbidden food ; procedure of law courts, means of proof, ordeals, the various titles of law such as deposit, partnership, dayabhaga ; detailed rules about ériddha, its various kinds, persons entitled to perform griddhas, the brahmanas proper to be invited at Sraddha etc The Smrticandrika refers to VijitineSvara with great respect.8°7 Yet there are several interesting points on which the Smrticandrika differs from the Mitaksara. , [06 Smrticandrika questiqns ( vide note 638 above ) the statement ofthe Mit. that unequal distribu- tion by the father of ancestral property among his sons should not be resorted to, as it has come ta be abhorred by the, people. The Smrticandrika does not approve of the definition of daya given by the ८.०० The Smypticandrika does not accept. VijnaneSvara’s explanation of the word ‘apratisthita’ occurring in the sutra of Gautama, but upholds Apararka’s explanation of it ( vide note 771 above ). The Smrticandrika favours the theory of spiritual benefit in matters of succession and therefore among daughters prefers one that has sons over another daughter who is. sonless.°°9 It criticizes the reasons advanced by the Mit. for preferring the mother over the father as an heir to their deceased son and says that both parents succeed together.2*° Though the.Smrticandrika in this way in.some 807 व्याख्यातं चान्यथा विज्ञानेश्वरपदेः । मातरि gs प्रभीतायां ... पक्षिणीं क्षिपेदिति ! स्मृतिच० ( आशौच ?. 64 ), This 18 quotation from मित(क्षरा ०० याज्ञ III. 20. 08 न्‌ च दायश्षब्देन यद्धनं स्वामिसंयन्धादेव inate स्वं भवति तदुच्यत इति दायदिरष्दनिरूपणार्थं मिताक्षरायामुक्तं युक्तम्‌ । एवं हि पत्युः स्वं Tawney निमित्तात्यत्नीस्वं भवतीति तस्यापि दायत्वापसिः । ततश्च अदाया; जिय इति श्रुति- विरोधो दुर्वारः स्यात्‌ । अस्मम्मते तु विभागा स्वं स्वामिसंयन्धादेव निमित्ताद्न्यस्य स्वं मतं दायशब्वाथं इति विभागानरई परनीशवं न दायः । स्मृतिच० 77. pp. 267-268. ९09 एवं च इष्ितृषु संतानमुसेनादृष्टोपकारसंबन्धेनासम्नता । स्मृतिच० 7. 9. 295 810 चशब्देन सूचितस्य दोदहिश्रस्यानन्तरमेव भातापितरी समसमये धनभाजो तयोरवान्तर- कमन्यायाभाद दित्यवगन्तव्योमिप्रायः । अन्यः पुनरन्यथोलेक्षितम्‌ | पिता सपत्नी- Tay साधारण Ko. स्मृति * II. p. 297; vide note 638 above for the full quotation, H. D. 44. $46 Eistory of Dharmatisira cases criticizes the Mit., it generally follows its lead. It holds, just as the Mit. does, that sons acquire by birth ownership in ancestral property. The author asserts that he puts forward no imaginary views but only such views as are based on ( authoritative ) texts.®"* As the Smrticandrika names the Mit., Apararka and Smptyar- thasara, its upper limit cannot be placed earlier than 1150 A. 0. Their Lordships of the Privy Council say in Buddhasingh vs Laltu» singh®*2 that Devanandabhatta is supposed to have been a contem- porary of Aparirka. But this supposition is not quite correct. Since Apararka is quoted several times as an authority to be pre- ferred even to the Mit., it looks more probable that there is some distance ef time between Apararka and Devannabhatta. Hemadri quotes the views of the Smrticandrika probably oftener than those of any other nibandhakara. In one place**3 he does not approve of the explanation given by the Smrticandrika of a verse occurring in the Mahabharata about a man with male issue performing 5124404 on the thirteenth titi. In another®*4 place Hemadri refers to the view of the Smrticandrika on the question whether the sraddha on amavasya is optional with sraddha in dark half. Therefore it follows that the Smrticandrika must have been composed at least a generation earlier than Heméadri, 1. €. before 1225 A.D. The Smrticandrika is frequently quoted by the Sarasvativilasa, the Viramitrodaya and other digests. 811 सर्वलेोकहिताथोय क्रियते स्मृतिचन्दरिका ॥ स्वाभिप्रायेण हि मया न किंजिदिह frees | किं तु वाचनिकं सवंमनो are निमेः ॥ Intro. verses. 812 1,. R. 42. 1, ^. 208 at p. 223. 813 aq महामारते Taye तु ATER कुर्वन्‌ ae Tarai । नाषश्यं तु युवानोस्व प्रमीयन्ते नरा गृहे ॥ -इति पुत्रमरणङूपस्व दोषस्यापस्सम्बायुक्तस्य निर- करणं रतं तद्‌पि नात्यन्तरुतम्‌ ... यचतववश्यं a fra वेति प्मृतिश्ग्निका- करस्य ध्याख्यानं तदधुक्तम्‌ । यतुर्वगश° (काल) vol. IIT. 2. 7. 482 ; ४75 स्मृतिच ® does quote the text of the महाभारत ०4 79095 ‘ ऊअवश्यं निभ्ितं न भ्रियन्त इत्यथः १ p. 369. ` | 814 यन्िगमस्मरणं अपरपक्षे यदहः संपयेताममावास्यायां AABN सत्‌ पृथक्येपि उभयपक्षाविरःधीति म विकल्पे प्रमाणमिति स्मूतिष्वद्दरिकाकारः । चतु्वगै ° WT £. 461 ; the THfeqo does contain the text quoted and remarks, अतो यत्कन्धिवुक्तममावास्याश्राद्रमपरपद्िकेण भद्धेन fee हति तदणस्तय्‌ । IT. p. 399. 85. The Smrticandriktl of Devannabhatta 34 Several authors composed works styled Smrticandrika, €. g. there is a Smpticandrika of Sukadeva-migra (I. O. cat. p. 471 No. 1 549 ), another by Apadeva ( Mitra’s Notices, vol. VI, p. 301 ), another by Vamadevabhattacarya ( Mitra’s Notices, vol. IX, p. 137 ). 86. Haradatta Haradatta’s fame stands very high as a commentator. He wrote a commentary called Anakula on the Apastamba-grhya-sitra ( 0. €. Ms. No. 2 of 1866-68 ), a commentary on the Apastambiya- mantra-patha ( vide Dr. Winternitz’s ed. of 1897, p. XIII), a com- mentary called Anavila on the Aévalayana-grhya-sitra ( published in the Trivandrum series ), a commentary called Mitaksara on the Gautamadharmasitra and a commentary named Ujjvala on the dharmasitra of Apastamba. His commentaries are very good models of ideal commentaries. His commentary on the dharma- sutra of Gautama ( printed by the Anandagrama Press, Pooona ) is more concise than that on the Dharmasitra of Apastamba ( large extracts of which were published by Bihler in his edition in the ए. ऽ, series, the whole being printed by MHalasyanath Sastri at Kumbhakonam and in the Mysore Government Oriental Library series ). In his commentary on the Dharmasiatras he quotes verses from numerous smrtis and from the puranas but hardly ever mentions by name any commentator or nibandhakara. In his Anavila( page9 ) he quotes the views of a Bhasyakara who 15 probably Devasvamin and mentions also a Candogagrhyabhasya- kara (on I. 2. 3). In his commentaries on both the Dharmasatras he frequently quotes the opinions of previous commentators with the words ‘anye, ’ ‘aparah,’ ^ kecit ;’ vide G. Dh. S. II. 28, VII. 4 and 14, IX. 52, XI. 17, XII. 32 and 33, XXIV. 5, XXVI. 9, XXVIII. 7 and 44 ; Ap. Dh. 5.1. 1.4.24, 1. 2. 5. 2 and 18,1. 3. 10. 4, I. 3. 11. 20, I. 5. 15. 20. etc. From the factthat he mentions two interpretations on Ap. Dh. S. I. 2. 5. 2. with the words “ apara aha’ and , ityanye ` and several interpretations on Il. 7. 17. 22 it follows that he had before him two or three commentaries on Ap. Dh. S. In Biihler’s edition Haradatta on Ap. Dh. 9.1. 1. 2. 38 appears to refer to a grhya-vrtti, but in the Kumbhakonam edition the reading is different ( viz. grhye gatam ). He is very careful to $48: History of Dharmatastra point out the un-Paninean forms in the sitras of Gautama and Apastamba, explains at great. length all grammatical matters and generally prefers readings that are in consonance with the rules of Panini. He very often says that the text of the sitras, particularly of Apastamba, as handed down by oral tradition was either wrong or followed Vedic usage as regards grammar.?"6 From various references Haradatta seems to have been an in- habitant of Southern India or was at least very familiar with its usages. On Gautama XI. 20 he instances several usages of the Colas. On Gautama XV. 18 he gives a synonym in the Dravida language for®*7 a skin disease called ‘ Kilasa.’ On Ap. Gy. ऽ. VI. 6 ( the satra ^ nadinirdesasca etc. ) he gives Kaveri and Vegavati as instances. On Ap. Dh. S. 1. 11. 29. 15 (last अ) ) he refers to certain practices of the Dravidas observed when the Sun is in Aries or Virgo.288 The Viramitrodaya classes Haradatta and the Smrticandrikakara among southern nibandhakaras.8*9 From his remark on Ap. Dh. S. II. 7. 17. 25 (the आप्य ‘anyatra rahudar- Sanat )’ that the northerners do not recite that sitra it appears that he affirms that he was a southerner. Haradatta seems to have been a great devotee of Siva. He begins his commentary on Gautama, on Agvalayana-grhya and Ap. Gr. with an obeisance to Rudra and his commentaries on Ap. Dh.S. and on the Apastambiya-mantra-patha (otherwise called Ekagni- 815 e.g.0n गौ. ध. सू. XXV-She says ‹ वाश्यनसोरिति. पाठोस्मभ्यं न रोचते । AAR समासान्तविधिभसङ्गात्‌ | | 816 6. g. on अप. ध. सु. 1, 11. 31. ८ पायत्यब्रह्मच्यकालेचर्यया च्‌? he says ^ प्रायत्यब्रह्मचयौभ्यां Be चयेया च । अयं तावदृथानुरूपः Tiss | अधीयमनस्तु प्रनाद्श्छान्दसो ar)’. Vide remarks on अपि, ध, चू. I. ४. 5.2 and IT. 3. 7. 7 also. 817 किलासः त्वम्दोषो weed द्रविडानां प्रसिद्धः । | 818 तन्न द्रमिडाः कम्यामेषस्थे सवितर्यादित्यपुजामाचरन्ति. al मण्डलमालिख्येत्यादी- न्ुदाहरणानि | 7 oe 819 Vide वीर० p. 705 शृ्गमरहिकया यत्न कण्ठोक्तः पत्नी gat इत्यादी यासां aft धनाधिकारस्तासामेव । अन्यासां त॒ श्रुतिमनुवचनाभ्यां दायम्रहणनिषेध एवेति स्मृतिच- नदरिकाकारदरद्तादीनां दाक्षिणात्यानिबन्दूणां जीमूतवाहनादिपोरस्त्यसर्वनिबन्णा सिदरान्ताख्च । | | 86. Haradatta 340 kinda, 25th and 26th prasnas of Apastamba-kalpa ) with an obei- sance to Mahadeva. Burnell ( Tanjore mss. cat. p. 170 ) tells ‘us that according to tradition in Southern India, Rudradatta, the com- mentator of the Ap. Srauta-sitra, is the same as Haradatta. In his commentary on Ap. Gr. g. I. 13. 5 ( ghosavad caturaksarath va ) he gives as instances of the names of males Hara, Rudra, Deva, Haradatta and Bhavanaga. In the colophons the Anavila is describ- ed as the work of Haradattacarya-miéra. Ghose.in his Hindu Law ( 3rd ed. Intro. p. XV ) says that, like Medhatithi, Haradatta denies the heritable rights of widows and must have come before Vijiianesvara and not after. But Ghose appears to be wrong. MHaradatta first says that according to the acarya( i. €, Apastamba ) the sapindas of the deceased who took the property were obliged to maintain the widow of the deceased, while the view of Gautama was that the widow took, on failure of male issue, an equal share along with the sapindas, and then Haradatta says that he himself liked the latter view.82° He often gives interesting information. On Gautama XVII. 33 he tells us that asafoetida is eaten by all, even though it is a matter for consi- deration whether being the exudation of a tree, it is to be regarded as due to cutting (and so forbidden ).** On Ap. Dh.S. II. 2. $. 14 he cites as an example of reviling ( a-krosa ) the following : ‘ the Taittiriya is a Sakha that is ucchista ( the leavings of food eaten ), the Yajiiavalkya and other Brahmana works are modern’.®2 On Gautama IV. 5. he says that what distinguishes the Prajapatya form of marriage from the Brahma and others is that there is in the former a stipulation that the husband is not to enter into another order of life ( asrama ) nor is he to marry another woman.**3 On Ap. Dh. S. I. 4. 12. 15 he says that whereas in the case of marriage with a paternal aunt’s or maternal uncle’s daughter, the act springs भी षयोग 9 $20 On आप, ध. सू. ए. 6. 14. 2 ‹ पुञ्नामावे यः प्रत्यासन्नः सपिण्डः , he says ¢ भाया तु रिक्थग्राहिणः सपिण्डाद्या रक्षेय॒नं तु दायय्हणमित्याचायंस्य पक्षः । ... गोतभल्तु पु्राभविे Teg: सपिष्डादिभिः समांशमाह । , . , वयमप्येतमेव पश्च रोचयामहे । १, ५ fare नियौसो ब्रश्यनममवो न वेति चिन्त्यम्‌ । स्वेथा शिष्टा अपि भक्षयन्ति । ५५ RATA SCART याज्ञवत्कादीनि बाह्मणानीदानीन्तनानीत्यादय STE: । ७ नाश्रमाम्तरं weed नापि हछयन्तरमुपयन्तव्या भीतै मन्त्रेण ` समय; Arad । एष बाहदः प्राजापत्यस्य विशेषः | 90. History of //. ।/ , , 1 from the fact that one is pleased thereby, there is no necessity to infer a Sastra (a Vedic passage ) once existing but now lost ( in support of such usage ).°*4 The date of Haradatta is a rather difficult problem. Buhler ( ऽ. ए. E. vol. II. p. अना ) at first thought that Haradatta probably wrote in the 16th century, but in his 2nd edition of the Ap. Dh. S. he says ( p. vir ) that the Munich ms of the Ujjvala written in Poona about 1600 A. D. shows the interpolated text found in all Devanagari copies and that therefore Haradatta is older than at. least 1450-1500A. D. The Viramitrodaya**s frequently cites the Mitaksara of Haradatta on Gautama. Niarayanabhatta (born in 1513 A. D. ) in his Prayoga-ratna quotes Haradatta’s comment on Gautama VIII. 14-22 about sarhskaras and his son Sankarabhatta names both the Mitaksara and the Ujjvala of Haradatta in his Dvaitanirnaya. The Prayogaparijata of Nrsithha, which is quoted in the Prayogaratna of Narayanabhatta and is therefore not later than the first quarter of the 16th century, cites Haradatta’s expla- nation of Ap. Gr. S. ( on ‘ pravasad-etya putrasya Sirah parigrhya japati’ etc. ) and contrasts it with Niarayana’s view. The Subo- dhini of VigveSvarabhatta ( about 1375 A.D.) on Mit. ( Yaj Il. 132 ) quotes certain smpti passages as found in the vetti of Apas- tamba which are found in Haradatta’s gloss.8** Hence it follows that Haradatta cannot be later than about 1300 A.D. The fact that Haradatta hardly ever names any commentator except perhaps Devasvamin, the Bhasyakara of Apastambe-grhya, and that he holds antiquated views about the widow’s right to succeed to her deceased husband’s estate are strong arguments in favour of the view that Haradatta is comparatively an early writer. Hardly any writer after Vijfianesvara assigns the same position to the widow 25 Hara- ee eee na गाणी गीष 824 यत्न पिवृष्वसुमातुलसुतापरिणयनाद्‌ प्रत्युपलब्ितः प्रबृत्तिनं तत्रोत्सन्पाठं ae मनुमीयते fate प्रवृत्तिहेतोः संमवात्‌ । 825 Vide वर० pp. 169, 655. 826 पूर्वामवे परः पर इति रिक्थग्रहणक्रमोपि दर्शितो वाक्यशेषे हपत्यन्तरेष्वन्यथा दुर्हितः। तथाहि आपरतम्धवृततो स्मृत्यन्तरसंग्रहः। रसः पुत्रिकाथीजलेतरह्ली पुश्रिकासुतः | पामभवश्व कानीनः सहोढो TSM | aa: क्रीतः TATE हद्ठिमन्पापविटकः ॥ यञ्च छ जोत्पादितश्च CATH दन्त पथ चेति । सुबोषिनी, This occurs in हरदत्त comment on अपृ. धृ. सु II. 6. 14. 1 ( Bubler’s ed. of 1894, p. 81 )- 86. Haradatta Si datta does. Hence it appears that Haradatta could not have flourished much later than 71700 A.D. So he must be placed between rroo-1300 A.D., very probably near the earlier limit than the later one. One important question is as to the identity of Haradatta, the commentator of the Dharma and Grhya satras and Haradatta, the author of the Padamajijari, a commentary on the Kasika of Vamana and Jayaditya. Buhler felt uncertain about the identity. Sankara- bhatta in his Dvaita-nirnaya speaks of Haradatta as expounding®?7 a karika of Hari ( Vakyapadiya Ill. p. 260, Benares ed. ) and also speaks of Haradatta as the authorof the Ujjvala and the Mitaksara without making any distinction between the two. ‘This shows that he regarded the two as identical.. Haradatta in his commen- tarieson the Dharmasttras gives far more attention to grammar than almost any other commentator of Dharmasastra.*?8 His grammatical disquisition on Ap. Dh. S. I. 2. 5. 18 ( ‘ plavanam ca nimno ’ etc. ) is almost identical with the Padamafijari on Panini VII. 2. 83 ( ^ pratyabhivadeSadre’). On Ap. Dh. S. II. 7.17.17 he quotes a verse as from the grammarians for defining the location of the (दकव. Thc Madhaviya Dhatu-vrtti mentions the Pada- manjari. From this it follows that the Padamanjari was composed before 1300 A. D. Dr. Belvalkar places Haradatta, the author of the Padamanjari, about 1100 A. D.%3° The learned editor of the Anavila in the Trivandrum series points out that, as Haradatta is 827 age हरिणा--मृणक्रियायां waaay Ae कर्मतां गतः । नियमात्कमेसंक्ञायाः स्वधर्मेणाभिधीयते ॥ अस्वार्थ हरदसेम विवृतः । दैतनिर्णय. 828 Vide comment on अपि. ध सू. 02.5.1 ( तदतिक्रमे fared निःख्वति ) where हरदत्त 5298 ‘ead; सकमभयोगो भःष्ये दष्टः SIS कुण्डिकेति” where he refers to the महाभाष्य Of पतञ्जलि ( vide Keilhorn, vol. II. p. 69). 829 भ्रागुद्श्वो विभजते हंसः क्षीरोदकं यथा । विदुषां शब्दसिद्धधरथं सा नः पातु शरावली । इति वयाकरणाः | स्थाः दारावत्या उद्क्तीरनिवर्तिन उदीच्याः ।१, PAF १००४०३ on the same alitra of आप, the same verse with the reading सरस्वती for हारावनी and styles it the saying of the ancients ( चतर्वभ IIT. 1. p. 1350 ) The भमरकोक्ष makes शरावती ४०९ boundary of aay, Is Sarivati the modern Rapti, a tributary of the SarayU, or is it the modern Shir&vati near Honavar in North Canara ? 830 ‘ Systems of Sanskrit Grammar ’ pp. 39-40, 86g. History of Dharmatistra quoted in the Purusakara which in its turn is mentioned in the Dhatu-vrtti of Madhava and as Saranadeva, the author of the Durghata-vrtti, who wrote in sake 1095, cites the Jainendra and Kaiyata but not Haradatta nor the Padamaiijari, Haradatta wrote about the close of the 12th century A. D. These circumstances render it highly probable ( if not certain ) that Haradatta the com- mentator of the Dharmasitras is the same as the author of the Pada- majijari and that he flourished between 1100 and 1300 A. D. and probably about 1200 A. 0. The Smrticandrika twice refers to the bhasya of the Apastamba-dharma-satra.*3' Haradatta’s commentary is styled vrtti and not bhasya and the citations do not occur in his’ work. Hence it appears that the Smpticandrika did not know Haradatta’s works and the latter could not have flourished much earlier than the Smrti-candrika. In the Padamafijari Haradatta is said to have been the son of Padma ( Rudra }-kumara, younger brother of Agnikumara and a pupil of Aparajita.*3* In his Padamafjari Haradatta employs the word ‘ kiicimanci’ which is a Telugu word.*33 The Bhavisyottara- purana printed in Grantha characters contains 12 chapters ( 54 to 65th ) and the Sivarahasya printed in the said characters has one chapter (17th ) which set out the life (carita)) of a Haradatta- carya. It is there stated that Haradattacirya’s original name-was SudarSana, that he was the son of Vasudeva and that he died 3979 years after Kaliyuga began®3+ (i.e. 878 A.D. ). This Haradatta- carya, being the son of Vasudeva, was not the same as the author Slay हि अभिकारत इति हितुबलात्‌ अन्येत्यादिपक्षत्नयं पूरवपक्षत्वेनोपन्यस्तमितयुक्तं तद्भाष्ये । स्मृतिच० 1.7. 25 (० आपं. ध.- सु II. 6, 15. 19-23); अत oq जीवन्पुत्रभ्यो at विभजेदित्यापस्तम्बसुञरं व्याचक्षाणेन तद्भाभ्यकारेण पुत्रेभ्य एव दायं विभजेन्न सभ्यो दुहितृभ्यं इत्युक्तम्‌ । स्मृतिश्च० 11. p. 300. 8898 Vide Report on the search of Sanskrit and Tamil mas. for 1898-94 by ९, Seshagiri Sastri pp. pp 13-20 and pp. 171-178 ( extract ).. 899 या पुनरद्माषामिः संज्ञाः कूचिमञ्चत्यादथो A eet साधुलम्‌ । 7 19 of the Report on Sanskrit and Tamil mss. for 1893-94 by 8. Seshagiri Sastri. 934 ema च चतुःसहृस्रसकिते यत्नक्िंशोनके पुष्ये aie विलम्बिनाम्नि समगाद प्रजो मोद्रलः । प्वम्थां सितपक्षे ae सद्यात्मणोदकटे कंसमरामनिषासिभः सुदशेनः सार्धं विमानोञ्ज्वलः ||. कंसम्राम is in the Tanjore District. - 86, Haradatta - 383 of the Padamafijari, who was the son of Padmakumara. This earlier Haradatta may probably be the same as the Haradattacarya cited as an authority in the Sarvadarsana-samgraha on the Nakulisa- pasupatadarsana.*35_ Dr. Jolly ( R. प. ऽ. p. 33 ) identifies without sufficient foundation the Haradattacarya of the Sarvadarsana-sarh- graha with Haradatta, the commentator of Apastamba and Gautama. A work called Hari-hara-taratamya and another called Caturveda- tatparya-samgraha are ascribed to a Haradatta. Of the latter there 15 a ms. in the Deccan College collection (No. 109 of 1871-72 ), which contains 154 verses of fine penmanship. The first and last are given below.®36 Whether these two works were composed by Haradatta, the commentator of the Dharmasiatras, it is difficult to say. In the latter work the author sings a hymn of praise to Siva as the supreme deity, points out how the Vedic mantras refer to him, how the various rites are meant for him, refers to the mythological re- presentations of Siva as Kirdta, or as wearing skin etc. All the verses upto 143 are in the Vasantatilaka metre, while towards the end there are a few verses in other metressuch as Sikharini and Rathoddhata. He was a staunch Saivite,*s7 though the hymn breathes a spirit of tolerance and sympathy for different religious and philosophical systems. He refers to the Maitrayana Sruti, Talava- kara Brahmana, Katyayana-grhya, Bhagvadgita, the Puranas as supplementing the Vedas ( vedopabrmhaka ), the Satmkhya and Yoga. Say विधीयमानमुपायफलं लाभः । ज्ञानतपोनित्यत्वस्थितिश्दिमेदात्‌ पश्चविधः । तदाह हरदत्ताचार्थः । ज्ञानं तपोथ नित्यत्वं स्थितिः शुदि्य पञ्चमम्‌ 1 & ०. सर्वदुर्घन- संग्रह Pp. 162-63 ( Govt. Oriental series, Poona ). 836 यस्मे नमो भवति यस्य गुणाः समग्रा नारायणोपनिषदा यदुपासनोक्ता । यो नः परचो- दयति बुद्धिमधिक्रतो यस्तं त्वामनन्यगतिरीन्बर संश्रयामि ॥ first verse: अघटित धटनापटवे प्रकटितकरुणाय Rey । वटतमूलस्थितये विधटिततमसे महे्वराय नमई ॥ last verse, 97 Verses 144-145 cre विधातारं SAAMI भजते कश्यन इरि सुरानन्यानन्ये जगति सफलाः सर्वविधयः । तथापि ae शिथै ननु यदा waa gat मन्त्रो देवान्तर- भजनदेन्यं न सहते ॥ शरो EE पुष्पं नमसि मृगतृष्णासु ses Teeter मनदधिकमायुस्तनुभृताम्‌ | Rafal देवान्तरभजनङ्गम्या पशुपते न WH नः संभावयितुमपि सर्वं बिमुशताम्‌ ॥ Me De 4. “554 History of Dharmatisiva 87. Hemadri Hemadri and Madhava are the Castor and Pollux in the galaxy of daksinatya writers on Dharmaéastra. Hemadri isa very volumi- nous writer. He is the author of the Caturvarga-cintamani, an encyclopzedia of ancient religious rites and observances. According to the statements contained in the work itself the author intended to treat DharmasSastra in five sections, called vrata, dana, tirtha, moksa and parigesa.*3® The Parigesa-khanda was divided into four parts, viz., Devata, Kalanirnaya, Karmavipaka, Laksanasamuccaya.®39 The Caturvarga-cintimani has been published in the Bibliotheca Indica series. Four volumes containing 6 parts and covering about 6000 pages have been so far printed. The second and third volumes have two parts each. The fourth volume which deals with prayascitta does not appear to be the work of Hemadri.8° The work so far published is concerned with vrata, dana, sraddba and kala ( the latter two being parts of the parisesa-khanda ). That portion of the Caturvarga-cintamani which was intended to treat of tirtha and moksa has not yet come to light. It is extremely doubt- ful whether the author was able to carry out his gigantic scheme. Mss. of portions of the great work are described in the catalogues under various names, €, g. 1. O. cat. No. 1379, p. 407 on Santtka- paustikant is the same subject that is treated in vratakhayda pp. 1003ff., though there are considerable variations between the Ms. and the printed text. Hemiadri’s is a standard work on the subjects with which le deals. He quotes most profusely from smrtis and puranas and names a host of writers. He appears to have been a profound student of the Parvamimamsa. The discussions in his work, parti- cularly on Sraddha and kala, cannot be well understood without thorough acquaintance with the numerous myayas of the mimamsa 898 खण्डानि चास्मिन््तदानतीर्थमोक्षामिधानि क्रमशो भवन्ति । यत्पञ्चमं तत्परिशेषसण्ड- मङण्डितो यन्न विभाति धर्मः ॥ चतुर्वगै० Vol. II. 797४ 1 verse 16; सष्डेयतुर्ि वरतदानतीथमोक्षाभिधेरषगीचतुष्कमुक्त्वा । विरच्यते तत्परिशिष्टवस्तुन्यार्णनार्थं परिशेष शण्ड्‌ ॥ vol. III. part 1 verse 25 839 तन्नादो देवताकाण्डं ततः कालविनि्णयः । विपाक कर्मणां ww MTT: ॥ . भहृप्रकरणानीह्‌ चत्वान्येतान्यनुकमात्‌ ॥ चतुरवेगै III. 3. verse 26. 840 It begins ' quar हेमाद्गिकारेण लोकोपकारा्थं &..’, 87. Hemadri $55 which he employs at every step. To illustrate this a few instances may be cited at random. On pp. 137, 143, 156, 159, of his kala- nirnaya (vol. III part 2 ) he makes use of four different nyayas of the mimamsa.*4* The eminent commentators and nibandhakaras on dharmasastra and other works named by him are given below.®#? It is somewhat remarkable that though he quotes Apararka and the Smrti-candrika scores of times he hardly ever mentions by name the Mitaksara of Vijfanesvara. Though he does not promise a treatment of vyavahara, here and there he makes sallies into the domain of vyavahara. For example, he quotes the well-known sitra of Gautama ( 10. 39 ) on the sources of ownership and holds alengthy discussion thereon.*43 In another place he digresses into the question of the various kinds of stridbana and their devolu- tion ( vol. III, part 1, pp. 530-531 ). He was of opinion that every- one, to whatever Jakha he may belong, should perform éraddha in accordance with the directions thereon in all s4khis, kalpa and grhya siitras, smftis, purinas and usages.*4* He makes the important [णि रर 841 तेन अ्योतिष्टोमादिवत्‌-एकस्य तूभयत्वे संयोगपृथक्त्वमिति न्यायेन नित्यत्वमपि स्वक्रियते । p. 187; this refers to जैमिनि IV. 3. 5-7; मोजनपरतिषेधस्य नित्यजन्माषटमीवत- स्तुत्यर्थता वेदितघ्या ( applying the न्याय based on न ॒पुथिन्यामभिश्येतष्यः ) p. 148 ; this refers to जैमिनि I. 2.5 and 18 and शाबरभाष्य thereon ; “पुरोडाश चतुर्धा करोति ata चतुर्धा करोति › 7. 156 ( this is उपसंह्यरन्याय in जे, 71. +. 26-2 ); यानि पुनवांक्यानि ब्रतशब्द्वन्ति दृश्यन्ते तानि न निषेधपराणि नोदन्त- मदित्य HAAR । ?.159 ( this is पर्युदास ). 842 अपराकँ {very frequently ), आपस्तम्बधर्मसु भाष्य, कर्कोपाध्याय ( frequently quoted), गोविन्दराज, गेविन्दोपाण्याय, चिकाण्डमण्डन, देवस्वामी ( frequently), निर्णयामृत, न्यायमञ्जरी, पण्डितपरितोष, पुथ्वीचन्दरोदय, ब॒हत्कथा, geile, भवदेव, मदुननिरधण्टु, मधुशषर्मा, मेधातिथि, वामदेव, विधिरत्न, विश्वपकाश, विश्वरूप, Rata, age (very frequently ), शभ्भु, बरटशातातपभाष्यकार, Raga, श्रीधर, सोम~ दत्त, स्मृतिचन्द्रिका (very frequently ), स्मृतिप्रदीप, स्मृतिमहाणेवपरक्रार (OF स्मृति- मह्मणैव OF Agia very often ); सत्यर्थसार, हरिहर (very frequently). S43 चतु्वैगै9 vol. III: part 1, p. 585 where he ०५8 wafting निमित्तेन यदन्य- दयं द्रष्यमन्यस्य संभवति ( स्वं भवति 1) स दायः। + here evidently he has in view the मिताक्षरा, ५५4 सवशासागृह्यकल्पसुमरस्मृतिपुराणेतिडासाचारावगतधर्ममाश्युक्तमेव सर्द Te कर्तव्यमिति स्थितम्‌ । चतुर्वर्ग * III, 1. p. 753, The discussion is started on p. 748, 356 History of Dharmatistra statement®4s that a person following any particular Vedic s4kha may enter into alliance by marriage with any other person of the same country following another Vedic sakha. Hemadri gives some account of himself in his work. The Mss, present great variations from the printed text. He belonged to the Vatsagotra.846 He was the grandson of Vasudeva and the son of Kamadeva. The introductions to the khandas contains fulsome praise of Hemadri. One verse says that Hemadri scored out by showering wealth on poor people the lines that Brahma had drawn on their forehead at the time of their birth ( foredooming them to eternal poverty ) and that Brahma acquiesces in such conduct of Hemadri.*47 Another verse says that none existed, exists or will exist surpassing Hemadri.*4® He describes himself as in charge of the imperial records of Mahadeva, the Yadava king of Devagiri ( modern Daulatabad ).849 In the colophong and the body of the work also he is described as the karanadhisvara of Mahadeva, as highly honoured by the king and as a minister ( mantrin ) of the king.8s° He gives in the introduction to the Vratakhanda a detailed pedigree of the Yadavas of Devagiri. In the section on kala (vol. III, part 2) he starts with Sanghana (i. €. Sitghana 845 आरायवर्तेषु च समानदेशवासिनां नानाशाखाष्यायिनामप्युपलभ्यन्त एव परस्परभनवगीय- मानाः सर्वतो विवाहृसंबन्धाः 1... अतो न कन्यादाने नापि saat स्वशासीयद्धिन- नियम इति सिद्धम्‌ | vol. IIT. 1, p. 381, 846 तेषामेव शिरोमणिर्विजयते विभ्वाभिधानो ait: ॥ गोत्रे तस्य यमूव निम॑लगुणश्मेणीभूता- ममणीर्वियाचारविवेकविक्रमनिधिः श्वीवासुदेवः Bell । Verses 1 and 2 of vol. LIT. 1. The D. ©. ms. No. 312 of 1884-87 reads वृत्सामिधानो मनिः and it appears that विन्वामिधानो Of the printed text is a mistake. 847 लिपिं विधात्रा लिखितां जनस्य भाले विभूत्या परिमृज्य दुष्टाम्‌ । कल्याणिनीमेष fee- त्यथेनां Past प्रमाणीकर्ते विधिश्च ॥ ₹»०1.7, verse 15 ; vol. III. 1, verse 17, 848 नैवासीनन च वतैते न मिता हेमग्रिरेः पर्‌ । Vol. I. verse 20, vol. IIT. 1. verse 22. 849 अस्ति शस्तगुणस्तोभः सोमवंशविभूषणम्‌ | महादेव इति ख्यातो राजराजेष भते # , ,„ तस्यास्ति नाम VATA: Tae: । निजोदारतया यश्च सरव॑श्रीकरणपमुः # vol. I. verses 6 and 13. कृरण means a document. श्रीकरण may also mean ‹ writing the word éri ’ ( on official documents ). 850 The colophon is भ्रीमहाराजाधिराजश्रीमह्यदेवस्य समस्तकरणाधीन्वरः &o; महदेव- महीपालमन्यो इेमाद्विराद्रात्‌ | करोति निपुणं पुण्यमम्नौकरणनिर्णयम्‌ ॥ ₹०. 771. ~ p. 1318, of the inscriptions ), then speaks of his son Jaitrapala (i.e. Jaitugi ), his son Krsna (or Kanhara ) and lastly of Maha- deva, son of the younger brother of Krsna. This is not the place to go into the genealogy of the Yadavas. There are some discrepancies between the genealogy as presented by Hemadri and as gathered from the inscriptions and numerous copperplate grants ofthe Yadavas. Vide Bombay Gazetteer, vol. I, part 2, pp. 248-249 for Hemadri and pp. 268-275 for extracts from the Vratakhanda, pp. 252 and 519 for two pedigrees of the Devagiri Yadavas and pp. 511-534 for history. The following may be consulted for the principal grants of the Yadavas :-- Ind. Ant. vol. 17, p. 117 ( Kalas- budruk plate of Bhillama dated sake 948 or 1025 A. D. ), E. I. vol. III p. rr0 ( Bahal inscription of Singhana dated sake 1144 ), ELI. vol. III p. 217-18 ( Gadag inscription of Bhillama dated sake 1113 1. €. 1191 A. D. ), Ind. Ant. vol. 14, p. 68 (grant of Krsna or Kanhara dated 1249-50 A. D. ), Ind. Ant. vol. 14, p. 314 ( Paithan plate of Ramacandra dated sake 1193), ए. I. vol. XIII, p. 198 ( Thana plate of Ramacandra dated Sake 1194 1. €. 1272 A. D.), E.I. vol. XIX, p. 20 ( Mamdapur inscription of Kanhara dated Sake 1172 1. e. 1250 A. D, wherein his younger brother Mahadeva is described as yuvaraja). Mahadeva reigned from 1260 to 1271 and Ramacandra, the son of Krsna, from 1271 to 1309 A, 0. Since in the Caturvarga-cintamani Hemadri is said to be the keeper of the state records of Mahadeva, that work must have been composed at some time between 1260 and1270 A. D. There are contemporary records available showing that Hemadri was in high favour not only with Mahadeva but also with his successor Ramacandra. The Thana plate of Ramacandra ( dated sake 1194, i.e. 1272 A.D.) records the the grant of a village called Vaul in Sasati ( modern Sasti in the Thana District >) to thirty-two brahmanas by Acyuta Nayaka of the Gautama gotra and descendant of Jalhana, who was the governor of Konkan, and describes*s! Hemadri as one who had attained a pre- eminent position in the government through the favour of Rama- candra and as one who was in charge of all ( state ) records and was the foremost minister Sl इत्यादिसमस्तबिरूदाविविराजमाने सकलभवलयमनुशासति यदुकुलकुमरदचन्द्र श्रीराम- TCA तथतल्मसादावापनिखिलराज्यधुरीणतां वहति समस्तटृस्तिपकाभ्यक्षे समस्तकरणाधिपत्यमङ्गीकुषणि च निरितक्षाडिमण्डले ATTEN गुणरलनरोहणाद्वो मादौ &०. 7. 1. vol. XIII at p. 208, 568 History of Dharmatastra HemAdri is credited with a commentary on Saunaka’s Pranava- kalpa.852, He appears to have written a éraddha-kalpa according to the rules of Katyayana which is distinct from his Sraddhakhanda ( vide Calcutta Sanskrit College mss. cat,. vol. 7, p. 163, No. 217 and Stein’s cat. p. 105). Hemadri also wrote a commentary®ss called Kaivalyadipika on the Muktaphala of Vopadeva, the famous author of the Mugdhabodha grammar. The Muktaphala embodies the philosophy of the Bhagavata puranain 19 adhydyas and 784 verses (and a few lines in prose in 5th and 6th chapters). Vopadeva was a friend and protegee of Hemadri, who wrote several works at the encouragement of the latter. He says that he wrote the Hari- lila ( published in the Calcutta Oriental Series No. 3 ), an index of the Bhagavata for pleasing the minister Hemadri.** There is a commentary on this work called Viveka with which both Hemadri and Madhusidana-Sarasvati had something to do.*5s Heméadri 2150 wrote a commentary called Ayurvedarasayana on the Astangahrdaya of Vagbhata. 852 I. O. cat. p. 594 No. 1808. 853 टीकां मुक्ताफ़लस्येमां ara केवस्यदीपिकाम्‌ । हेमाद्रिः कटके चक्रे कामराजस्य ({ रामराजस्य ) वेश्मनि ॥ इति शीमत्मोढपभतापचक्रवर्तिमहाराजाधिराजसोभवशोद्गव रामराजमन्तिवयहेमाद्रिदेवविरचिता मुक्ताफलटीक। समाप्ता | Mitra’s Notices, vol. IV. pp. 67-68 No. 1466. The मुक्ताफल with the com. of are has been published in the Calcutta Oriental Series No. 5 (1920). This edition reads रामराजस्य. | 854 श्रमिद्धागवतस्कन्धाव्यायार्थादि निरुण्यते । विदुषा वोपदेवेन मन्तरिहेमाद्वित॒ष्टये ॥ ms. in Bhadkamkar collection; the last verse is यस्य ल्याकरणे वरेण्यधटनाः स्फीताः a «RTT दृश प्रख्याता नव वेयकेपि तिथिनि्धारा्थमेकोद्धतः । Mea त्रय एव भागवत- TRAY TATA च भुगीरवाणशिरोमणेरिह गुणाः के के न लोकोत्तरा ॥ This verse occurs at the end of the मुक्ताफल also. 855 The ms. in the Bhadkamkar collection folio 5 has । इति aft हर्टिीलायां मधु- सूदनसरस्वतीनि भितं प्रभमस्कन्धकिवरणम्‌ A ms, in the Bombay Asiatic Society Library ascribes the com. to ae and says मधुसूदनसरस्वती saw it through ‹ हइरिलीलाविवेकोयं रामराजस्य वेश्मनि । कटके THAW gua हमा- Bon सताम्‌ ॥ सरस्वतीश्रीमधुदरद्नेन निन्दढमेतदूबुधमोदनेन । जनः समस्तोपि रसा यनन HAWS बजतादनेन ॥ ( BBRAS, cat. p. 329 No, 1157 ) 87, Hemadri - $59 Altogether Hemadri was a towering personality. His name is associated throughout the Maratha Country with the construction of numerous temples having a peculiar style of architecture. He is also credited with having invented the Modi script. Within a few decades his Caturvarga-cintamani, particularly its dana and vrata sections, came to be looked upon as the standard work in the whole of the Deccan and southern India. Madhava in his Kalanirnaya (p. 67) expressly mentions the Vratakhanda of Hemadri as an authority. This work was composed about 1340 A. D. In an inscription of Bhaskara alias Bhavadira, son of BukkaI, dated sake 1291 (i. e. 1369 A. D.) the king is described as making various gifts following the composition of Hemadri.#5° This is obviously a reference to his danakhayda and establishes that long before 1369 A. D. Hemadri had become a standard author in the Telugu country. The Vanapalli plate of Anna-Vema dated sake 1300 (about 1380 A. D. ) describes Vema as giving the various gifts in Hemadri and his son as one who observed the vratas and danas®s7 described by Hemadri. Pedda--Komati--Vema is described in a grant of Sake 1344 as eager in bestowing gifts described in the rules of Hemadri.*s* Hemadri is quoted in the Madanaparijata,*59 the Dvaitanirnaya of Sankarabhatta, the Nirnayasindhu and other works, 88. Kullukabhatta Kullaka’s commentary on the Manusmyti styled the Manvarthamuktavali is the most famous of all commentaries on Manu. It has been printed several times. In the following the Nirnayasagara edition of 1909 has been relied upon. Kullaka’s commentary is concise and lucid and his remarks are always to the point. He avoids all unnecessary discussions and is never prolix. He was not however original. He drew upon the commentaries of Medhatithi and Govindaraja and incorporated a great deal from them 856 हमाद्विरूतिमर्मिण कुर्वन्दानान्यनेकशः y E. 1, vol. XIV p. 102. 857 RETRO भूमिं हविजमुक्तशेषाम्‌ | ००१ हेमाद्रिदानब्रती, Vide 2.1. vol. IIT. pp, 59 and 61. | 858 हेमद्रिकस्पोदितदानदक्षः | 1.1.१01. XI. Pp. 325. 9 येतु पटू्िशन्मतेपि विचिकिःसन्ते तेामपराकोवज्ञनिश्वरचन्दिकाकारेेमद्विमश्तयः मति- ; । मदुनपार्जिात ?" 556. : 360 History of Dharmasastra into his own work without acknowledgment. For example, on Manu XI. 95 he simply summarises the remarks*®° of Govindaraja and cites only one out of the several quotations that are found in Govindaraja’s Manu-tika. He severely criticizes both Medhatithi and Govindaraja, particularly the latter. He frequently pours ridicule on the latter ( vide note 713 above). At the end of his commentary he says®**' that Medhatithi’s skill lay in expounding what texts were authoritative and of substance and what were not so, Govindaraja in concise words explained the hidden meaning of the brief text (of Manu ), while Dharanidhara had his own method of explanation which was independent of previous tradition ; and there- fore he undertook to write a commentary that would clearly set forth the real meaning of Manu. He was very proud of his achievement and says that neither Medhatithi nor Govindaraja nor other commentators explained in the way he did and that explanatory material like his would be difficult to find elsewhere.*°? He notices the explanations of Medhatithi and Govindaraja hundreds of times, discusses various readings and his commentary deserves toa consider- able extent the eulogy pronounced by Sir William Jones®® ^ At length appeared Cullaca Bhatta, who, after a painful course of 860 ^ पुंस एव ब्रह्मणस्य मयप्रतिषेधो न खिया gengeagad | सुराटशन ,.. अभक्ष्याणि स्युः बाह्मणी सुरापी भवति Fat देवाः पतिलोकं नयन्ति Rea सा दुर्मतिः क्षीणपुण्या अप्सु जलोद्रवेति शुक्तिका वा पतिलोकं न सा यानि , . , इति शङ्कवसिष्टयाज्ञवल्क्ये- aera अपि निषेधस्मरणात्‌ › । गोविन्दराज ० मनु XL 95; * अत्र केचित्‌ . . . ब्रह्मणस्य पुंस एव मयप्रतिषेधो न शिया इत्याहृस्तदुसत्‌ पतिलोकं न सा याति . , . सूकरी चोपजायते इति याज्ञवर्क्यादिस्मृतिविरोधात्‌ । ° कुलक 861 सारासारवचपन्नविधौ Anke स्तेकं॑वस्त॒॒निगृढमस्यवचनाद्रोबिन्द्राजो जगौ | अन्थेसिमिन्धरणीधरस्य बहशः स्वातन्व्यमेतावता स्पष्टं मानवमर्थतस्वमसिलं वक्तु कृतोयं श्रमः yj, Vide his remarks about धरणीधर on मन्‌ II. 83 and IV. 50 ' धरणीधरण तु एकाक्षरपरं AT प्राणायामपरं तपः इति sa... मेधातिधिप्रभृति- मिवदवराकषितं यतः लिसनाचयाठान्तरं तत्र स्वतन्त्रो धरणीधरः ' and पर्परीयमाम्नायं हत्वा विद्वद्विरादृतम्‌ । पाठान्तरं भ्यरचयन्मुषेह धरणीधरः ॥.१ &9 प्रायाश्यितते बहुमुनिमतालोचनायन्मयोक्तं ANAM खलः मनिगिरां तद्धजध्वं गुणज्ञा; नेतन्मेधातिधिरमिद्धे नापि गोषिन्द्राजो श्याख्यातारो न जगुरपरेष्यन्यतेो GT वः ॥ last verse of chap. XI B63 en Pedda Ramappa र Bangari Seshamma 1.L.R. 2 Mad, 286 at ४, 291, 88. Kulliikabhatia 361 study and the collation of numerous manuscripts, produced a work of which it may perhaps be said very truly that it is the shortest yet the most luminous, the least ostentatious yet the most learned, the deepest yet the most agreeable, commentary ever composed on any author, ancient or modern. ” Among the authors and works quoted by him ( besides the usual smrtis ) are the following :—Garga (on II. 6 ), Govindaraja, Dharanidhara, Bhaskara ( bhasyakara of the Vedantasttras, on I. 8 and 15 ), Bhojadeva ( on VIII. 184 ), Medhatithi, Vamana ( author of the Kasika ), Bhattavartika-krt (on XII, 106), Visvarapa ( the commentator of Yajnavalkya, on II. 189 and V. 68). The Viéva- 7002 that he quotes on Manu V. 215 is the lexicographer and not the jurist as Aufrecht ( in his great catalogue) appears to hold. He gives us a little information about himself in the introduc- tory verse.*°4 He came of a Varendra Brahmana family of Bengal ( Gauda ) residing in Nandana and was the son of Bhatta Divakara. He wrote his commentary in Kasi in the company of Pandits. On Manu VI. 14 he mentions the names of certain vegetables that were current in Malwa and among the Vahikas.*5 It appears that Kulluka also composed a digest called Smrti- sagara. A Ms. of a portion of it called Sraddhasagara exists in the Caleutta Sanskrit College (cat. vol. II. p. 405, No. 446 ). In this his ASaucasagara and Vivadasagara are referred to. I secured a transcript of the ms. of the Sriddhasagara in the Calcutta Sanskrit College through the kindness of the Principal. The Sraddhasagara deals with the following subjects :—definition of of gradha ; whether it is of the nature of yaga, dina and homa; various kinds of Sraddhas such as nitya, naimittika &c.; the proper and improper places for sraddha ; the proper times for $raddha ; Astaka-Sraddha ; Sadras can perform astaka aud other Sraddhas ; inter- calary month ; who are pankti-pavana brahmanas ; meaning of ० गोडे नन्दनवासिनान्नि सुजनेवन्ये वरेन्द्यां कुले श्रीमद्रहदिवाकरस्य तनयः FST भवत्‌ । कश्यामुत्तरवाहिजहुतनय तीरे समं पण्डितेस्तेनेयं क्रियते हिताय विदुषां मन्वथे- मुकावली ॥ ` % भूस्तृणं मालवदेशे परसिदं शाकं शियुकं वाहीकेषु प्रसिद्धं UES । ७० De 46. 868 History of Dharmatisira nimantrana and amantrana; the number of brahmanas to be invited ; the darbhas ; Sraddhadevatas ; the sacred thread etc. The Sraddhasagara is full of Parvamimarhsa discussions. The author says that he wrote it and the other two works ( Vivadasagara_ and Agaucasagara ) at the order of his father. He quotes profusely from the Mahabharata, the Mahapuranas and Upapuranas and from the dharmasutras and metrical smstis. He names the Kalpataru oftener than any other nibandhakara. The other authors and works named are: Bhojadeva, Halayudha ( probably the author of. Prakasa on the Sraddhakalpasatra of Katyayana ), Jikana, Kama- dhenu, Medhatithi, Sankhadhara. In one place we have a reference to Prabhakara and Kamalakarabhatta (on Kala and Kama being devatas ) and in another place to Gauda-Maithila~-Mayakhabharah ( which are probably marginal notes creeping into the ms. or refer to authors other than the well-known ones). He refers to the opinion of his own guru in opposition to that of the Kalpataru. The date of Kullaka cannot be settled with certainty. एप held that he lived probably in the r5th century (S. B. E. vol. XXV. p. (कश), Ghose ( Hindu Law, 3rd edition p. XVI) and M. M. Chakravarti (JASB 1915; p. 345 ) are of the same opinion. In I. L. R. 48 Cal. 643 Sir Asutosh Mukerji places Kullaka in the rsth century (at p. 688). As Kullaka mentions Bhojadeva, Govinda- raja, Kalpataru and Halayudha he is certainly later than r150 A. D. Raghunandana®© in his Dayatattva and Vyavaharatattva, and Vardha- mana in his Dandaviveka frequently mention his views. Srinatha’s com. on the Dayabhaga refutes the view of Kullaka. The Sraddha- kriya-kaumudi of Govindananda refers to Kullaka’s explanation of the word ^ akanksan ’as ‘Viksamanah’ in Manu III. 258. The Rajaniti-ratnakara of Candesvara quotes the explanation of Kulloka.667 Therefore Kullaka must have flourished before 1300 86 एको gery साक्षी स्यादिति कुलकमदृषृतपाठः, एको ठुभ्वस्वसाक्षी स्यादिति जीमरतबाहनधृतपादस्तु न युकः । व्यवहारतस्व (vol. 71, 9. 243); समाः समभागा एव मवेयुरनोद्धारः कस्यचिद्‌ देय He Hew: । दायतस्व (vol. 11, 7.193) 867 अत एव कृ्ठकमटः-राजरशष्दोपि नान्न क्षश्रियजातिषरः किं त्वभिषिक्रजनपदृपा्कपितृ \ । राजनीतिरल्नाकर (ed. by Mr. Jayasval, 1924) 2. 8. These are the words of gaa on मनु १.३ च 88, Kulltkabhat{a 363 A.D. Kullaka in his by no means small work nowhere refers to the Dayabhaga, though he himself came of a Bengal family. This silence is explicable in two ways. As we have seen, Kullaka wrote in Kasi and not in Bengal. Therefore if he flourished not long after Jimatavahana, it is quite natural that writing in Benares he had not heard of the Dayabhaga or read it. It has been shown above that Jimatavahana probably wrote about 1100-1150 A. D. Therefore Kullaka flourished between 1150 and 1300 A. D. and probably wrote about 1250 A.D. M. M. Chakravarti is not sure as to how early Kullaka flourished but opines that he could not have flourished later than the first quarter of the 15th century ( JASB 1915, ए. 345 n. 1 ). | 89. Sridatta Upadhyaya Mithila has made extremely valuable and substantial contribu- tions to Dharmaéastra Literature. From the days of the Yajiiavalkya smrti down to modern times the land of Mithila has produced writers whose names are illustrious. Sridatta Upadhyaya is one of the earliest among the mediaeval Maithila nibandhakaras. He is the author of several works which will be briefly noticed. The Acaradaréa of Sridatta was printed in Benaras at the Divakara Press and by the VenkateSvara Press in Bombay in 541८4; 1961. It is a manual of the daily religious duties of the followers of the white Yajurveda ( Vajasaneyins ),*°* such as acamana, brushing the teeth, morning bath, samdhya, japa, brabmayajna, tarpana, daily worship of gods, vaisvadeva, feeding guests etc. Among the works and writers named are the following**s: —Acara-cintamani, Kalpa- taru, Kamadhenu, Kalikapurana, Ganegamisra, Raja (probably Bhojadeva ), Smrtimaharnava, Harihara and Halayudha~-nibandha. There is a commentary on this work called Acaradarsabodhini MR वाजसनेथिनामू । निबण्यते नियद्धो यो धर्मशा्लनिषन्दुभिः ॥ 2nd intro, verse in D.C. Ms. No. 343 of 1875-76; समूलवबनाभोगो wR भ्यायनिमलः । श्रीद्सेन सतामेष आचारे दु्पणः रतः ॥ 869 Vide for Toy eet and राजा ‹ अशिरस्कं माजननमिति गणेशमिन्नाः ' folio 15 b of ATA (D. 0, Ma, No, $48 of 1878-76) ; « इति राजायकिसितं तरल्ायणीयगृद्य परिषिषश्वचनं न प्रमाणमनित्याहुः ' follo 26a; इदं च बोधायनवाक्यं राजायलिलित- aR Nyomi ycty । › folio 29 a, 964 ` History of Dharmatistra composed by Gauripati or Gaurifa, son of Damodara Maithila, at Benaras in 1640 A. D ( Dr. Bhandarkar’s report, 1883~84, p. 347 ) In this work he uses several vernacular words; e.g. he says that ‘Sala’ tree is known as Sagavana®?° (in the vernacular ). Another work of his is the Chandogahnika on the daily duties for Samavedins. He refers to it in his Samayapradipa®?! and Pitrbhakti. A supplement to it named Chandogahnikoddhara was written by Sankaramisra, son of Bhavanathamiégra ( Mitra’s Notices, vol. VI p. 10, No. 1989 ). The Pitrbhakti is a manual on the éraddha rites for students of the Yajurveda. It was based*7? on the Katiyakalpa with Karka’s bhasya thereon and on the works of Gopala and 2300012 (i. €. Bhojadeva ). It is frequently quoted in the Sraddhaviveka of Rudradhara. Among the writers named are ( besides those that occur in the AcaradarSa also) : Pitrhitakaranikara, Narayanavrtti ( on Asvalayana Gr. S.), Mitaksara, Ratnakarandika, Vidhipuspamala (26 a), Subhakara, Smrtimaiijari, Smrtimaiijusa, Halayudha’s Sraddhadhyaya. This work first treats of the details of the Parvanasraddha, then of ekoddista, of the monthly Sraddhas, the $raddha on the 11th day after death, of Sapindikarana, of abhyudayika $raddha. It then proceeds to consider the definition of sraddha. The Sraddhakalpa was composed by him for the Samavedins. It is referred to in his Samayapradipa®?3 and Pitrbhakti ( folio 33b ) The Samayapradipa treats of the proper times for various vratas.874 It is divided into three chapters (paricchedas). The 870 ८ शालवृक्षः सगवन इति Wag: ) folio 9 bof the आचारादश, Compare Marathi ° सागवान, ' 871 ‹ उक्तमस्माभिराष्विके ' folio 58a of समयपदीप . 0. Ma. No. 871 of 1875-76; ‹ न च सपत्नीकानामिति प्रपञितमस्मामिग्छन्दोगश्रादकत्पे ' पितृभक्ति folio 24 a. 872 कातीयकल्पं सहककंभाष्यं गोपालभुपालमतादि दृषा । सतां च वाष्यानि निशम्य सम्य- ग्यजुरविदां श्राद्धविधिं विधास्ये ॥ first verse of पितृभक्ति ( 7. 0. Ms. No 158 of 1892-95 ). 873 ‹ निर्णीतिमस्मामि; श्रादकल्पे ' समयप्रदीप folio 49 a (2. 0, Ms. No. 971 of 1875-76 ). 874 afte ्तादीनां सारमाक्ष्य लिख्यते | verse ४ of समयप्रदीप. 89, Sridatin Uptdhytiya $68 first is called Samayapariccheda and dilates upon the definition of vrata, on the procedure about fasts, nakta and the vratas of Ganeéa and other deities, the second is called Satnvatsara-kstya-pariccheda and treats of vratas from the pratipada to the amavasya in the several months and the third is called prakirnaka ( mis- cellaneous ) dealing with the vratas on sankranti ( the Sun’s passage into another Zodiacal sign) etc. In this work Sridatta often refers to the views of the Gaudas and contrasts them with his own. He 2150 refers to Gaudanibandha. No other writers or works except those that are already enumerated under Acdradarsa and Pitrbhakti are named in this work. On folio 7a there is a name which is somewhat indjstinct and appears to be ‘Mitamitradi- bhih’, The Samayapradipa is mentioned in the Krtya-ratnakara ( pp. 400, 479, 505) of Candegvara and in Salapani’s Durgotsava- viveka.875 Sridatta is more frequently quoted in the Sraddhakriya- kaumudi of Govindananda than almost any other author or work. As Sridatta names the Kalpataru, Harihara and Halayudha’s work on Sraddha he must have flourished later than 1200 A. D. As Candegvara mention his Samayapradipa, Sridatta must have flourished before the first quarter of the 14th century. If Ganesga- migra mentioned in the Acadradarga be the same as Ganesvaramiégra, the author of Sugatisopana and uncle of Candesvara ( which appears extremely probable ), then Sridatta flourished a short time before Candegvara and must have composed his works between 1275 and 1310A. D. It appears that there was another Maithila writer called Sridatta- migra, son of Nagesvaramigra, who composed the Ekagnidana- paddhati and one or two other works ( Hp. Nepal cat. p. 129 ) The Nepal Ms. of the Ekagnidana-paddhati was copied in La-Sam 299 (Laksamanasena era 299, i. €. 1418 A. D.). Vide Hp. Nepal cat. XII, 45 and 129. So this Sridatta flourished towards the end of the 14th century in the reign of Devasithha son of Bhavega, Vide JASB for 1915 pp. 379-381 and 388-390 for ridatta. 85 समांसङ्भिरदानमाह श्रीदलोपान्यायरूतसमयपरदीपे भविष्यपुराणम्‌ | दुगोत्सवधिवेक ए. 2 ( Oaloutta Sanskrit Sahitya Parishad ed. ). 966. History of Dharmatistra go. Candesvara CandeSvara is the most prominent figure among Maithila nibandhakaras on Dharmasastra. He compiled an extensive digest called Smrtiratnakara or simply Ratnakara. This digest was divided into seven sections viz., on krtya, dana, vyavahara, suddhi, paji,vivada and grhastha.*7© Out of these the Vivadaratnakara dealing with dayabhaga and the other titles of law (vyavahdrapadas ) has been printed in the B. I. series and has been translated into English by Mr. G. C. Sarkar and by Mr. Justice Digambara Chatterjee. The Vivadaratnakara of CandeSvara and the Vivadacintamani of Vacaspati are of paramount authority in matters of Hindu Law in Mithila ( modern Tirhut ) so far as British Indian Courts are concerned.®77 The Krtya-ratnakara deals in 22 tarangas with the discussion of Dharma ( its real nature, its rewards, means of knowing it and the occasions for it ), the various vratas and observances in the several months from Caitra, the observances in the intercalary month, various vratas on the several days of the week, the Sun’s passage into a new sign, eclipse on the new-moon day etc. This work is referred to in his Danaratnakara, which in its turn is quoted in the Grhastha- ratnakara.878 The work has recently been printed in the B. I. series (1925). The Grhastharatnakara isa very extensive work in 68 tarangas on the duties of householders. The Deccan College Ms. that | could consult is incomplete, has only folios 30, 72-133 and contains the last 23 tarangas only. Some of the subjects dealt with are :— from whom gifts were to be accepted by grhasthas; duties and 876 श्रीरत्यदानम्यवहारशुदिपूजादिवादषु गृहस्थरुत्ये। रत्नाकरा धमभुवो free: SATS पुरुषदेन सप्त॒ ॥ Verse towards the end of the विवादुरत्नाकर्‌ last verse of दान- रल्नाषर्‌ = ( 0. ©. Ms. No. 114 of 1884-85, where-wehave धर्मस्‌ ये निबदा रुताः श्रीषण्डीन्बरमन्निणा ते ) 877 26 11 Moo. I. ^. 139 at p.174; I. L. ए. 20 All. 367 ( P.O.) at p. 290; I. L. R. 10 Cal 392 at p. 399 ; I. L. R. 12 Cal. $48 at p. 351 878 अश्नोक्तमपि agri रृत्यरत्नाकरे पुनः | मासादिरूत्यसामस्त्यं गोरवा्तदुदीरितम्‌ # Intro, २७२०७1० दूनर्‌त्नाक्रर्‌ (D.C. M.s. No. 114 of 1884-86) ; असचतिग्रह्य- श्वाग्यस्मामिदीनर्नाकरे देयदेयतङ्ग Haas । गृहस्थरलनाकर्‌ follo १6 $0. Candetvara 36 actions proper for Ksatriyas, Vaigyas and Sadras; the observances of asnataka ; yama and niyama ;sauca; the observances of brahma- carya ; what ruins families; proper abode for a grhastha ; what a grhastha should or should not speak or should or should not see; things not to be given to sadras; the avoidance of anger, adultery and intermixture of castes ( samkara ) ; requiting of debts etc. The Danaratnakara contains 29 tarangas and deals with the following subjects :—meaning of dana ; what may or may not be gifted ; fit objects of charity ; the gifts called mahadanas ; gifts of a thousand cows and heaps of corn ; various gifts, such as those of food, books ; gifts appropriate to certain months, naksatras and tithis; miscellaneous gifts; dedication of wells and tanks for public use ; planting of trees. The Vivadaratnakara is an extensive work ( 671 pages in print ) in 100 ¢arangas on civil and criminal law and deals with the 18 titles of law such as dayabhaga (on partition and inheritance ), mnadana ( recovery of debts) and others. It formed the basis of the Vivadacandra of Misarumiéra, the Vivada-cintamani of Vacaspati and the Dandaviveka of Vardhamana. It is mentioned in his own Grhastharatnakara.°79 The Vyavahararatnakara deals with judicial procedure, such as the plaint, the reply, the burden of proof, means of proof, judg- mentetc. Vide Mitra’s notices, vol. VI. p. 66, No. 2036. The Sudhiratnakara isin 34 tarangas and deals with impurity on birth and death, persons who have to observe no 4Sauca, mean- ing of sapipda, rites on death up to the end of the period of mourn- ing, purifications of food and various substances. Vide Mitra’s Notices, vol. VII. p. 149, No. 2384 and I. O. cat. p. 412, No. 1389. For the Pajaratnakara, vide Mitra’s Notices, vol. III, p. 162, No. 2398. That work is mentioned ‘by Raghunandana in the uddhi-tattva (vol. II, p. 299 on Salagrama stone ). Besides this digest Candesvara compiled several other works. Krtyacintamani is one of such works. It is a question when it was composed. In his Grhastharatnakara he says that certain O78 इत्यादीनि चान्यानि प्रदेशे विवाद्रप्नाकर्‌ एवास्माभि्वणितानीति । गृहस्थरमाकर follo 188 b, | 868 History of Dharmatastra architectural and decorative constructions called Srivrksa, Vardhamana and Nandy4avarta have been spoken of by him in the Krtyacinta- 7020188० But the Krtyacintémani says that he has already compos- ed the seven ratnakaras.*®** The Krtyacintimani is divided into sections called prakasgas. It deals with astronomical matters in relation to the performance of several religious ceremonies and sarhskaras, such as tarasuddhi, the intercalary month, garbhadhana, simantonnayana, birth of a child on the Mala naksatra, the rites on the 6th day after birth, namaka- rana, the movements of Saturn, Sun’s passage from one sign into another, the results of eclipses etc. Another work of Candegvara, the Rajanitiratnakara, has been recently edited at Patna ( 1924 ) by Mr. K. P. Jayasval witha learned introduction dealing with the personal history of Candeévara, his relations with the Maithila kings and the mediaeval Indian literature on politics. It appears that CandeSvara did not complete the writing of a work on politics when he compiled his great digest. He wrote the work at the command of the king BhaveSa ( or Bhaveévara ) of अपा. The work contains 16 tarangas ( waves, i.e. chapters ) on the following subjects :—definition of a king, different grades of kings, the eighteen vices or calamities for kings, duties of kings ; the characteristics and duties of amatyas ( councillors ) ; the characteristics of purobita ; the characteristics and duties of a pradvivaka ( Judge ); the members of the hall of justice ( sabhyas ), their number and qualifications; concerning forts; the time and place and accessories of the settlement of royal policy; concerning the state treasury; the army; the commander-in-chief and the discipline of the army ; ambassadors, allies, and spies; the gencral obligations of kings, conflict of Dharmasastra and Arthasastra, the six gunas -- sarndhi etc., the mandala of kings; the king’ power of punishment ; abdication by king, the heir-apparent, im- partibility of the kingdom ; the eldest son’s right to succeed, the — कक ee 880 श्रीवुक्षवर्धमाननयावर्ना; प्रासाद्विशेषाः सुवर्णदर्वादिनिर्मिताः शृत्यचिन्तामणावस्मा- मिक्ता | folio 1135 of D. 0. Ms. No, 44 of 1883-84 881 आन्नायस्मृतिनिणैयाय रतवांस्तान्सपरल्नाकरान्‌ । Intro. verse 19 of रुत्यविन्तामणि (7. ©. cat. 0. 811. No. 1261 ) 888 ce AAEM राजनीतिनिबन्धकम्‌ । तनोति Aa भीमान्‌ चण्डे Belt ॥ ८० intro. verse राज नीतिर्‌ ०, 90. Candetvara 369 seven constituent elements of the state; the state’s obligation towards the poor, the helpless etc.; the coronation of the heir- apparent or his investiture. There are two more works composed by Candesvara viz., the Danavakyavali and the Sivavakyavali ( vide I. O. cat. p. 1409, No. 3724 for the latter ). Candesvara names in his works, particularly in the Krtyaratnakara and the Vivadaratnakara, a host of writers and works. In his great digest he drew largely upon five predecessors and incorporated often without acknowledgment much or almost all that was valuable in them. These five predecessors were the Kamadhenu, the Kalpataru, the Parijata, the Prakasa (i. €. Smrtimaharnava) and Halayudha, all of which he quotes scores of times. At the end of the Vivada- ratnakara he boasts that whatever is of the essence in the above five works and even more is comprehended in his single work the Ratna- kara.883_ Among the authors and works mentioned in his seven ratnakaras, those mentioned below deserve to be noted.8% In I. L. R. 12 Cal. 348 (at p. 356) the learned judges appear to hold that the Parijata mentioned in the Vivadacintamani is the Madanaparijata. But this is obviously a mistake ( vide p. 309 above on Parijata). Besides these in his Rajanitiratnakara he names Kamandaka, Kullakabhatta, Pallava and Pallavakara, Srikara. What 883 erage वाप्यथ पारिजाते हलायुधे वाण्यथवा प्रकाशे । यत्तारमस्माद्धिकं च AI हूधाति रत्नाकर एक एव ॥ यं कामधेनुरनुयाति सकल्पवृक्षो (ant) यं सेवते निज- फलाय स पारिजातः । ते वेरिगोत्रमिदुमुच्चसहृस्रदिं wat तुलयितुं कतमे भवन्तु ॥ ( vide notes 652 and 703 for these two verses ). 68५ saga, उदयकर ( commentator of मनु, vide विवाद्रत्ना ° 0. 453, 560, 500), कल्पत, कामधेनु, रुत्यसमुश्चय, गोपाल, THT ( वि, र. P46), जिक- नीयनियन्ध, दानसागर (folio 15 gaze), देवेश्वरथमाधिकरणिक, esr, THI, परतिमासंमह, ATIM ( गहस्थर folio 7a, on गोतमधर्मसूत्र ), भाष्यकार (of शङ्कलिसित ), भागुरि ( वि. र. ४. 10४ ), भूपाल, भूपालकत्यसमुश्चय, ATT पटति, माधवस्वाी ( गहस्थर० 116 £ ), मिश्र (वि. र्‌. ४. 595 ), मिताक्षरा, मुरारिराज, मेधातिध, corres, लक्ष्मीधर , वर्धदीपिका, वसन्तराज, विन्वरूपाचार्य, ATT, श्रीदत्त; wast, सागर ( दानरनाकर 10" ), स्मृतिरष्नविवेक, 1 इरिहर, इृलायुधनिबन्ध, 71"° रुत्यसमुख्जय, भुपालपद्ति and भृषारुरृत्यसमुष्चय seem to be the same work. H. D. 47. $70 History of Dharmutistra is printed as Natasatra in the Vivadaratnakara (p. 477) is really Lata (i. e. Latyayana Srautasatra). Candesvara mentions many vernacular words ( €, g. Krityaratnakara pp. 109, 111, 306, 338, 443 ). We learn a great deal about the family and personal history of Candesvara from his works. The Vivadaratnakara in the introduc- tion and in the colophon tells us that CandeSvera was a mantrin (a minister ), was entrusted with the office of minister for peace and war, that he conquered Nepal and weighed himself against gold on the banks of the Vagvati in sake 1236 (1314 A. D. ).885 There are more or less similar colophons at the end of the Rajanitiratnakara and the other ratnakaras. The grand-father of Candesvara was Devaditya,®* who was minister of Harasirhhadeva of Tirhut and who belonged to the Karnata family. One of the sons of Devaditya was Viresvara who was also a minister for peace and war of the same king and is said to have made grants to learned Brahmanas in Ramapura (1. €, Simraon in Champaran District ) and other cities (verse 10 of Krtyaratnakara ). Mr. Jayasval points out in his introduction to the Rajaniti-ratnakara (j ) that the correct name of the king was Harisithhadeva. Another son of Devaditya was Gane- Svara who was younger than Viregvara and who was also a great minister and author of Sugatisopana. A copy of -this work bears the date La-sam ( Laksmanasena era ) 224 (i. e. 1343-44 A. D.).®8 In the colophon of this work Devaditya is called ‘ mahamatta’ ( mahamatra ) and Ganesvara is styled maharajadhiraja. In the 885 श्रीचण्डेश्वरमन्निणा मतिमतानेन प्रसन्नात्मना नेपालसिलमूमिपारुजयिना धर्मन्ुुग्धा- erat । apres सरितस्तटे सुरधुनीसाम्यं दधत्या; शुचौ मार्गे मासि यथोक्तपुण्य- waa द्त्तस्तुलापुरषः | 3rd Intro. verse ; at the end we have TATA: संमिते arent सहसि eras वाम्बतीतिन्धुतीरे । अदित qferqercorn eee राशे निषिरकिलगुणानामुत्तमः सोमनाथः ॥ इति समक्रियमहासन्णिविब्रहिकटककुर- भन्निवरशरीवीरेशवरात्मजसमक्रियमहासन्धिविग्रिकटक्करशरीषण्डेश्वरविराधिते विबादुरला- करः संपूर्णः । 886 आसीन्मेथिलतीरमुकिषिषये ATTA: ,,. देवादित्य हति Karate मन्ड Fert: ty 2nd intro. verse to कुत्यचिन्तामाणि (1. O. cat p. 811, No, 1631 ) ; अस्ति श्रीहरासिष्देवनृपतिर्मिःरोषविद्षिणां निर्माथी मिथिलां प्रशात्दलिष्ठां कारणाट- tana: । verse 4 of wrareearet, 887 Vide oat. of Nepal palm-leaf and paper mss. 7, 183 ( Haraprased 89971. 98. Candetvara $74 Sraddhaviveka of Rudradhara the Sugatisopana is said to be the work of one who was pratihastaka (deputy ) of Bhavagarma,®#8 | Candesvara was the son of Viresvara and like his father and grand- father became minister of Harisirhhadeva. This must have happen- ed about 1310 A. D., as he weighed himself in 1314 A. D. The Kytyaratnakara ( verse 15 ) says that he touched the very idol of Pagupati in Nepal and worshipped it after conquering the country. From the Vyavahararatnakara it appears that Candesvara was Chief Judge as well as Minister for peace and war.**9 Candeévara and his ancestors are highly praised for their liberality.29° In the Danaratnakara ( verse 2 at the end ) he is said to have rescued the earth submerged in the flood of Mlecchas.*9 This probably refers to the defeat of some Mahomedan generals. Harisitnhadeva was routed by Ghiasuddin Tughlak in 1324 and retired from Tirhut 888 भाटुविवेक 7. 4 ( Benares ०0. of 1920 संवत्‌ ) * इति सुगतिसोपानादौ भवदार्मप्रति- ASU कमः । ' 889 निर्णीय घ्यवहारसागमदृशा यः पादूविवाकः LETT विषारचारधिषणो धमं नयत्युनलतिमू । तेनायं गुरसन्धिवि्रहधुरां धोरेयसंनीतिना भ्रीखण्डेश्वरमन्त्रिणा विरचितः Tete रत्नाकरः ॥ Mitra’s Notices, vol VI. p.67. The second pada has four syllables less, The genealogy of qugaqz's family is कर्मादित्य ee ee व ee see ed wee 3 | धीरेन्वर wea YHA = minister of alae and author of विवाहयदति 00 यस्य दानातिरेकेण लोके निर्जितगोरवः । कल्पद्रुमः पारिजातः कामधेनुः कचित्‌ कथित्‌ # 4th verse at end of दानरत्नाकर Mitra's Notices, vol. VI. p. 135 ; verse 21 of कृत्यद्त्नाकर says that qugeqz dug a Jarge lake in अमिराभपुर SL मनना SRE TET येनोद्धता लीलया tt $72 History of Dharmatdstra into Nepal.89? Hence it follows that the seven Ratnakaras some of which (like vivada and dana) refer to his weighing himself against gold in 1314 A. D. and his high position at the court of -Harisirnhadeva were composed between 1314 and 1324 A. D. His Rajanitiratnakara was composed at the command of Bhavega. This last belonged to the line of the Kamesvara dynasty which began to rule Tirhut in the third quarter of the 13th century, in 1370 A. D. according to Mr. Jayasval ( introduction to Rajanitiratnakara, +). Therefore the literary activities of CandcSvara extended over about 50 years from 1314 and the Rajaniti-ratnakara was probably his last work composed at a very advanced age. For the somewhat con- troversial and confused chronology of the Tirhut kings of the Karnata and Kameévara dynasties, vide Hp. cat. (Introduction p. 31); Grierson in Ind. Ant. vol. 14, p. 182-196 and Ind. Ant. vol. 28, p. 57; JASB 1915 pp. 407-433 ( M. M. Chakravarti ); JBORS vol. IX, p. 300 and X, p. 37 (Jayasval). Candesvara exercised very great influence over Maithila and Bengal writers. Misarumisra, Vardhamana, Vacaspati-misra and Raghunandana®9; very frequently quote him. The Viramitrodaya ( p. 181 ) calls the Ratnakara ‘ Paurastya-nibandha’ (eastern digest). gt. Harinatha Harinatha is the author of a digest called Smptiséra on several topics of dharmagastra. No part of this work has been yet printed. In the India Office there are two mss. of the Smrtisara (I. O. cat. p. 448, No. 1488 and p. 449, No. 1489 ). The first cites 67 autno- . 1165 ( pramapakah )on Dharmasastra, out of which the Karma- pradipa, the Kalpataru, the Kamadhenu, Kumara, Ganeévaramisra, Vijfianegvara, Vilamba (?), Smptimafijisi and Harihara deserve special mention. This ms. contains the portion of the Smptisara on the sathskaras, rites on death, raddha and prayagcitta. The other ms. deals with the principal topics of vivada ( various titles of law) and vyavahara (judicial procedure ), viz. partition, father’s share 892 The Pafiji historian of Mithil& thus desoribes the departure of इरसिहदेव ‹ चाणाब्धियुग्मशरिसंमितशःकव्थे पौषस्य शद्ुनवमीरविस्‌नुवारे | reat सुपष्टनपुरी हरसिंहृदेवो दुदवदेशितपथोथ गिरिं विवेश ॥ , 893 The दृनरत्नाकर, पुजारत्नाकर्‌ and शुदिरत्नाकर are quoted in the शुदितस्व रघुनन्दन ( ०. £. Pp. 284, 299, 301, vol. 1), of 91, Harintitha ` 373 on partition, larger share to eldest son, persons excluded from partition and inheritance, impartible property; stridhana; the several kinds of sons; succession to the property of the sonless ; re-union ; gambling and prize-fighting and other titles of law ; various methods of dauda ( punishment ); the various units of measure etc.; judicial procedure i. e. the plaint, the reply, the means of proof, viz, documents, witnesses, possession, reasoning, oaths, and ordeals ; review of judgment; minority and dependence; rules about succession according to various authors. This last portion appears to be a sort of supplement, wherein the views of Balarapa, Parijata, Halayudha, Kalpataru and of the Smptisara itself on the order of succession to a man dying sonless are set forth. Visvarapa and Srikara are named in the summary of Balaripa’s views and the Prakasa at a later stage ( folio 148 b). Bhavadeva-nibandha is also expressly named on possession. No information is given in the mss. about Harinatha himself. He is styled in the colophons ‘ mahamahopadhyaya.’ In several places he refers to the views of the Gaudas on dcdra; e.g. he cites the view of the Gaudas that on a fasting day or Sraddha day one should not employ the twig used in dantadhavana and that when there 15 Ekadasi on two days a house-holder should observe a fast on the first and a yati on the second. It appearsthat he was not a Gauda but rather a Maithila. The India Office ms. of the vivada portion of the Smrtisara is dated sainvat 1614 (i. €. 1558 A. D. ). Another ms. of the same portion (vide Mitra’s Notices, vol. V, p. 232, No. 1913) was copied in Laksmana samvat 363 i.e. 1469-1470 A. D. Salapani quotes the Smrtisira in his Durgotsavaviveka. Misarumiéra in his Vivada- candra several times refers to the opinions of the Smrtisara.®% Hence it follows that the Smrtisara was composed before the last quarter of the 14th century. Candeévara in his voluminous work ५५ ०.४. न बाधे; कालसंबोधान्निसरगोस्ति न विक्रय इति वचनात्‌ कालसंयोधः काला- Tart Fry व्यधिकरणम्‌ । भोग्याधिविषयमिति स्मृतिसारः | folio 5a of faagaeg ( 7. 0. ms. No. 57 of 1888-84) ; अत oy स्मृतिसारे यदा पितैव Sager संसं ( संृे 1) तद्‌, सदनं संृपुत्रो गृहीयानाससृषटु संर नस्तु संमृष्टीत्यविशेषेणमिधानादित्यु्छम्‌ \ folio 87 b ; vide also 57 b for another reference to स्मृतिसार, | अ History of Dharmatustra nowhere refers to Harinatha nor does the latter refer to him, Hence they were probably contemporaries or not separated by any appreciable interval of time. As Harinatha mentions the Kalpataru and Harihara, he must be later than about 1250 A.D. If Ganeé- varamisra®9s mentioned by Harinatha be the author of the Sugati- sopana ( which is extremely probable ) who was an uncle of Cande- Svara, then Harinatha cannot be earlier than about 1300 A. 0, and flourished at about the same time as Candeévara, viz, the first half of the 14th century A.D. Harinatha is quoted by Vacaspati- migra in his Dvaitanirnaya, by Raghunandana ( in Udvahatattva vol. I, pp. 108, 119, Abnikatattva vol. I, p. 240, Suddhitattva vol. II, p. 240), Kamalakara, Nilakantha and a host of other later writers, In the Ekadasitattva p. 45 Harinatha is spoken of as upajivya by Vardhamana and Vacaspati. There are several works styled Smrtisira €. g. of Kesavagarma ( Mitra’s Notices, vol. II. p. 76), of Yadavabhisana-bhattacarya ( Mitra’s Notices, vol. IV p. 213 No. 1642 ), of Devayajiiika ( D. C. Ms. No. 266 of 1884-87 and 344 of 1886-92, the latter being called Smrtisarasarhgraha ). Hence it often becomes difficult to say in the case of later works, what particular Smptisdra is being quoted. 92. Madhavacarya Madhavacarya is the brightest star in the galaxy of daksinatya authors on dharmasastra. His fame stands only second to that of the great Sankaracarya. He hada most versatile genius and either himself wrote or inspired his brother Sayana and others to write voluminous works on almost all branches of Sanskrit literature. Asan erudite scholar, as a far-sighted statesman, as the bulwark of the Vijayanagara kingdom in the first days of its foundation, as a sarhnyasin given to peaceful contemplation and renunciation in old age, he led such a varied and useful life that even to this day his is a name to conjure with. Among his numerous works two deserve special mention here, viz : the Paragara-madhaviya, his com- mentary on the ParaSarasmpti and the Kalanirnaya. 895 श्वः watenia निश्ित्य दाता विप्राननिमन््रयेत्‌ । निरामिषं wage ThE गृहे । असंभवे RA बह्मणास्ताक्निवेद्येत्‌ ॥ अत्र गणेन्वरमिभा; । शं TT निरा- मिषसरुद्धोजनविरिषे निमन्प्रणविधायक्मतो निमन्त्रणाद्गानि निहामिषसरुद्धोजना- १ श्रुतिबलात्‌ । स्मृतिसार (1, 0. ms, No. 1488 ). 9%. Muadhavictrya $76 The ParaSara-madhaviya has been published several times, the edition in the B. I. series and in the Bombay Sanskrit series being the best known. In the following the Bombay edition has been used. This work is very extensive and occupies about 2300 पण ed pages in the Bombay edition. Itis not a mere commentary on Paragara’s text, but is in the nature of a digest of civil and religious law. The original smrti of Paragara contains no verses on vyavahara, but Madhavacarya hangs, on the slender peg of a single verse of Parasara calling upon the king to rule his subjects with righteous- ness, his treatise on vyavahara that covers a little over a fourth part of the whole commentary ( vide note 341 above an ParaSara ). The Paragara-madhaviya is a work of authority on modern Hindu Law in southern India.*9° His style is lucid and he generally avoids lengthy and abstruse discussions. Besides numerous smtti- karas and puranas he names the following authors and works -—- Apararka, Devasvamin, Puranasara, Prapaiicasara, Medhatithi, Viva- ranakara ( on the Vedantasatra ), Visvaripacarya, Sambhu, Sivas- vamin, Smrticandrika. The Parasara-madhaviya was amongst his earliest works. He tells us that there was no commentary on Parasara before him.®97 The Kalanirnaya of Madhavacarya has been published several times. In the following the B. I. edition has been used. He states that he wrote this work after he composed his commentary on the Parasarasmrti.89® The work is divided into five prakaranas. The first ( Upodghata ) deals with a scholastic disquisition on kala (time ) and its real nature ; the 2nd (called vatsara ) speaks of the year, its various lengths according as it is candra, savana or sara, of the two ayanas, of the seasons and their number, of the months (ca@ndra and saura), of the intercalary months, and the religious acts allowed and forbidden in intercalary months, of the two paksas (fortnights ); the third prakaraua ( pratipat- prakarana ) deals with the meaning of the word tithi, duration of a 896 2 Mad. H.C. R. p. 206 at ए. 217; 11 Moo. I. A. ए. 487 at p. 508; 1. L. R.35 Mad. 158 at p. 156. 87 पराशरस्मृतिः पर्वेनं stem fag: । aa माधवर्येण तदभ्याख्यायां पयस्यते ॥ 9४) Intre verse. ॥ 8 भ्यारूयाय माधवाचार्य धर्मान्पाराशरानथ | तदनुष्ठानकालस्व निर्णयं wage: ॥ 4th Intro. verse of कृलनिर्णय, $76 History of Dharmatiistra titht, the fifteen tithis of a paksa, two kinds of tithis, viz. Suddha (i.e. not intermixed with another titht on the same day ) and viddha ( intermixed with another 1 on same day ), rules about the preference of the first tithi for particular religious rites and obser- vances ( for Gods and Manes ) when intermixed with the preceding and following tithts, the fifteen mubartas of the day and of the night; the fourth ( dvitiyadi-tithi-prakarana ) extends the application of the rules about pratipad to the tithis from the second to the fifteenth and decides on what titht ( whether intermixed with the preceding or the following ) certain vratas, such as Gaurivrata on the third, Janmastami on the 8th, were to be performed ; the fifth ( prakiryaka i. €. miscellaneous ) deals with rules about the deter- mination of naksatras for various acts, the yogas and karayas and rules about sarhkranti and eclipses and the actions proper for them. The Kalanirnaya besides the names of numerous sages, puranas, astronomical and astrological writers mentions the following works and authors :—Kaladarsa ( p. 83 ), Bhoja (as having composed in Arya metre a work on the Saiva agama), Muharta-vidhana-sara ( p. 341 ), Vatesvarasiddhanta, Vasistha Ramayana, the Siddhanta- Siromani ( of Bhaskaracarya ), Hemadri( p. 67 his vratakbanda and youpphayda ). A good deal about the family and personal history of Madhava- carya can be gleaned from the above-mentioned two works and other treatises of Madhavacarya. From the Paraéara-madha- viya we®9 learn that he was the son of Mayana and Srimati, *hat Sayana and Bhoganatha were his younger brothers, that he was a student of the black Yajurveda and of the Baudhayana-sitra-carana and belonged to the Bharadvaja-gotra. The introductory verses and the colophon of the Prayascitta-sudhanidhi2 of Sayana corro- borate most of these particulars. A verse at the beginning of the 899 श्रीमती जननी यस्य सुकीतिंमीयणः पिता \ सायणो भोगनाथश्च मनोबुद्धी सहोद्गो ॥ यस्य बोधायनं चुर शासा यस्य च याजुषी । भारद्वाजं कुलं यस्य सर्वज्ञः स माधवः ॥ Intro. verses 6 ९०१? of पृराशरमाधर्वीयः. 900 यस्य मन्निरिरोरत्नमस्ति मायणसायणः । यः स्याति रत्नगर्भेति यथा्थयति पार्थवम्‌ ॥ and the 0010790४ इति माधवमोगनाथसहोदरस्य मायणनन्दनस्य सायणाचायस्य &o. Descriptive cat. of Madras Govt, Sanskrit mss. vol. VII. Pp. 9620 No. 3490. The king referred to is सङ्गम, 96, Madhavicirya 377 Kalanirnaya tells us that Vidyatirtha, Bharatitirtha and Srikantha were his teachers.9°t The ParaSara-Madhaviya highly eulogises9* Madhava, compares him to divine and semi-divine councillors like Angirasa of Indra and says that he was the hereditary teacher ( kulaguru )and mantrin of king Bukkana ( or Bukka ). The colo- phons to the several works of Sayana, the younger brother of Madhavacarya, show that these brothers were closely connected with four rulers of the Vijayanagar dynasty, viz. Bukka and his son Harihara, Kampa and his son Sanigama. In the Yajfiatantra-su- dhanidhi} ( ms. in the Bhau Daji collection ) Sayana, the author of the bhasyas on the vedas, is said to be the kulaguru of Harihara, son of Saigama. In the Guruvarnsa-kavya ( Vanivilisa Press ed. ) it is said that Vidyaranya was the pupil of Vidyatirtha, that he com- posed Vedabhiasyas and published them in the names of Sayana and Madhava, that Harihara and Bukka were the most valiant of the five sons of Sangama (v. 48), that -Vira Rudra was the sovereign of Harihara and Bukka and was defeated by the suratraya i.c. sultan. The same work says that Vidyaranya: founded Vijayanagari in Sake 1258, vaisakha guddha 7 Sunday (i. €. 3oth April 1335 A. D. ) and crowned Harihara king.993a Burnell in his introduction to the Varhgabrahmana started the theory that Sayana and Madhava were identical and put forward an esoteric meaning on the verse that states that Sayana and Bhoganatha Mae पप्य विनेकतीर्थपद्वीमाम्नायतीरथे परं मज्जन्‌ सञ्ननसङ्गर्तीथनिपुणः GaAs रयन्‌ । लष्धामाकलयन्पभावलहरीं श्रीभारतीतीथैतो विययातीर्थमुषश्रयन्‌ हृदि भजे श्रीकण्ठमब्याहृतम्‌ 1 810 verse of काटनिर्णय, 0५ TET नलस्य सुमतिः शेव्यस्य मेधातिधिर्म्यो धर्मसुतस्य वैम्यनृपतेः स्वोजा निमेगेतमिः । प्रत्यग्दृषटिरर्न्धतीसहचरो रामस्य ॒पुण्यात्मनो agar विभोरभूत्कुल- THR तथा माधवः ॥ Ath verse of परा. मा, ०0१ तस्यामुदन्वयगुर्सरतच्वसिदन्तदेषिता | सर्वज्ञः सायणाचार्य मायणार्यतनू द्रवः | उपेनदरस्येव यस्यासीदिन्द्रः सुमनसां प्रियः । महाक्रतूनामाहत माधवार्यः सहोदरः ॥ अधीताः तकला tart च दृष्टाथंगौरवाः | त्वत्मणीतेन तद्भाष्यमरदीपेन प्रथीयसा ॥ Intro, verses 7, 8, 14. ५५५ नागष्वकेरमित इह शके श्चालिवाहस्य याते erated शुमसमुचिते मासे वैशासनाम्नि । शङ्खे पक्षे शुगुणपितृभे सूयवारे ger सप्तम्यां श्नीविजयनगरी HAR नि्ममेन्द्र; ॥ गृरवशकाव्य V1. 8. | H. D. 48. $78 History of Dharmhatistra were the younger brothers of Madhava. But the facts as culled from the works of these two great men and the inscriptions of contemporary Vijayanagara kings are too strong for the hypothesis of Burnell and make it look absurd. The whole subject about the relationship of Madhava, Sayana and Bhoganatha has been carefully examined by Rao Bahadur R. Narsimhachar in Ind. Ant. vol. 45 pp. 1-6 and 17ff and the theory of Burnell has been thoroughly refuted. Siyana and Bhoganatha were as real personages as Madha- vacarya himself. Madhavacarya in his later years became a sashnyasin and was named Vidyaranya. To the items of evidence adduced by R. B.R. Narsimhachar for establishing the identity of Madhava and Vidyaranya( Ind. Ant. vol. 45 p. 18 ) I may add one more. The Viramitrodaya ascribes the commentary on Parasara composed by Madhava to Vidyaranya.2* It has however to be noted that the Guruvarhsakivya ( Vanivilasa Press ed. ) says ( V. 41-44 ) that Vidyaranya was different from both Sayana and Madhava. The chronology of the kings of Vijayanagara has been a fruitful source of controversy. It is not necessary to go into that chrono- logy in great detail here. It may be studied in such works as Sewell’s ‘ Forgotten empire’ andin E. I. vol. III. p. 36, E. I. vol. XIV 2. 68, E. I. vol. XV p. 8. The following pedigree?°s will be sufficient for the purpose of connecting Madhava and his brothers with the kings of Vijayanagara. The earliest inscription is that of Harihara I dated Sake 1261 ( 1339-40 A.D.) wherein Harihara 904 व्याख्यानं Fé शङ्कव चनं वियारण्य श्रीचरणः पराशरस्मृतिरीकायां पेतृकद्रष्यविभाग्काले स्वधृताल्करादिकमपि कन्या प्रारोतीत्याह शङ्क इति । वीर्‌० ए. 588 ; vide p. 672 ‘ विद्यारण्य चरणेक्तं ited तस्माननिरिद्धिया इत्य दिश्रतिभ्याख्याने तु aot दाय भ्रह्णत्रतिषेधत्वमेवास्याः भ्रतेनस्तीति i’, This refers to the remarks in परा. मा, vol. IIL. p.538. ` 905 et I ee eee eee हरिहर 1 कन्य Kara युक्तं I AT yar (fake 1261 ) | सङ्गम I ever 11 ( 1879-1399 A. D. ). ( ake 1278 ) II ( dake 1828 ) 98, Madhavicairya $79 *s said to be a MahamandaleSvara and is spoken of as ‘ Sri-Vira- Hariyappa-Vodeya.’ 9°° The colophon of the Madhaviya Dhatu- vrtti describes Madhava as the great minister of Satgamaraja, the son of Kamparaja.9°7 The Bitragunta grant in Sake 1278 ( 1356 A. D. ) by Sangama II at the request of his teacher Srikanthanatha shows that Bhoganatha?°* who composed the contents of the grant was a narmasaciva ( gay or humorous companion ) of Sangama II. We saw above that Srikantha was a teacher of Madhavacarya ana that Bhoganatha was the youngest brother of Madhavacarya. Bhoga- natha in order to be a poet and a narmasaciva of a reigning sovereign must have been a grown-up man in 1356 A. 0. and so Madhava- carya must have been quite an elderly person about that time. The Kalanirnaya tells us that in the cyclic year Isvara following immediately after sake 1258 sravaya was an intercalary month and that in the cyclic year Bhava that preceded sake 1258 (i.e. in Sake 1256 ) Falguna was an intercalary month and then examines the intercalary months that occurred iu the cyclic years up to Vikari thereafter ( i. €. up to Sake 1281 ).9°% As the Kalanirnaya examines the intercalary months from sake 1256 (i.e. 1334 A.D.) to sake 1281 (1. €. 1359 A. 70. ), it follows that it was either composed during these years or immediately after this period. The Paragara- madhaviya was composed before the Kalanirnaya. Rao Bahadur Narsimhachar states that in a copperplate grant dated 1386 A. D. it is said that Harihara( II) gave in the presence of Vidyaranya- sripada certain donations to three scholars who were the promoters ee ee 006 | महामण्डे्बरपुर्प्िमसमुद्धाधिपतिश्रीवीरहरियिष्पवोडेय ' Int. Ant. vol. X, p. 69. 90 श्रीमतू्वपभ्िमदक्षिणसमुद्राधीन्वरकम्पराजसुतसङ्गमराजमहामन्तरिमायणपुत्रमाधवसदोदर- सायणाबार्यरूता भाधवीया वृत्तिः । 008 इति भोगनाथसुधिया सङ्गभमूपालनमंसचिवेन । भीकण्ठपुरसमृदथे शसनपतरेषु िलि- सिताः श्डछेकाः y E. I. vol. IIT. at p. 30. ' तादृशं चाधिमासमुदाहरामः । अष्पश्चाशयुकशतहयाथिके शकवषोणां सहसे गते सति समनन्तरभावी योयमीश्वरसंवत्सरस्तस्मिन्ध्रावणमासोधिकः । ततः ar यो मावसंवत्सरस्तस्मिन्‌ फल्गुनमासोधिकः ... ननु अधिकमासस्य Bia व्यमिचरति म्यूनाधिकसंख्याया अपि दशनात्‌ । तथा हि यथोकतेन्वरसवत्तरात्तरभार्ेनि चिन्रभानुसंवत्तरे वैशासमासोधिकः ... ` वथा दुर्मससंवत्सरे भावणमासोधिकः। हेमरम्बिविलम्बिसंवत्सरट् यब्यवहिते विकारिसवत्सरे seaside । तथा च तन्न पथेत्रिशत्वं संपयते | काटनिणेय Pp. 70-71. 380 History of Dharmatisira ( pravartaka ) of the commentaries on the four Vedas ( Ind. Ant, vol. 45 p. 19). Another inscription speaks of Vidyaranya in 1378 A. D.9°9 This shows that Madhavacirya had become a Saninyasin at leastin 1377 A.D. Tradition says that Vidyaranya died in 1386 A. D. at the ripe old age of 90. Therefore we shall not be far wrong if we place the literary activity of Madhava-Vidya- ranya between 1330-1385 A.D. From the remarks about inter- calary months it appears that the Parasgaramadhaviya and Kalanir- nuya were composed between 1335-1360 A. D. There was a tradition among pandits that it was Madhavacarya who composed bhasyas on the Vedas and ascribed them to his brother Sayana. Kasinatha, in his Vitthala-rimantra-sara-bhasya says so.9*° Great confusion has been caused by identifying Madhava-Vidyi- ranya with another scholar named Madhava who was also a mantrin of Bukka, who was a great warrior and was governor of Banavase and the country round Goa on the western coast. Ina grant9'' of the village Kucara, also called Madhavapura, dated fake 1313 (1391 A. D.), it is said that he routed the armies of the Turuskas, wrested Goa the capital of Konkana from them and re-established the temple of Saptanatha (i. €. Sapta-kotisvara ). There is another inscription dated Sake 1290 (i.e. 1368 A. D. ) where the great minister ( Maha- pradhana ) Madhavanka is stated to have ruled over Banavase 12000 under king Bukkaraya (Ind. Ant. vol. IV, p. 206). Fleet is wrong in identifying the minister Madhavanka with Madhavacirya- Vidyaranya. Another grant from Goa (found by Dr. Bhau Daiji ) says that Madhava-mantrin, son of Caundibhatta, established the linga of Saptanatha( JBBRAS vol. 9, p. 228 ). Vide E. C. vol. VII, ` 50147 No. 375 dated gake 1268 (Sunday Madhava 30, i. e. r1th Feb. 1347 ), where we are told that Madhavamantrin was governor of Candragutti, capital of Banavase 12000, that he was minister of Marapa, younger brother of Harihara I and that he was a disciple of 909 Evigraphia Carnatica, vol. VI. ए 07930. 10 कथं तहिं माधवाचायर्वेदमाण्यादेष Mame: स्वरातुर्नाम किखितमिति Beers &c. | folio 37 b of the विदलक्ङन््रसारभाष्य (D. ©, ms. No. 100 of 1869-70). 911 गोवामिधां कोङ्कुणराजधानीमन्येन मन्येरुणद्णवेन । प्रति्ितास्तश्र तुदष्कलहूनुतपास्ध दोष्णा भुवनेकवीरः ॥ उभ्मूलितानामकरोल्मतिषठं भीसपमाथादिसुधामृजां यः । JBBRAS vol. IV, p. 115 ( text ), p. 107 ( translation ). 9%, Madhavicirya 384 Kriyasakti, a Saiva teacher. In E. C. vol. VII, Shikarpur 281 dated fake 1290 Kartika bahula 8 (i.e. 15th November 1368 ) Madhava ;5 said to have been a son of Caunda of the Angirasa gotra and a minister of Bukka I and his guru is said to have been 2611252 Kriyasakti. From this it follows that the Madhava mantrin who was a governor of Banavase and Goa and was living in 1391 A. D. was the son of Caundibhatta and cannot be identified with Madhava- cirya who was the son of Mayana. There is a ms. in the Bombay University Library of a work called Kalanirnayakarika in 130 verses, which contains the introduc- tory verses of the Kalanirnaya dealing with the contents, though in a somewhat different order. There are several commentaries on the Kalanirnaya, viz. Kalanirnayadipika by Ramacandricarya com- posed about 1450 A. D., a commentary called Laksmi by Laksmidevi, wife of Vaidyanatha Payagunda. There is a Vivarana of the Kala- nirnayadipika, by Nrsimha, son of Ramacandracarya (vide D. €, Ms. No. 99 of 1871-72 ). 93. Madanapala and Visvesvarabhatta The Madanaparijata compiled under the patronage of king Madanapala by Vigvesvarabhatta is a famous work. Like Bhoja, Niadanapala seems to have been a great patron of learning and several works are attributed to him. At least four works on dharmagastra are ascribed to him (i.e. were written under his patronage ) viz the Madanaparijata, Smrtimaharnva or Madana- maharnava, Tithinirnayasara and Smrtikaumudi. The Madanaparijata is an extensive work printed in the B. I. series. There are 23 introductory verses, the first 13 of which give the genealogy of Madanapala. In the printed edition these 13 verses are stated to have been added by Purobita Sri-Ramadeva. The last of the introductory verses states that the work was com- posed after a careful study of Hemadri, Kalpavrksa (i. e. Kalpataru ), Apararka, Smpticandrika, Smftyarthasira and Mitaksara.9'? That Madanapala was only the patron and not the real author of the ° VRSCA TANS AIA स्मृतिचन्दिकां च । मिता्रादीनवलोक्य FET नियध्यते संग्रहतो निबन्धः ॥ $80 History of Dharmatistra ( pravartaka ) of the commentaries on the four Vedas ( Ind. Ant, vol. 45 p. 19). Another inscription speaks of Vidyaranya in 1378 A. [2.१० This shows that Madhavaciarya had become a samnyasin at leastin 1377 A.D. Tradition says that Vidyaranya died in 1386 A. D. at the ripe old age of 90. Therefore we shall not be far wrong if we place the literary activity of Madhava-Vidya- ranya between 1330-1385 A.D. From the remarks about inter- calary months it appears that the Paragaramadhaviya and Kalanir- Naya were composed between 1335-1360 A. D. There was a tradition among pandits that it was Madhavacarya who composed bhasyas on the Vedas and ascribed them to his brother Sayana. Kasinatha, in his Vitthala-rimantra-sara-bhasya says so.9'° Great confusion has been caused by identifying Madhava-Vidy4- ranya with another scholar named Madhava who was also a mantrin of Bukka, who was a great warrior and was governor of Banavase and the country round Goa on the western coast. Ina grant??? of the village Kucara, also called Madhavapura, dated Sake 1313 ( 1391 A. D.), it is said that he routed the armies of the Turuskas, wrested Goa the capital of Konkana from them and re-established the temple of Saptanatha (1. €. Sapta-kotiSvara ). There is another inscription dated fake 1290 (i.e. 1368 A. D. ) where the great minister ( Maha- pradhana ) Madhavanka is stated to have ruled over Banavase 12000 under king Bukkaraya (Ind. Ant. vol. IV, p. 206). Fleet is wrong in identifying the minister Madhavanka with Madhavacarya- Vidyaranya. Another grant from Goa (found by Dr. Bhau Daiji ) says that Madhava-mantrin, son of Caundibhatta, established the linga of Saptanatha( JBBRAS vol. 9, p. 228 ). Vide E. C. vol. VIII, -Sorab No. 375 dated Sake 1268 ( Sunday Madhava 30, i. €, 11th Feb. 1347 ), where we are told that Madhavamantrin was governor of Candragutti, capital of Banavase 12000, that he was minister of Mirapa, younger brother of Harihara I and that he was a disciple of [रीं 909 Hvigraphia Carnatica, vol. VI. ए 07930. 910 कथं ate माधवाचयरवेदमाष्यादिषु सायणादे; स्वश्रातुर्नाम लिसितमिति बेत्काश्ण्येन &c. | folio 37 b of the EOE TACT (D. ©, ms. No. 100 of 1869-70). 911 गोवाभि्धां कोङ्कणराजधानीमन्येन मन्येरुणदर्णवेन । प्रतिहितां स्तन्न तुदष्कलषटनुताव्ध दोष्णा भुवनैकवीरः ॥ उन्मूलितानामकरोल्मतिषठां॒श्रीसप्तनाथादिसधायुणां यः | JBBRAS vol. IV, p. 115 ( text ), p. 107 ( ¢ranslation ). 98, Madhavacirya $81 Kriyasakti, a Saiva teacher. In E. C. vol. VII, Shikarpur 281 dated Sake 1290 Kartika bahula 8 (i.e. 15th November 1368 ) Madhava is said to have been a son of Caunda of the Angirasa gotra and a minister of Bukka I and his guru is said to have been Kaégivilasa Kriyasakti. From this it follows that the Madhava manirin who was a governor of Banavase and Goa and was living in 1391 A. D. was the son of Caundibhatta and cannot be identified with Madhava- carya wno was the son of Mayana. There is a ms. in the Bombay University Library of a work called Kalanirnayakarika in 130 verses, which contains the introduc- tory verses of the Kalanirnaya dealing with the contents, though in a somewhat different order. There are several commentaries on the Kalanirnaya, viz. Kalanirnayadipika by Ramacandracarya com- posed about 1450 A.D., a commentary called Laksmi by Laksmidevi, wife of Vaidyanatha Payagunda. There is a Vivarana of the Kala- nirnayadipika, by Nrsithha, son of Ramacandracarya ( vide D. C. Ms. No. 99 of 1871-72 ). 93. Madanapala and Visvesvarabhatta The Madanaparijata compiled under the patronage of king Madanapala by ViSvesvarabhatta is a famous work. Like Bhoja, Madanapala seems to have been a great patron of learning and several works are attributed to him. At least four works on dharmagastra are ascribed to him (i.e. were written under his patronage ) viz the Madanaparijata, Smytimaharnva or Madana- maharnava, Tithinirnayasdra and Smrtikaumudi. The Madanaparijata is an extensive work printed in the ए. I. series. ‘There are 23 introductory verses, the first 13 of which give the genealogy of Madanapala. In the printed edition these 13 verses are stated to have been added by Purobita Sri-Ramadeva. The last of the introductory verses states that the work was com- posed after a careful study of Hemadri, Kalpavrksa (i. €. Kalpataru ), Apararka, Smpticandrika, Smptyarthasira and Mitaksara.9*? That Madanapala was only the patron and not the real author of the 91 हेमाद्रिकरपद्रुमसापराकंस्मत्यथंसारान्‌ स्मृतिचन्दिकां च । मिताक्षरादीनवलोकष्य TT निबध्यते संग्रहतो निबन्धः ॥ 382 Ristory of Dharmatastra work is made clear in several places. In the introductory verse 20 it is stated that the work was compiled through (lit. by the mouth of ) learned men.9"3_ In two places in the body of the work? it is said that the author has explained the matter under discussion in his work called Subodhini, a commentary on the Mitaksara. There- fore the Madanaparijata was really composed by ViSvesvarabhatta, the author of the Subodhini. The Madanaparijata contains nine stabakas ( bunches i. €. chapters ) on brahmacarya, the dharmas of householders, the daily duties ( abnika-krtya), the sarmhskaras from garbhadhana onwards ; impurity on birth and death, the puri- fication of various substances ( dravyasuddhi ), sraddha, dayabhaga ( partition and inheritance ) and prayascitta. In the portion on the Dayabhaga it very closely follows the Mitaksara. Its style is simple and lucid. Besides the authors and works mentioned above it cites those noted below.9'5 There is a work called Maharnava ascribed to Mandhata, a son of Madanapala. In several mss. of this work deposited in the Deccan?'* College there are introductory verses giving the genealogy of Madanapala that agree almost word for word with the introduc- tory verses of the Madanaparijata. Moreover two verses that speak of VisveSvarabhatta occur here also as well as in the Madanaparijata and Subodhini. This work also is said to have been compiled by 913 श्रीमानयं मदनपूर्वकपारिजातनामाङ्कितं स्मृतिपथानुगतं निषन्धम्‌ । वणौश्रमभमुखधमं- विवेचनाय विहन्मुसेन सुरूती मितमातनोति ॥ 914 यथा चायमेव क्रमस्तथारमाभिरुपपादितो विज्ञानेन्वर्टदकिायां सुबोधिन्यां दायभाग- प्रकरणे | मदनपारिजात p. 654 ; vide p. 603 also for similar words. 915 आचारसागर, MRT, गोविन्द्राज, चिन्तामणि (० arg. 2. 601), धमैविदृति (p. 772), नारायण, मण्डनमिश्न, मेधातिथि, रत्नावक्ि ( ०० erg, 2. 607 ), शिव- स्वामिन्‌ ( ४. 619), सुरेश्वर, स्मृतिमजरी ( 2. 554), स्मृतिमहमणेव. ` 916 For the महार्णव vide D. 0. ms. क ०.11 of 1882-83 and Nos. 259 and 260 of 1886-1893. No. 260 does not contain the verses about the genealogy, but the twoverses माता पुष्य ° and मतिर्येषां ( which are 21 and 22 in the मदनपारिजात ) occur in all the three; in No. 181 and No. 259 the verse माता yoyo ०८०४४ in the introdoctory verses and the verse nfatat occurs at the end of the work and in No. 260 the two verses Aare the 2nd and Srd of the introductory verses, 98. Madanapiila and Vitvetvarabhatta 383. Mandhata through the learned.9'7_ It is said to have been based on a study of the Sruti, the smrtis and the purayas. The work is divided into 40 tarangas (waves:). The principal subject'® of the work is to describe how the various diseases which human bodies are heir to are the result of evil deeds done in past lives ( this subject being called Karmavipaka in dharmaégastra works ) and to prescribe various rites and penances for the eradication of the evil results of evil deeds. Among the various rites and penances that are set forth in great detail may be mentioned the Kasmanda- homa, Radraikadagini, Maharudrabhiseka, Vinayakaganti, the Nava- grahayajiia &c. The Maharnava mentions the Karmavipaka of Satatapa, the Caturvarga-cintamani ( folio 234 a of D. C. no. 259 of 1886-1892 ), the Mitaksara, the Karmavipaka-samuccaya &c. It is worthy of note that in the Smsti-kaumudi the authorship of the Maharnava is claimed by the author himself and is not ascribed to Madanapila’s 501.9"9 The Tithinirnayasara is another work compiled under Madana- pala. Stein in his cat. of mss. at Jammu ( p. 306 ) gives extracts from this work. The first fourteen verses are the same as those in the Madanuparijata. It appears to have been composed by Visvanatha, which is most probably a paraphrase of the name VisveSvara.9?° The Smrtikaumudi contains an introduction of 17 verses, 713 of which set forth the genealogy of Madanapala. The fourteenth verse tells us that Madanapala composed works called Yantraprakaéa, Mahiarnava, Parijata, Siddhantagarbha and Tithinirnayasara.92 The 15th verse says that he composes the Smrtikaumudi through 97 सोयं सुशृतबिधाता sora तनोति मान्धाता Agar मतिमान्‌ सत्छतिरत्नं ngild नाम ॥ 18th verse in D.C. ms, No. 259 of 1886-92, 018 The work begins ¢ तन्न तावदरक्ष्यमाणसकलकर्मोपयोगित्वेन कर्मविपाकरूपयोगादिनि- व्यथं प्रायन्धित्तदेरवश्यकपैष्यता प्रतिपायते 1’. 9४ विनायकशान्तिपभरक रोश्मामिर्म॑हा्णवे निरूपितः | ०२ श्रीविन्वनाथसुधिया स्मृतितत्त्वमागेपान्थेन शाज्ञविलसन्मतिपःय्वेन । अस्मिन्‌ व्यापि ` तिथिनिर्णयसारनान्नि भन्ये कियानसिटोकहिते प्रयासः ॥ 921 For the स्पृतिकीौमदी, vide Aufrecht’s Oxford cat. p. 275 b, I. 0. cat. p. 526, ०४ यन्श्रमक्ाक्चसमह्मभवपरिजातसिद्धान्तगभंतिभिनिर्णंयत्तारमुख्याः । THAT येन रचिताः &o. 364 Kiistory of Dharmatistra the learned.9*3 The 17 verse says that his predecessors have generally dilated upon the dharmas of the three higher vargas and the dharmas of the gadra have not been dealt with by them asa principal topic, therefore he would clearly expound the dharmas of the last varna. At the end of the ms. in the I. O.cat. it is described as the younger sister of the Madanaparijata and of the Maharnava.9*+ This is not found in the D.C. ms. which was copied in samvat 1615. This work is divided into four kalol- lasas, each kalollasa being subdivided into kiranas (rays). The first kalollasa has two kiranas, the second has four, the third and fourth five kiranas each. The subjects dealt with are: I two kinds of Sadras, viz : the kevalasaidra ( simple Sadra ) and one who is of mixed descent, being born of a Sadra woman from a man of the higher castes ; the mixed castes ; II. general discourses on the Sadra’s adhikara for engaging in various acts and performing various rites, such as the study of the vedas and smrtis, the performance of garbhadhana and other sarhskaras and the consecration of sacred fires ; sarndhyavandana; the siidra’s capacity for attaining the knowledge of brahman ; III. marriage; different forms of marriage, prohibited degrees of blood relationship ( sapindya ), the various rites of marriage such as kanyadana; such sarhskaras as nama-karana ( naming the child ), the duties of Sidras in ordinary and difficult times ; asauca for sudras; the various Sraddhas for them ; the letting loose of a bull in honour of the dead ; IV. Sadra’s daily duties such as auca, brushing the teeth, baths in the morning and at other times, brabmayajna, tarpaya, vaisvadeva, daily sraddha, dinner, &c. The Smrtikaumudi mentions among others Apararka, Krtya- kalpataru, Mitaksara, Medhatithi, Yajnaparsva and Smrtimaiijari. It also quotes from the Vedanta-kalpataru*s and the author claims the Madanaparijata as his own work. It has been seen how all the four works set out above were composed under the patronage of Madanapala and how they were का ------------------------------------------~--------- ~~ 988 विदरन्मुखेन तनुते Madame unt स्मृतिकौमुदीं सः ॥ 9४५ अनेन कृतिना शृता स्मतिपदाङ्कता कोमुदी महाणवसहोद्री मदनपारिजालानुजा | 925 यदुक्तं सत्यामप्युत्यत्तो प्रवाहस्याविर्छत्तरनादित्वमिति तश्च कायीएमके संसारे | ATS वेदा्तकश्पतरौ ॥ तदाशरतयुपरकानां (1) व्य्कीनामेकया विना । अनादिकालाृत्तिय सा कायनिादिता मतेति ॥ folio $a of the D. 0, ms. No, 61 of 1872-73 ; folio 558 of the same has ¢ grr च प्रा्प॑कानि मद्नपारिजितिष्मामिर्दर्धितानि १, 98. Madanapila and Viévesvarabhatta 985 probably from the pen of VisveSvarabhatta. There is one more work on Dharmaégastra which VisveSvarabhatta composed in his own name without the shelter of a patron’s name. It is the Subodhini, a commentary on the Mitaksara of Vijnanesvara. The vyavahara portion of it has been published in Bombay by Mr. S. 5S. Setlur and also by Mr. J. R. Gharpure. Mr. Govind Das had seen portions of the Subodhini on the prayascitta section also. The Subodhini does not comment on each word of the Mitaksara but explains only important passages. Itis a learned work. This was the earliest composition of ViSvesvarabhatta, since it is mentioned even in the Madanaparijata. The first verse of the Subodhini is also the opening verse of the Maharnavaand of the Smrtikaumudi.9?6 From the verses??? 21 and 22 in the introduction to the Madana- parijata it appears that Visvesvara was the son of Pedibhatta and Ambika, that he was of the Kausikagotra and was the pupil of Vyasaranya-muni. In the Subodhini also the verse ‘mata &c.’ occurs at the end with slight suitable variations and the verse ‘matiryesim’ in the beginning. The second introductory verse in Mr. Gharpure’s edition makes ViSveSvara the son of Appabhatta,928 while Mr. Setlur reads ‘ Pettibhatta’ which is probably a misreading for Pedibhatta. From his father’s name it appears that Visvcsvara was a native of the Dravida country??? and migrated to Northern India in search of patronage after he wrote the Subodhini. Visvesvara is regarded as one of the leading authorities of the Benares School rn re eee accion ee ee » कछ 9 9 गा भनक णज जाम्‌ = > ना नका —— = ~ न~ न~ ~ om | (न 926 नुमः सकल्कल्याणभाजनाय पिनाकिने | नमां लक्ष्मानिवासाय द्वेताय गिर्‌ नमः ॥ सुषोधिनी. The स्मृतिकोमुदी ( Aufrecht’s Oxf. cat. p 275b has कल्याणकारणाय) and Descriptive Oa. of Govt. Sanskrit mss. (Madras) vol, VII p..2625, No. 3495 has परमकल्याण ० and गिरे नमः. 97 मतिर्येषां शाज्ञे प्ररुतिरमणीया stag: परा शीलं श्क्यं जगति ऋजवस्ते कतिपये । चिरं चित्ते तेषां मकरतलम्‌ते स्थितिमिय। दियं व्यासारण्यप्रवरमुनिरशिष्यस्य भणितिः ॥ माता पुण्यचरिकीर्तिविभवा यस्याम्बिका नामतः शाकल्यापरभूरतिंरायं चरितः Ate महः पिता । सोयं कोशिकवंशमुषणमणिः श्रीभडविश्वन्वरो वेद्स्मातमते नयं च सपद वाक्ये weft वर्धते ॥ 98 योप्पभहात्मजः श्रीमान्‌ महटविभिन्बरः सुधीः । 929 One of thedonees mentioned in the Bitragunta grant of king Sangamg dated 1356 A. D. is Peddibbatta; vide E.I. vol. III at p.28. Bifragupta 18 in the Nellore District. He ०. 49. ५३६6 ‘History of Dharmibistra “of modern Hindu law.93° Madanapala belonged to the family of ‘Taka kings that ruled in Kastha ( modern Kath )on the Jumna ‘to ‘the north of Delhi.93: The printed Madanaparijata makes the family name to be ‘ Kastha,’ but this is most probably a wrong reading, asin the Maharnava and the other works of Madanapala ¦ the family name is distinctly stated to be Taka. The pedigree ‘of the family as gathered from the Madanaparijata and the other “works is given below. Some works such as the -Maharnava omit *mention of Sahajapala. About Sadharana itis said that he brought > about the remission of all taxes at the three tirthas ( Prayaga, Kasi “ and Gaya ).93? -930 Vide I. L. R. 16 Cal, 367 at p, 372. 081 अस्ति प्रशस्तविभवोपगतप्रशस्तिविस्तारिणी भुवि शकाधिपराजधानी । Reif विन्व- विदिता नगरीमतद्यी celia भति पुरतक्धिदिवोपि यस्याः ॥ तामुत्तरेण यमुनातटदेश- निष्ठा कष्टैःयमूदुनुषमा नगरी गरिष्ठा । यस्यामनर्पविभवोपचिता अमूवु; कष्ठान्वया महितकीर्तिजुषो मदीशा ॥ Verses 4-5 of मदनपारिजात, at the end of the मदुन्‌- विनोदनिषण्टु we read टाकान्वये महति भ्रमिभृजां विशुद्धे emit नाम॒ नगरं जयति प्रसिद्धम्‌ |, Vide Aufrecht’s Oxf.. cat, p. 275 a ( ms, of मदनपारिजिात) where the reading is टाककुटनम्बुरशा for PEPSFTM of the printed text. The pedigree is : ToT TS NETS — साधारण । सहजपालं OF TEMA मदनपाल ------- | | : getters ० श्रीम FTPs 982 तीथंन्नयीकर विमुकिमचीकरयः । verse 10 of the महाणैव, D.C. ms. No. 359 of 1886-82; कीनशिपाशचयंबदविमोचनार्थं तीन्रयीकरविमुक्तिमनलीकरयः ` vere? 10 of स्मृतिकोमुदी, 98, Madanapiila and Vitvetvarabhatta 387%: In the Saryasiddhantaviveka of Madanapala the father of Mada-.. napala 15 said to be Saharana%33 which is a Prakrit. equivalent of; Sadharana. Madanapala appears to have been a very great patron of learned men and is said to have emulated the fame of Bhoja.4. Besides the four works described above he compiled several other. works, the most famous of which is his dictionary of drugs called . Madanavinodanighantu; That work is very extensive, contains . about 2250 verses and is divided into fourteen vargas, the last of: which contains a prasasti of his family.935 This work contains the, names of medical drugs, the qualities of drugs and of dishes and of the flesh of various animals. Some of the words given as synonyms for.- Sanskrit words occur in the modern Marathi.93° We saw aboye - that his Smrtikaumudi refers to Yantra-prakasa and Siddhantagarbha . as. two of his works. These two were works on astronomy. Another work of his is the Sarya-siddhantaviveka or Vasanar- nava, which is a commentary on the Saryasiddhinta. There is a- ms. of this work in the Bhau Daji Collection of the Bombay Asiatic Society.937. Therein after giving his pedigree he says that by_ his. works on Smrtigastra, on astronomy and mathematics and on: medicine he came to be known as abhinava Bhoja.93® In this: treatise he refers to his own works already composed called Siddha- ntagarbha939 and Yantraprakaga. He also refers to a Rajamrganka - a ee 933 भवनाङ्गणयद्धवारणस्तनयस्तस्य नृपः सहारणः। उदियाय जनस्य वीक्षिते नृपतो यश्र प्रन्द्रश्रमः ॥ Sth Intro. verse of सूयसिद्धान्तविषेक (BBRAS oat. part I pp. 95-97. ). 9०4 परिशीलयता कलाकलापं विदधानेन च भूरिशो निबन्धान्‌ । मदनेन महीभूताथ येन प्रथिता नुतनमोजराजकीर्तिः ॥ Verse. 18 of मदनपास्जिातः this verse, particularly th स्मृतिकोमुदी = ® 4th pada, occurs in-the तिधिनिणयसार ( 17th verse ), (13th verse ), the महार्णव ( 13th verse in 7. 0. ms. No. 259 of 1886-93. ). 985 Vide 7, ©, mg. Nos. 1065 and 1066 of 1886-92 for मदनविनोदनिषण्ड्‌ In No. 1065 there is no प्रशस्ति 936 ©. g. such words as afeasi ( fot द्धिपुपक ) छापसी, धेवर, SCS, नागरमोथा, & 937 Vide BBRAS cat part. I. pp. 95-97 for this ms 88 मरतिदिनमुदितैनबैः पयन्धैः स्मृतिसरणौ गणिते चिकित्सिते ष । जगति विजयते fT माणरमिनवभोजं इति प्रथा यदीया ॥ 7h Intro. verse. १० अत Sete परमेयमस्मत्छते सिदान्तगरमसंज्के मदनविनोदापरनाग्नि मन्थे दरव्यम | 388 History of Dharmatastra of Bhoja and to Bhaskara’s works. The ms. was copied in sarhvai 1459, i.e. 1402-3 A. D. In the colophon of this work his birudas ( titles ) are Panditaparijata and Abhinava-Bhoya, and he is also styled Maharajadhiraja.o1° In the Madanaparijata and the Mahar. nava the dirudas are Panditaparijata and Kataramalla or Kattaramalla, A work called Anandasafijivana on singing, dancing, musical instruments and ragas is ascribed to Madanapala.4! The king Madana, son of Saharana, who is connected with the restoration of Medhitithi’s bhasya, must be this Madana. A great deal has been written concerning the date of Madanapala. The introductory verses giving the genealogy of Madanapala must be‘ held to be genuine, as they occur in the ancient ms. (D.C. No. 131 of A 1882-83 ) of Maharnava copied in sarhvat 1645 ( t588-89 A. D. ) and in the still older ms. ( dated samvat 1459) of the Strya-siddhanta-viveka. As the Madanapiarijata mentions the Smrticandrika and Hemadri’s Caturvarga-cintamani not only in-the introductory verses of the Madanaparijata but in the body of the Madanaparijata and the Maharnava, Madanapala must be certain- ly later than 1300 A.D. As the Smrtikaumudi mentions the Vedantakalpataru that was composed in the time of the Yadava princes Krsna and Mahadeva, it follows that the work was compos- ed after the third quarter of the 13th century. The Madanapari- jata is quoted in the Nrsirhhaprasida, the Antyestipaddhati of Nara- yanabhatta, the Ahnikatattava ( pp. 326, 397, 479, vol. I) of Raghu- nandana, the Sraddhakriyakaumudi (pp. 327, 489) of Govindananda. Therefore it is certainly earlier than 1500 A. D. And if we rely on the date when the ms. of the Stryasiddhantaviveka was copied (viz. 1402-3 A. D.), it follows that Madanapala flourished before १ ए गी 1400 A.D. The Madanavinodanighantu%? gives the date of its 940 इति श्रीपण्डितपार्जिाताभिनवभोजत्यादिबिरूदावीविराजमानेन मदनपारिजात-महाणव- सिद्धान्तगभं-यन्त्रप्रकाशायनेकम्नन्थकन श्रीमहाराजाधिराजेन श्रीमदनपालुदेवेन विर चितः श्रीस्‌ यंसिदान्तविवेको AAAS समाप्तः 1; but at the eud of the D. C. ms, of the स्मरतिकोमुदी, the colophonis simply इति श्रीरायमद्नपालविर- चितायां शृद्रधमेत्पिलद्योतिन्यां स्मृतिकीमुयां &०. #41 Vide Mitra’s Bikaner cat. p. 509. 42 अन्दे बरह्मजगयुगेन्वुगणिते APHASIA मासि वलक्षपक्षलारिते wat Ful anita । verse 14 of the last az in D.C. ms. No. 129 of 1884-87 and No. 1066 of 1886-92. The last has a corrupt reading ypof गुरसर्हिने. Vide Bhandarkar’s Report for 1883-84 p. 47 for the date, 98. Madanapila and Viévetvarabhatta 889 composition as ‘Brahmajagad-yugendu’ of the Vikrama era, magha 6 of the bright half and Monday (i.e. 8-1-1375 A.D. ). This was interpreted by Sarvadhikari ( Tagore Law Lectures 78. 297-298, ed. of 1922 ) as equal to 1231 of the Vikrama era (i. € 1175 A. D.). He held that ^ yuga” meant two. But herein he was entirely wrong. Besides, the date proposed by him is impossible, since it would lead us to hold that Madanapala wrote in 1175 A. D. and since, as we saw above, he could not have flourished before 1300 A.D. It has been already shown (pp. 309, 369) that the view of Sarvadhikari and others that the Parijata mentioned by Cande- gvara is the same as Madanaparijata is quite wrong. Astronomical usage as found in Bhaskara and other writers always interprets yuga9#} as meaning four ( and not two ) and hence the date of the compo- sition of the Madanavinodanighantu is 1431 of the Vikrama era (1. €. 1375 ^. 0. 2). Vide Jolly’s Tagore Law lectures pp. 14-15, Dr. Bhandarkar’s Report for 1883-84 pp. 47 and 347 and S.B.E. vol. 25, p.¢xxvn.2. Ams. of the Saryasiddhantaviveka, which is one of the last ( if not the last ) works of Madanapala is dated in 1402-3 A. D. Hence the-literary activity of Madanapala and of his protegee, VisveSvarabhatta, must be placed between 1360-1390 A. D. 94. Madanaratna The Madanaratna is an extensive digest on Dharmasastra no part of which has yet been printed. In the colophons of mss. it is also called Madanaratnapradipa or simply Madanapradipa. The work was divided into seven?4+ sections called uddyotas on samaya (or kala), 2८01-4, vyavahara, prayascitta, dana, suddli , Santi. The order ofthe various sections was the one indicated, the samayoddyota being the first part. Ihave not been able to cxamine the mss. of all the uddyotas. 9५३ ०.६. भस्कराचाये in his गणिताध्याय ( कालमानाध्याय verse 24 ) says ‹ संसा- घद्न्तसागरेथुगा्नियुग्ममूगुणेः । करमेण सुयेवत्सरेः GANA युग्यः ` where युग must mean‘ four’ and qm is employed for two. १५५ उद्योताः समयाचारण्यवहारविवेचकाः । पायग्ित्तस्य दानस्य शुदधिशान्त्योश् सपमे ॥ तच्रादो राजसिंहेन सर्वधर्मोपयोगतः । ` तन्यते मदनेनद्रेण समयस्य विनिणयः ॥ verses 24-25 of ms. of समयोयोत in Visrambag collection I. No. 146 and verses 26 and 27 in the I. O. cat. ms. (p. 587b) and Peterson's cat. of Ulwar mss. No. 1410 and extract No. 336 at p. 144. $90. History:of Dharmatietes : The Samayoddyota deals with the subjects usually treated of in works on kala, vix discussions about the year, the seasons, the. months, the intercalary months, the rules about #ithis, the rules about the proper times for various religious observances, gifts, homa, the rules about kalivarjya. There is a ms. of the Danoddyota in the Anandagrama collection at Poona (No. 2378 ). The following are the subjects treated of :- eulogy of dana ; the nature of dana, various kinds of danas ; ‘the constituent elements ( 20407 ) of dana ; the donor, proper persons for gifts, persons undeserving of gifts, what things cannot be given ‘away, proper and improper times and places for dana, measures of corn and other substances and weights and units of length &c., finding out the east and other directions, characteristics of a torana, pataka and mandapa, tula-purusa ( weighing oneself against gold or silver ), gift of a thousand cows and other magnificent gifts, dedi- cation of atank or well and planting of a garden &c. In this work the author refers to Kalpataru and to Hemadri as a daksina- tyanibandhakara. . Deccan College ms. No. 392 of 1891-95 deals with the Santi. section. It treats of rites for propitiating gods and plancts and averting the evil consequences of great or small portentous pheno- mena, such as Vinayaka-snina, sirya-Santi, navagraha-Santi, Sintis for birth on certain evil naksutras like mala, aslesa and evil astro- logical conjunctions like vyatipata, vaidhrti, samkranti ; rites for the. safety of the foetus and of the newly born infant ; ayutaboma ; laksa- homa, kotiboma &c. In-thissection sages like Uttara-Garga, Katyayana, . Narada, Baijavipa (on grhya ), Manava~samhita, Yajiavalkya, . Saunaka and purinas like the Skanda, Bhavisyottara, Visnudhar- mottara are very frequently cited. Besides the following are among: the authors and works referred to :—Apeksitarthadyotini, a com- mentary of Narayana, Karmavipakasarhgraha, Karmavipakasamuccaya, Kumiratantra promulgated by the son of Ravana, Prayogasara, Vijfianesvaracarya ( in the plural ). A ms. of the-Acaroddyota is noticed by Burnell in. his . Tanjore: cat. ( 2. 137 ० ). Stein (:in his cat. of Jammu mss. ) notices an in- complete ms. of the Vyavaharoddyota (p. 98 No. 2437). M..M. Haraprasad Sastri notices a ms, of the Prayagcittoddyota ` ( Nepal Palmleaf and Paper mss. cat. XVIII and p. 223 ) 94. Madanaraina $61 From the colophons at the end of the several mss. of the Madana- ratna it appears that the work was composed under the patronage of king Madanasithha-deva, son of Saktisirmha.s The king is styled maharajadhiraja and one of his titles is kodanda-parasurima ( meaning ^ who was a veritable Parasurama in wielding the bow ). The introductory verses?4* to the Samayoddyota in the Visram-bag collection and the Ulwar ms. refer to Delhi-deSa and its king named Mahipaladeva. Then verse 9 speaks of Damodara whose exact relationship with Mahipaladeva is not clear. Damodara is said to have made the yavanas of Malasthana ( modern Multan in the Punjab ) give up the slaughtering of cows. The whole pedigree is given below.%47 Saktisirnha is said to have eclipsed even Bhoja. 945 इति श्रीकोदण्डपरशरामेत्यादिभिरूदावलीविराजमानमानोन्नतमहाराजाधेराजशीशकतिरसिंहय- रमजमष्टरानाधिराजश्मिदनसिंहदेवषिरिाधिते मदुनरल्नप्रदीपे दानविवेकोदयोते ® ०. in ms, ( Anand&grama No. 2378 ) ; there is a similar colophon at the end of the शान्ति Section. 9५6 तस्मादाकस्मिकोयदहनषनमहस्तुत्यत पपतापज्वालातालामिभूतद्विषद्बनिपतवन्वये AE रस्य । राजा रजावतारो वरसमरधुरोदहामरामानुभावप्र्वस्तारातिभूमीपतिदनुजवयो- भून्भहीपालदेवः ॥ यत्रासीद्धवनेषु विश्रुतचणो दामोद्राख्यः रती श्रीमान्पुण्यवद्ग्रणी- ॥ = नितपिपकषमापालसङु ममुः । मूकस्थानपुरे तुरुष्कनिवहान्ते परित्याजितो येनायावाधि गोवधो यवनकैः शश्रापि ( कुञ्रापि १) न स्मर्यते ॥ verses 8 and 9 of the Ulwar ms. of समयोदृद्योत, 947 The pedigree is मेहीपाटदेव | दामोदर | देवीदास | प शक्तिर्सिंह | मदन्ति 898 History of Dharmasastra It is further said that Madanasithha 64164945 together four learned men, viz., Ratnakara, Gopinatha, Visvanatha and Gangadhara- bhatta and entrusted the composition of the digest to them. The colophons™9 at the end of the Santyuddyota in the Deccan College says that it was composed by Visvanitha, a resident of Benares and son of Bhattapdjya, a Srimali Gurjara ( Brahmana). There is a similar colophon at the end of the Prayascittoddyota noticed by M. M. Haraprasad Sastri. Since the Madanaratna mentions the Mit., the Kalpataru and Hemadri, it must be certainly later than about 1300 A. 0. It is quoted asa great authority by the writers of the 16th and 17th centuries, such as Narayanabhatta, Kamalakarabhatta, Nilakantha and Mitramisra. In the Vyavahara-mayakha Nilakantha relies upon the Madanaratna as often as ( if not oftener than ) the Mitiksara. The Viramitrodaya?s° says that the author of the Madanaratna refers to the views of the Mitaksara, Kalpataru, and Halayudha. From this it follows that the Madanaratna was composed at some time between 1350-1500. Madanasimha and his ancestors are spoken of as ruling the country about Delhi. Though Madanasimha bears the high-sounding title of maharajadhiraja it is highly probable that he was some feudatory chief under the Mahomedan rulers of Delhi. It is difficult to conceive of a period between 1300 and 1500 A. D. when a Hindu ruler was king of Delhi. It may be that during the troublous times of Muhammad Tughlak ( 1325- 1351 A.D.), when the capital was transferred from Delhi to Doulatabad, or during the weak rule of the last kings of the Tughla dynasty ( 1388-1413 A.D.) Madanasimhas’ predecessors might 948 तेनाहूय मनीषिमण्डनम्णिं सन्मिश्ररत्नाकरं गोपीनाथमनुत्तमं च सुधियं श्रीविश्वनाथ तथा । मुग्धं पण्डितमननतदुतिमतिं wea गङ्गाधरं राज्ञा शक्तिनं (कं!) सूनुना aaa प्रंभोयमारभ्यते ॥ 7, 0. oat. p. 597, No. 1681, verse 53 ; this is verse 21 in the Visrambag ms 949 महाराजाधिराजस्य मदनेन्रस्य शसनात्‌ । श्रीमाली ( लिना 1) गरेण भह्पुर्यात्मजेन वा 1 भहश्रीविन्वनाथेन काशीतीर्थनिवासिना । शान्तिकं पिकं वापि यथारालं Te तितम्‌ ॥ The Ulwar ms. ( Peterson’s Ulwarcat. No. 365 ) reads भ्रीमदिनाथगुजरेण, 950 तन्न॒ मद्नरलनकारेण मिताक्षराकल्पतरुहलायुधादिसंर्षपन्थान्तरेष्वलिसनान्निमूलत्वमस्य जङ्गमं स्थावरमिति प्राजापत्यस्य लिलनात्समूलत्वामिति दूषणमुक्लवा ke. वीर» 9.५, vide दर्‌ 9 77. 6, 29, 86, 59 for references to मदुनेरस्न 64. Madanaraina 393 have usurped some territory about Delhi and ruled over it. At all events it would not be far from correct if the Madanaratna be placed about 1425-1450 A.D. Dr. Jolly (R.u.S. p. 37) says that the Madanaratna names the Ratnakara and the Madhaviya. M. M. Haraprasad Sastri ( Report on palm-leaf and paper mss. from Nepal, Intro. pp. 31-32 ) tells us that the dynasty to which Madana- sitnhhadeva belonged ruled over Gorakhpur-Champaran ( Western Tirhut ), that Madanasithhadeva was preceded by Saktisirnhadeva, whose predecessor was Prthvisirhhadeva. The learned Sastri further says that a ms. of the Madanaratnapradipa-prayascittoddyota applies the title ‘ kodandaparasurama ° to Madana( 0. 223 ), that a ms. of the Amarakoga was copied in sarhvat 1511 ( 1454-55 A. D. ) when Madanasimha ruled over Campakaranyanagara ( p. 51 of the body of the Report ) and that a ms. of the Narasithhapurana was copied in La-sarh 339 (1457-58 A. 0.) when maharajadhiraja Madanasirhhadeva ruled over Goraksapura i. €, modern Gorakhpur (p. 29 of the Report ). The great similarity of the names Madana- pila and Madanasimha misled J. C. Ghose ( Hindu Law, vol. I, p. XIV, ed. of 1917 ) into holding that the Madanaparijata and the Madanaratna were written under Madanapala. But it is clear from the ancestry of the two kings, Madanapala and Madanasirha, and the names of the real authors of the digests ( Madanaparijata and Madanaratna ) that they have no connection with each other. 95. Sulapani Next to Jimatavahana, Salapani is the most authoritative Bengal writer on dharmasastra. Rai Bahadur M. M. Chakravarti gave a very interesting account of his works and time in JASB for 1915, PP. 336-343. The earliest work of Salapani appears to have been his Dipa- kalika, a commentary on the smyti of Yajfiavalkya. It isa very brief commentary. The portion on the dayabhaga section ( Yajiavalkya 1, verses 114-149 ) is contained in five printed pages ( vide Ghose’s Hindu Law, edition of 1917, vol. II. pp. 550-554). In this com- mentary, besides the sages he names only a few writers and works on dharma, e. g. the Kalpataru, Govindaraja, the Mitaksara, Medha- प्रधा and Vigvara pa.. Heentertained somewhat archaic views on matters of inheritance. For example, he holds that the text speak- ing of the right of the parents to succeed before the brothers of the He De $0. $04 History of Dharmastsira deceased has reference to property acquired by the deceased from his ‘father or grand-father. He explained the word ‘apratisthita’ in the sitra of Gautama ‘stridhanarh. duhitppam- aprattanam-apratisthitanarh ca’ in the same way as Apararka, Jimutavahana and the Smpticandrika.25' He says that a full brother though not re-united succeeded before a half-brother though re-united.952_ This explanation of the much canvassed verse of ४३] offered by Salapani is refered to by the Viramitrodaya.%5} The Vyavaharatattva of Raghunandana several times refers to Sulapani’s explanations of Yaj.954 Salapani wrote several small treatises on topics of dharmasastra and intended them to form part of a huge digest called Smptiviveka. Fourteen such works are known to have been so written with titles ending in the word ‘viveka,’ viz. Ekidagi-viveka, Tithi-viveka, Dattaka-vgveka, Durgotsavaprayoga-viveka, Durgotsava-viveka, Dola- yatra-viveka, Pratistha-viveka, Prayascitta-viveka, Rasayatra-viveka, Vratakala-viveka, Suddhi-viveka, Sriddha-viveka, Sarnkranti-viveka, Sarhbandha-viveka (on marriage ). Of these the Durgotsavaviveka seems to have been amongst his latest works, since he names therein five of his vivekas on dufgotsava-prayoga, pratistha, prayaé- citta, Suddhi and graddha. The Sraddha-viveka is the most famous of his works and has been printed. His Prayascittaviveka and Durgotsava-viveka have also been published, the former by Jivananda ( 1893 ) and the latter by the Sanskrit Sahitya Parisad at Calcutta in Bengali characters. In the Durgotsava-viveka he deals with the worship of Durga in Agvina and also in spring ( hence the deity is called Vasanti ). In the Durgotsava-viveka, besides such puradnas as the Kalika, Bhavisyottara, Bhagavata, Devi, he names a host of writers and works as noted below.955 In spite of Aufrecht’s view 951 अनपत्या निधना अमवृका दुर्भगाश्च । ता विना अन्वयः qseesTIe: । 952 असंसृषयपि सोद्र एव गृह्णीयान्न तु संमृष्टः सापलनभ्राता । 953 ^ याज्ञवल्क्यस्मृतिटीकायां श्रूलपाणिः। अन्योदर्यः संसृष्टी नान्योदर्यधनं गृह्णीयात्‌ | ste FRAT सोदर एव गृह्णीयात्‌ । न तु संसृष्टः सापलनभ्राता & ०. वीर्‌ 9 Pp. 682-683. 95५ °. &- अवेद्यति Weert स्वयं विवादोत्थापनं राज्ञा न कर्तव्यमिति youre: पाध्यायाः$ | भ्यवद्धर्तष्व. 965 They are: काटकोमुदी, कालमाधवीय, कालविविक; कालादशं, चक्नारायणी, जिकन, जीमूतवाहन, ज्योतिषा्णव, बालक, महाकपिलिपश्चरान्र, Teer, वसन्तराज, शारदा तिलक, श्रीकरमिश्र, श्वीदक्तापाभ्याय, संवतस्सरपदीप, analy ( of भीदस ), सार- TATA, स्मृतिसागर्‌, 95. प्रणत $95 the Sathvatsara-pradipa is not his own work. A Sdrasamuccaya is 2150 mentioned in Hemadri ( Dana-khanda page 135 ). The Smytisigara is probably the same as the Govindarnava of Sesa Nrsimnha or the work of the same name which Kullika appears to have composed. Srikaramigra is probably the ancient author referred to even by the Mitaksara. The Sraddha-viveka has several commentaries by eminent writers such as Srinatha Acaryacaidamani and Govindinanda. So there are commentaries on the Prayascittaviveka. Besides the above, the works and authors mentioned in the other vivekas are noted below.956 The Sraddha-viveka of Sulapani is referred to (as Gaudiya-&iiddha- viveka) by Rudradhara,957 by Vacaspati in his Sriddha-cintamani, by Govindananda in his Sraddhakriyakaumudi and by Raghunandana in several of his tattvas. ® We know very little about the personal history of Salapani. In the colophons of his 01159४8 he is styled Sahudiyala (or -na) Maha- mahopadhyaya and Raghunandana also calls him Mahamahopadhyaya. The Sahudiyala was a degraded section of the Radhiya Brahmanas in Bengal from the days of Ballalasena. As Rudradhara calls him Gaudiya, it follows that Salapani was a Bengal Brahmana. There isa tradition that he was the Judge of king Laksamanasena of Bengal. Butthis is impossible as the following discussion about his date will show. There is some uncertainty about the exact age of Salapani. As Salapani names the Ratnakara of Candesvara and the Kalamadhaviya, he must be later than about 1375 A. D., since some time must have elapsed before a work from Vijayanagar came to be regarded as an authority in Bengal. As Sualapani’s works are mentioned by Rudradhara, Govindananda and Vacaspati, the former must be earlier than about 1460. In this connection it has to be noted that Govindiananda not only comments upon Sualapani’s i en scr a Nr cnt 956 कल्पत, कामधेनु, रृत्यिन्तामणि, गोविन्दराज; धरमपरदीप, परिजात, भवदेव, गज- यलमीम, मोजदेव, मह््णवप्रकाश, मिताक्षरा, मेधातिथि, रत्नाकर, शङ्खधर, स्मृति> मजरी, ToT. 957 Vide folio 25 a of the Benares edition of eres श्रादुविवेक ( printed in 1920 ), 958 Vide I. 0. oat. p. 871 No, 1287 and D, O. ms. No. 98 of 1895-98. $96 History. of Dharmatisira works but probably looks upon Salapani as an old writer along with Aniruddha.9s9 | A ms. of the Prayaécittaviveka was copied at Benares in sake 1410 (i.e. 1488 A. D. 2.9० From all these data it follows that Salapani flourished between 1375 and 1460 A. D. From the Suddhittatva it appears that Salapani wrote Parisista- dipakalika ( probably a commentary on a Grhyaparisista 396", 96. Rudradhara This is a well-known Maithila writer on Dharmasastra, who com- posed several works. His Suddhi-viveka has been published several times ( at Benares in 1866, in 1878 and by the VenkateSvara Press in Bombay, sarmvat 1978). That work is divided into three pariccheda@and deals with purification from impurity on birth and death, the persons liable to undergo purifications, the meaning of the word putra, purification of the body and of various substances when polluted, purification of cooked food and water and women in their menses. He tells us that अ having examined seven works ( nibandbas ) on Suddhi and being encouraged by his father and brother he composed the Suddhiviveka. He further says that he made the effort for the benefit of those who were not disposed to go through such works as the Ratnakara, Parijata, Mitaksara and the Hiaralata.96: Besides these he mentions the Acaridarga, Suddhi- pradipa, Suddhi-bimba, Sridattopadhyaya, Smrtisara and Harihara The Sriddhaviveka of Rudradhara is the most famous of his works. It was printed at Benares in samvat 1920. The work 1s 959 यञ्च मथिलेरासनाननदानयोये We त्वेति मन्त्रो नास्तीत्युक्तं तद्निरदशरुलपाणिपभूतीनां प्राचामसंमतम्‌ ॥ 7.71 of शाटक्रियाकामुदी. The word प्राचां may here mean * eastern writers. ° 960 शाके गते दृशसमद्रधमां संख्ये मासे त्विषे शिबमुदे शिवश्मेणा यः 961 अत एव पिवृद्यिता-परिशिष्टमकाश-शटपाणिरूत-परिरिष्टदीपकलिकापभूतिषु मन्तरामिधान- पृवकवाक्येन ITNT इत्युक्तम्‌ । शुद्धितत्व ( vol, II, p. 380) 962 शुद्धा सतत निवन्धान्‌ CRA: पितुस्तथा तुः | 9८२ सन्त्येव रत्नाकरपार्निातमिताक्षराहरकतादृोन्ये । तथापि तभ्नारसषनानतानां AAMT नत प्रयासः ॥ 08. Rudradhare’ $e7 divided into four paricchedas. He first defines Sriddha, and then treats of several topics, viz. the varieties of Sraddha, the procedure at sriddhas, the mantras that are recited, the proper time and place for sriddhas, the Brahmanas worthy to be invited at Sraddha and the proper food etc. Among the numerous works and authors referred to in the work the undermentioned ones deserve notice.9* He refers to his own Suddhiviveka as already written. In several places he tells us that he follows a different tradition on certain matters from that of the Pitrbhakti or of the Sugatisopana. He points out that the prasatika is a kind of grain known in Madhyadeéga as Sathila.9¢s For his Vratapaddhati, vide Mitra’s Notices, vol. VI, p. 15, No. 1995. He says that he was urged by his brother’s advice to write the work and that he follows the Samayapradipa.9* 3 Another work of his is the Varsakrtya which deals with festivals and fasts. He was the son of Mahamahopaidhyaya Laksmidhara and young- est brother of Haladhara. His works are quoted by Vacaspati in his Dvaitanirnaya, by Govindananda in the Sraddhakriyakaumudi, by Raghunandana in several of his tattvas, by Kamalakara and Nilakantha. As Rudradhara mentions the Ratnakara, the Smrtisara, Sridatto- pidhyaya and the Sriddhaviveka of Salapani, he is certainly later than 1425 A.D. Ams. of his Vratapaddhati is dated in Laksmana 0710041 344 1. €. 1463 A. 09.97 Besides he is quoted by Vacaspati and Govindananda. Therefore he must have flourished between 1425 and 1460 A. D. ०५ कलपतर, Trea, छन्दोगपरिशिषटटीका, परिजात, पितृभक्ति ( of श्रीद्तो- पाध्याय styled प्राचीनं ), भुजबलमीम, भोजराज, APT, रत्नाकर, WAHT, ere, were ( गीढीय fe. of शूलपाणि ), सुगतिसोपान ( styled भष शमभतिह्तकभ्रम्थ ), स्मृतिसार, TATE. 9 प्रसातिका मध्यदेशो शादीला इति प्रसि धान्यम्‌ 1 folio #1 ४ of the Benares ed. of वत 1920. १ एष प्रीभ्रावृबरणोम्नतिः समयप्रदीपनुसारी पर्थाः | at the end of the ब्रतपडति, 967 Vide M. M. Haraprasad Sastri’s oat. of palm-leaf and paper ‘Nepal mss. AUT and p. 73. oe Efstory of Dharmaststra The Rudradhara who was a pupil of CandeSvara and author of the Krtyacandrika, the Vivadacandrika and the Sraddhacandrika appears to be a different author. 97: Misarumisra Misarumisra is famous for his works called Vivadacandra and Padartha-candrika ( on the Nydya-Vaisesika system). There is a ms, of the Vivadacandra in the Deccan College (No. 57 of 1883-84). That work deals with the titles of ‘Law ( vyavaharapadas ) such as madana (recovery of debt), nydsa (deposit ), asvamivikraya, sarnbhaya-samutthana ( partnership ), dayavibhaga, stridhana; and then with procedure, viz. the plaint, reply, pramanas, witnesses, possession etc. It frequently quotes the Ratnakara (on vivada and vyavahara ) of CandeSvara and several times criticizes him, Besides numerous smrti writers the other authors and works named are: Parijata, Prakasa, Balarapa ( often ), Bhavadeva and Smrtisara ( frequently ). In the mss. and colophons the name of the author seems to be Misaramiéra.96* He tells us that he wrote the work under the orders of princess Lachimadevi, wife of prince Candrasithha who appears to have been the younger brother of Bhairavasirmhadeva of the Kameévara dynasty of Mithila. The work was probably called Vivada- candra to connect it with the prince Candrasitnha. The Vivada- candra 0175069 speaks of king Bhavesa of the Kameévara dynasty, then of his son Harasirhhadeva, then of his son Darpanarayana and the latter’s queen Hira or Dhira and then of Candrasithha and his queen Lakhima or Lachima. We saw above that Candegvara who had weighed himself against gold in 1314 A. D. wrote in his old age 968 श्रीचन्दरर्सिहनृपतेदैयिता लछिमा महदेव । रजयति पदाधचन्दं मिसरुमिभ्रोपदेरेन ॥ Intro. verse 2 in Mitra’s Notices vol. IX p. 12 No. 3901; vide I. O. cat. p. 454 No. 1500 ‹ इति महयमद्येपाभ्यायक्नीमिसरूमिभविर शितो विवादन्ड्ः समापः, 900 अनूदुमूतमतिमहगन्धो राजा मवेशः हिल सा्व॑मोमः | अत्याजयथो aged दोषं FAT BET ॥ तस्मादनूजोजनि सूनुसारो धीमान्रमासुनुसमानसारः | राजो- पजीष्यो HET ततो तरपो दपनरायणोभृत्‌ ॥ दुषैनरायणनूषतेः श्रीमड़ीरा meant । अलमत तनयं तनयं नरपतिगुणराशिपूरितं शरम्‌ ॥ शभीमलसिमादेवी तस्य बन््रसिंहनृपतेर्दयितस्य | नाम्ना मिसङूमिशद्वारा coat Repertory ॥ १४८०, verses in the 7056680 College ms, 97. Misarumidra 869 under Bhavega his work on Rajaniti. Lachimadevi was queen of the great-grandson of this Bhavesa, who became king of Tirhut in the third quarter of the 14th century. Therefore Candrasithha must have flourished about the middle of the 15th century and Misaru- misra’s work must be assigned to that period. M. M. Chakravarti points out ( JASB for 1915, p. 425 ) that for Dhirasirhha, a son of Darpanarayana, there is an authentic date, viz. 321 of the Laksmana- sena era in Tirhut ( i.e. 1438 A. D. ), when a ms. of Srinivasa’s Setudarpani ( com. on Setubandha ) was copied during Dhirasithha’s reign. That the Vivadacandra is a work of authority on Hindu Law in Mithila has been recognised from very early days in the British courts.97° The Vivadacandra held that the word stridhana was to be applied to such woman’s property as was technically so called ( by the sages ) and not to all property that comes to a woman.97? 98. Vacaspatimisra Vacaspatimisra is the foremost nibandha writer of Mithila. His Vivadacintamani has been recognised by the High Courts in India and by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as a work of paramount authority on matters of Hindu Law in Mithila.97 Vacaspati was an extremely voluminous writer and appears to have composed dozens of works. In the Sraddhakalpa alias Pitrbhakti- tarangini, almost his latest work, he says that he wrote in his youth ten works on Sastra and thirty nibandhas on अप and composed the work in question in his declining years.973 At least eleven works of his bearing the title ‘cintamani’ areknown. They are briefly noticed below. The Acaracin:amani deals with the daily rites of Vajasaneyins.974 The Ahnikacintamani is quoted in his Suddhicintamani. The 970 Vide 2 Moo. I. A. p. 138 at p. 147 and p.152 (where there is a citation in English from the विवादब्न्त्र ). O71 ‹ जीधनं पारिभाविकमेव न सर्दम्‌ › folio 83 a of the 7. 0. ms. 972 Vide 11 Moo. I. ^. 139 at p. 1%4 and 487 at p. 506, I. L. R. 20 All. 267 at ss Pp. 200 ( ए. ©), 1, L. R. 10 Cal. 392 at p. 399, I. L. R. 12 Cal 348 at p. 351. ° शाले दश स्मृतो Gruman येन योवने । निमितास्तेन चरमे वयस्येष विनिर्ममे ॥ vide I, 0. cat. ४, 556 No. 1730. RAAT : ॥ धमं हह वाजसमेयिनाम्‌ । निबभ्यते इरि नत्व। ओीवाचस्पतिरार्मणा ॥ Mitra's Notices, vol. V. p. 169, No. 1857. 400 History of Dharmatisira Kytyacintamani was published in Bengali characters at Benares in Sake 1814 (vide JASB. for 1915, p. 395 ) and deals with the festivals that are celebrated on different days in the year. The Tirthacintamani has been published in the B. I. series. It is divided into five prakasas, viz. Prayaga, Purusottama ( Puri), Ganga, Gaya and Varanasi and deals with such topics as the purpose of pilgrimages, the preliminaries of pilgrimage, the various rites to be performed at the several tirthas, the subsidiary sacred places at the principal t#irthas etc. He mentions the Kalpataru, Ganeévara- misra, JayaSarma, the Mitaksara, Smytisamuccaya and Hemadri. In the introduction he explicitly states that he composed the work after carefully examining the Krtyakalpadruma and Parijata, the Ratnakara and other works.°75 The Dvaitacintamani is mentioned in his Kytyacintamani. The Niticintamani is mentioned in the Vivadacintamani (p. 72). The Vivadacintamani (text) was published at Calcutta in 1837 ( which edition is used in this work ) and was translated into English by Prasannakumar Tagore (in 1863 ) with a learned preface. It explicitly states that the author carefully studied the Krtyakalpadruma, Parijata and Ratnakara.276 The work deals exhaustively with the eighteen titles of law (vyavaharapadas ). The principal authors and works, besides the usual smptis and puranas, mentioned in the work are noted below.977_ In this work he mentions several vernacular equivalents for Sanskrit terms. The Vyavaharacintamani?7® deals with judicial procedure, viz. the four principal topics thereof, viz. _ bhasa ( the plaint ), wttara (reply of defendant ), kriya ( evidence ), 975 श्रीरुत्यकलद्रुमपारिजातरल्नाकरादीनवलोकष्य यत्नात्‌ । प्रणम्य AeA मधुसुद्नाय वाचह्मतिस्तीथंिधिं तनोति ॥ तीथंचिन्तामणि $ vide ए. 268 also 976 ओीरुत्यकल्यद्वम ... यत्नात्‌ । वाचस्पतिः भीपतिनश्चमोलििधादभिन्तामणिमातनोति॥ 977 कत्पतर, गहस्थरत्नाकर्‌, पारिजात, THI, बाल्य, भाष्यकार ( Of शङ्कूलिखित p. 67, the same quotation ocourring in the वि र, P ४०४ ) नितक्षग, मेधा fate CHET, लक्ष्मीधर) स्मृतिसार Porgy Note the following words प्करोवकरः गोन्दतल इति प्रसिदुः" (7. 63), * आरश्चकः कोटाल दति प्रसिद्धः ' ( ए. 95, i, e. Kotwalin Marathi), ‘eam; area इति प्रसिद्धः " (p. 101 compare Marathi सांकंष ) 978 भाषो्रक्रियापादा निर्णयः सोषदेशकः । चतष्यासर्वविषथो sweet निरूप्यते ॥ 1,0. cat. 0, 417 No, 1400 98, Vacaspatimitra 401 nirpaya (decision ). The Suddhicintamani was printed at Benares in Bengali characters in Sake 1814 (JASB for 1915, p. 3962 ). The Sadracaracintamani deals with the duties of sidras ( Mitra’s Notices, vol. VI, p. 22, No. 2001 ). The Sraddhacintamani is a standard work and was printed at Benares in Bengali characters in Sake 1814. Besides the works and authors enumerated in the foot-note above, the others mentioned by him in his several Cintamanis are noted below.979 Besides these there is a group of Vacaspati’s works with the title ‘nirnaya’. The Tithinirnaya%®* starts with an invocation of the highest Being ( paramatman ) while most of his works are begun with an obeisance to Hari or Krsna. It first divides tithis into Suddha and viddha ( commingled with another tithi ) and then discusses all the tithis from the first to the fifteenth and also amavasya; it deals with the questions as to the rites of that tithi which is ksaya, with sivaratrivrata, naktavrata, holidays, fasts, jayantivrata, holika festival etc. The Dvaitanirnaya,9* as its name implies, is concern- 979 अनिङ्द्ध, AACA, STINT, उदयकर, ककं, sind, कालविवेक, कालाद, कुलाणंव, गोविन्दराज, दुर्गामक्तितरङ्गिणी, पितृभक्ति, दीप, भवदेष, भीमपराक्रम, भोजराज ( ocsimply राज ); राजमातेण्ड, रामाचैनबन्दिका, व्धमानोपाण्वाय, विवेक, ध्यवहारमातृका, usar, भाद्कस्पचिन्तामणि, mares, wera, श्राद्‌- विवेक, भरीद्तोपाण्याय, सुगतिसोपान, स्मृतिपरिभाषा, स्मरतिदपेण, स्मृतिसागर, इरि- इरमिभ, इरिषहपदति, हरता. 980 उद्वैतोदूबोधगन्याय निगुणस्थितिहतवे । जगतामादिमूताय नमस्ते परमात्मने ॥ विलोक्य मुनिवाक्यानि संपदायानुसारतः। तिधिद्धेतविधौ यत्नाक्छियते तिथिनिर्णयः ॥ Mitra’s Notices, vol, V. p. 149 No. 1189. 98} Vide Mitra’s Notices, vol. I, p. 149 No. 275 and vol. V, p. 296 No, 1978 for the दवेतनिणय H. D. 9० 408. History of // ed with the settlement of some doubtful points of Dhwrmasastra stich as the names to be given to brahmanas and the other varnas, doubts on gifts and consecration of tanks and wells, doubts about daily bath, samdhya, devapnja, vaisvadeva, daily offerings to manes, about judicial proceedings and the taking of interest, about various vratas like ekadasi and janmastami, about intercalary months, about the proper time for marriage and upanayana. The Mahadana- nirnaya?** expatiates on the sixteen munificent gifts such as weigh- ing against gold and silver. In the introductory verses Vacaspati gives the genealogy of his patron’s family from 204९652, whose son was Harasirnhadeva, whose son was Narasirnha, whose son Bhaira- vendra bore the Jiruda ( appellation ) Hari-narayana. A verses*s at the beginning and one at theend attribute the work to Bhaira- vendra and to Rupanariyana respectively. Rupa-narayana was the biruda of Ramabhadra, a son of Bhairavendra. Therefore it looks probable that the work was commenced in the reign of Bhairava and was completed in the reign of his son Ramabhadra. M. M. Chakravarti says that Bhairava himself bore at one time the biruda Rapanarayaya. M. M. Haraprasad Sastri ( Nepal cat. p. 90 ) mentions a Vivadanirnaya of Vacaspati. The Suddhinirnaya of Vacaspati deals with impurity on birth and death, the religious acts that must be performed even in times of impurity, sapiuvda_relation- ship, periods of impurity for the principal varnas and mixed castes; periods of impurity on abortion, the deaths of infants and women, accidental deaths etc., over-lapping of several periods of 04411८4 ; impurity arising from carrying a corpse ; rites after the death of a samnyasin ; impurity from contact of lower castes, such as washet- men and candilas, freedom from impurity at tirthas and marriages etc. 982 Vide Haraprasad 388४९1१७ cat. of palm-leaf and paper Nepal mss, p. 12% for the महाद्‌ननिर्णय- 983 sfarqeneht सहकारितया समासाय । Haag: ery मह्यदाननि्णवं तनुते ॥ ; भरीरुपनारायणनूमिपालकतो महादानंविंनिणयोथम्‌ | TATA AAA AEA TATE माकलपतु भूपतीनीम्‌ || at end. 98. Vacaspatimitra 408. Besides these, Vacaspati appears to have either composed or contemplated writing seven works called Maharnava on krtya, acara, vivada, vyavahara, dana, Suddhi and pitryajfia. Of these the Krtya- maharnava is found and deals with festivals and fasts and the proper times therefor-( vide JASB for 1915, p. 398). He also wrote the Gayasraddhapaddhati, the Candana-dhenupramana and the Dattaka- vidhi. Probably his last work, as stated above, was the Sraddhakalpa alias Pitrbhaktitarangini. Apart from the works on dharmagistra, Vacaspati wrote also on the systems of philosophy. But it is not necessary for our purpose to go into that question. Most of his works styled ‘ cintamani are mentioned by Raghu- nandana in the tativas (e. g. Krtyacintimani in Ekadasitattva, Vivada- and Vyavahara-cintamani in Dayatattva ). The Suddhicintamani is quoted in the Suddhitattvarnava of Srinatha-acarya-cudamani, the Sraddha-cintamani is quoted in the Sradhha-kriyi-kaumudi (pp.265, 475 ) and in the Suddhikaumudi ( pp. 89, 93 ) of Govindananda, the Vivada-cintamani is quoted in the Viramitrodaya ( p. 697 ) and the Vyavaharacintamani is criticized in the same work (p. 288) His Pitrbhakti-tarangini is mentioned in the Suddhitattva and Sriddhatattva. Vacaspati vouchsafes very little information about himself or his family. In the colophons of his works he: is generally styled mahamahopadhyaya and misra or sanmisra. In the colophor of the Sudricara-cintamani9*+ he is described as the parisad (the adviser of the king in finally deciding dificult points of Dharmagistra)) of Mahdrajadhiraja पथा nirayana. We saw above that his Mahidananirnaya connects itself with two kings Bhairava and his son Rtpanirayana. At the end of the Sraddhakalpa we are told that Vacaspati who was the parisad of Ramabhadradeva alias Ruapanarayana, son of Hari- “५ मह्यराजाधिराजश्भीमद्रूसिनाराचणपरिषद्‌ा सकठपण्डितमण्डलींशिरोमगिना श्वीवाचस्सति- मिश्रेण विरचितः शुद्रचारचिन्तामणिः &o. Mitra’s Notices, vo}. ¥I. p. 28 No. 2001. 404 History of Dharmatistra narayana, composed the work at the bidding of his patron.%*s Vardhamana in his Dandaviveka says that one of his gurus was Vacaspati.89° It is probable that it is this Vacaspati that is meant. But as against this we must remember that Vacaspati in his Sraddha- kalpa quotes Vardhamana Upadhyaya on Sraddha. Vardhamana wrote his Dandaviveka while king Bhairava was reigning and his Gangakrtyaviveka for Ramabhadradeva. So Vacaspati was an elder contemporary of Vardhamana. Prasannakumar Tagore assigned 1423 A. D.as the time of the Vivadacintamani ( vide preface p. उण्णा). Ghose in his Hindu Law ( vol. II p. शर ) says that Vacaspati wrote the Sraddhacinta- mani by order of queen Jaya, widow of king Bhairavadeva and 985 समस्तेत्यादिमह्मराजाधिराजभीहरिनारायणास्मज-तमस्तेत्यादिमहाराजाधिराजश्रीरूपनारा- यणपद्षीसमलङ्कुतमिथिलामण्डलास्ण्डलश्रीमद्राममद्ुदेवचरणादििन तत्परिषद्‌ा। श्रीवा- चस्पतिशर्मणा विराचेतोयं श्रादकस्पः परिपूर्णं; । 1. 0. cat. 7. 556 No. 1730. The pedigree of the कृमिण्वर्‌ kings of Mithila from भवेश्‌ is : भवसिंह OF भवेश | ee देवसिंह (गर्डनारायण) Rake हरसि | ESssenrormnss [| शिवसिंह (इषपनारायण) पद्मसिंह = विश्वासदेवी aga अमर धीरमती = ate (दषंनारायण) = ६ oF धीरा | | भीरर्सिंह Weg ० भरवसिंह = जया शअनद्सिंं = wf | (इरिनिारायण) | | THAR (STANT) पुरषोत्तम Vide Ind. Ant. vol, XIV, 2. 196 for a detailed pedigree gathered from P&fijas of Mithila ( though somewhat confused) and Ind. Ant, vol. 23 pp. 57-58. 986 ज्यायाम्यण्डकमिभः शङ्करवाषस्यती च मे गुरषः । quays १७२४१ 6, 98. Vacaspatimitra 406 mother of Purusottamadeva,987 that Harinariyana (i. €, Bhairava ) ruled from 1513 to 1527 and that the latter was killed by Nasrat- shah, the Pathan king of Bengal. M. M. Chakravarti holds that the literary activity of Vacaspati lay between 1450 to 1480 A. D. Since Vacaspati mentions the Ratnakara ( of Candeévara ) and Rudradhara as his authorities hc must be later than about 1425 A. D. Vacaspati’s works are quoted by Govindinanda and Raghunandana. Therefore Vacaspati is certainly earlier than 1540 A. D. The ms. of the Mihadananirnaya found in Nepal is dated in 392 of the Laksmanasena era ( Monday of Vaigakha, dark half, rath sithi i.e. gand April 1511 A.D.) The ms. of the Suddhinirnaya (Mitra’s Notices vol. X, p. 58, No. 3308 ) was copied in samvat 1416, which must in this particular case be taken as equivalent to Sake 1416 i. 6. 1494-95 A. D.., since Vacaspati could not have flourished about 1360 A. D. ( which corresponds to Vikrama saiival 1416). Hence the period assiened by Chakravarti for the literary activity of Vicaspati appears tobe correct. That date is further corroborated by the fact that Vicaspati wrote under Bhairavendra and his son Ramabhadradeva, that were 4th and 5th in descent from king Bhavesa of Mithila, who as we saw above began to rule over Mithila in the third quarter of the 14th century. This Vacaspati who flourished in Mithila in the latter half of the fifteenth century is very often confounded with other authors bearing the same name. The great philosopher Vacaspati who was author of the Bhamati on the Sarirakabhasya of Sankara and of several other commentaries on other systems of philosophy flourished in the first half of the 9th century as he wrote his Nydyasticinibandha in 898 ( most probably of the Vikrama era ).988 There was another ( Candragekhara ) Vacaspati who wrote the Smrtisarasarhgraha ( cat. of Calcutta San. College mss. vol. II, p. 181, No. 203 ) and flourished in the first half of the 18th century. °87 Compare विष्णोध्यक्तः(१) पुरमिव शम्भोरिव देवामा्धम्‌ । देवीसनामिरेषा जयति जयात्मा महादेवी ॥ श्रीभेदेष्द्रधरणीपतिधर्मेपत्नी राजाधिराजपुषोत्तमदेवमाता । वाचस्पतिं निसिलचन्रविदं नियुज्य 8a Potala विधिरत्तनोति ॥ verses 5 and 7 of दवेतनिर्णय, Mitra's Notices, vol, I p. 149. 8 न्यायचचिनियन्धोसावकारि सुधियां मुदे । ्रीवाचस्पतिमिभेण वस्वङ्कवसुवत्सरे ॥ 406 History of Dharmatiistra 99. Nrsimhaprasada This is an encyclopaedic work on dharmasastra, no part of which has been yet printed. ‘The Benares Sanskrit College has a complete ms. of this vast work. I could examine the whole of it. Besides, the Deccan College collection has two mss. of portions of it, viz. of the Danasara ( No. 353 of 1875-76 ) andof the Tirtha- sara ( No. 352 of 1875-76 ). The Danasara and Santisara are also noticed in Mitra’s cat. of Bikaner mss. ( pp. 429-430 ) and six sections out of twelve are noticed in the 1. O. cat. p. 434 No. 1467. Unless otherwise stated the references here are to the Benares Sanskrit College ms. The Nrsirhhaprasida is divided into twelve’? sections called ‘sara’ on samskara, ahnika, sriddha, kala, vyavahira, prayascitta, karmavipaka, vrata, dina, Santi ( the averting of evil foreboded by natural portents and other strange occurrences ), tirtha and pratistha (consecration of temples, idols etc.). Each section99° begins with an invocation of Nrsimha( the man-lion incarnation of Visnu ) after whom the work is named Nrsithhaprasida (the fruit of the grace of Nysithha ). In the Sathskarasira, after invoking Nysirmha, the introduction tells us that9#* when king Rama ruled in Devagiri ( modern Daulatabad ), Samavit was ruler of Delhi and that after the latter Nijamasaha wielded power over the world. Then after pro- nouncing an eulogy on Nijamasaha ( verses 10-13 ) the author 989 संस्कारसारः प्रथमो द्वितीयस्त्वाहविकामिधः। श्रादसारस्तृतीयस्तु चतुर्थः कालनिर्णयः ॥ qa व्यवहराख्यः पायश्रित्तामिधो ... (torn) नाशकः ( सपमस्त्वषनारकः ) ॥ अष्टमो वतसाराख्यः पराणोक्राभिधायकः । नवमो दानसाराख्यः सर्ववणौधिकारकः Il दशमः शान्तिसंज्ञो वे तेथ एकादशः स्मृतः । देवपरतिष्ठास।रश्च द्वादशः परिकीर्तितः ॥ verses 17-20 of संस्कारसार, 990 ©. 8. verse 8 of the संस्कारसा।र्‌, The first ९९86 of आह्धिकसार ` 1 प्रणम्य श्री- सिंहेन ( हं तु !) दलाधीशेन ween । श्रविसिंहपसादेन दिनालुषठेयमुच्यते ॥} "° oman ४०४०७ श्रीनृसिंहं नमस्कृत्य दुकाधीशमहीपतिः । श्राद्धसारं seat सववादृक तुष्टये ॥ 991 श्रीमद्धेवगिरी पुरन्द्रपरस्पर्थाधिबद्वाद्रे रामे राजनि शामवित्किल TA राजा स ग्हठीश्वरः। Ree मुः TAMA महान्‌ यष्टोदुण्डनिजपतापमद्धा राज्यं TT चानयत्‌ ॥ verse 9 99, Nrat*nhaprastda ४८१ speaks of himself. We are told that the author was Dalapati ( त Daladhiga ), son of Vallabha, of the Bharadvaja-gotra and of the Yajfiavalkiya $akha (1. €. Suklayajurveda >) and that he was the keeper of the imperial records of Nebajana (?). There are claborate colophons99? at theend of almost each section (called sira ) in which we are told that Dalapati was the pupil of Sdaryapandita, that he was a great exponent of the Vaisnavadharma, that he was the chief minister and keeper of the records of Nijamasaha, who was the overlord of all Yavanas ( Mahomedans) and ruler of Devagiri. In some colophons he is styled Maharajadhiraja. It is doubtful whether Dalapati or Dalidhiga was the real name of the author or was merely a title. It is not unlikely that Suryapandita said to be the guru of the author is the same as Sarya, the father of the great Maratha saint Ekanatha, who wrote his Bhagavata at Benares in sake 1495 Ci. €. 1573 A. 9. ) and who states that he was born in a family of devout Vaisnavas. The Nrsirhhaprasida names numerous authors and works. In the beginning of the Sathskarasira, he mentions a host of writers and works that he consulted.99+ Besides these he mentions Some- 098 प्रोढश्रीद्रिजराजवंशतिरकालङ्क ररः प्रमुभर्द्रजकृखनुगः प्रथमय। यः UATE | ्रीमननेबजनसमस्तकरणाधीशः सतनम्रणीः श्रीमद्रलममृश्रिरं विजयते finger apart: ॥ verse 14 07 संस्कारसार, The third line is metrically faulty in the 6th syllable. This verse occurs in each सुर्‌ at the end with variations. In the D.C, ms. No. 358 of 1875-76 the last two lines are AAPA सनिरतस्तत्संभदायाम्रणीः सरि ARAM HARE Aires Paes ॥ 999 ०. ४, at the end of the sigeng ¢ श्रीमत्मढधतापमहराजाधिर।ज-सर्वपुरीसन्द्रीदेव- गिरिपुरवराधीन्वर -समस्तयवनाधीश्वर्‌ -श्रीमन्निजामसहिसभस्तकरणाधीन्वर-सकटवियावि- UNG ARASH AGAMA -द्विजराजकुलालङ्क रहर -्रीवेष्णवप्रवतेक -शरीवलमा- AH HTT TS TAT द्‌।स'दितसूयैपण्डितामिधगुर्‌-मन्वादिप्रणीतनीतिशङ्खमिज्ञ-महा- ममुस्वक यवीक्षणमतिनिधीरत-श्रीमहाराजदपतिरा नविरचिन श्रीनृसिंहपरसदे &०. ०५ काल्दशौनन्वभट-विज्ञानेन्वर मद्ेमादवि-पिक।विवरण-असक्षय-प्रयोगपारिनात-मद्नपारि. जात-रत्यकस्थतद-म।धव-स्मृतिचन्द्िकासमृतिरलनावलि-स्मृतिद्पण-स्मृतिचिन्तामणि-स्म- तिभास्कर-मेधातिथि-विज्ञानतिलक-अपराक-विज्ञानमाकण्ड-मोजराजीय -विन्बरूपनिबन्ध- नारायणीय-गणेश-वाक्यमीमांसा-स्मृतिमीरमासिा-निबन्धसवस्व-स्मृतिमहार्णव -शातातपीयक- मेविपाकसमुड्चय-माधवीयःभेलुगिकर्मविप।क-प्वर ध्याय AAA -नतिविवेकभमुखान- नेकनिबन्धान &0. folio 3b. 408 Fiistory of Dharmasistra $vara (commentator of the Tantravartika ) and Kaladipa in the Satnskarasira ; the Purinasira in the Ahnikasira; Parijata and Vadibhayankara in the Vyavahiarasira; Kamika, Jiidnaratnavali, Balarkodaya in the Danasara. The contents of some of the sections of the Nrsitnhaprasida may be set out here. In the Satnskarasira the author treats of the meaning of dharma, sruti, smrti, the authoritativeness of puranas, kalivarjya ( usages prohibited in the kali age ), punyahavacana, madhuparka, vrddhisriddha, garbhadh4na, purhsavana, jatakarma, namakarana, upanayana, marriage and other samskaras, the duties of brahmacirins, snatakas, householders, vanaprasthas and sarhnyi- sins. In the Ahnikasira the author after dividing the day into eight parts speaks of the actions appropriate to each viz : in the first getting up from bed at the brahma-muhtrta, Sauca, brushing the teeth, decoration of the hair, bath etc; in the second study; in the third, looking after dependents and pursuit of one’s livelihood; in the fourth midday bath, bralhmayajiia, tarpana, vaisvadeva, daily sraddha ; in the fifth dinner and foods prescribed and forbidden ; in the sixth and seventh reflecting over itihasa and purana; in the 8th decision about worldly affairs, evening sarndhya etc. In the Kalasara ( which is incomplete in the Benares ms. ) he defines the nature of fala and gives rules and decisions about months, tithis and such festivals as Navaratra, Janmistami etc. In the Vyavahira- sara the author deals with the meaning of vyavahara, the eighteen titles of law, the four-fold method of deciding dharma, the pramanas ( means of proof ), dayavibhaga etc. In the Vratasara he speaks of the several principal vratas in each month, some of which are for both men and women, some for men only and some for women only. In the Danasara he dilates upon the nature of dana, its varieties, the various results of danas, the proper time and place for danas, proper recipients of dina, what things can be the subjects of gifts, units of gold, silver etc., the description of kunda, mandapa and vedi, the sixteen great dinas such as tula, hiranyagarbha, brahmanda, kalpapadapa etc. and three atidanas, viz. land, cows and learning ; gifts of images, food, ornaments, bed-stead etc. ; gifts on sathkranti and eclipses etc. The Tirthasara is interesting for this that as the author hailed from Devagiri he speaks principally of firthas-of the Deccan and Southern India, In this work he speaks 99. Nrsithaprasida 409 of Setubandha, Pundarika%s or Paundarika ( modern Pandharpur in the Sholapur District, it seems ), Gayatirtha, eulogies of Godavari, Krsna-Venya, Narmada, Malaprahirini etc. The Nrsimhaprasada being a work from the Deccan held the view that marriage with a maternal uncle’s daughter was sanctioned by the Veda and was not to be censured.99° It says that where there is ( irreconcileable ) conflict between the smrtis and puranas there is an option.997 As the Nrsirhhaprasada relies upon the Madhaviya and the Madanaparijata, it is certainly later than 1400 A. D. As it is mentioned as an authority in the Dvaitanirnaya of Sankarabhatta and in the Mayakhas of Nilakantha it must be earlier than about 1575 A.D. If by the Dipikavivarana which it enumerates among its principal authorities is meant the com. of Nrsimha, son of Ramacandracarya, on his father’s commentary of the Kalanirnaya ( which is most probable ), then the Nrsithhaprasada must be later than about 1500A,D. Dr. Bhandarkar9® says that Ramacandracarya lived about 1450 A.D. A ms. of the Dipikavivarana was copied in samvat 1604 (1548 A. D.).999 The Benares Sanskrit College ms. ap- pears to have been copied for Ramapandita Dharmadhikari at Benares, who is said 10 have been the father of Nandapandita'°™ (see sec. 105 below ). At the end of several savas either samvat 1568 ( 1511-12 A. D. ) or 1569 occurs as the date.1°° This may be said to be the कि 9४ ——. 7 a नम "~ को eee ee न= = ees 05 Sapa तटे देवि दक्षिणे तीरथमुसमम्‌ ... घमेरीरा_ नदी यत्र Seti: । शोभिता सङ्गता भेम्यास्तस्मायोजममन्ततः | पोण्डरीकमिति ख्यातं तत्तीर्थं ती्थपूजेतम्‌ । पाण्डुरङ्गस्त्र स्ते Ke. 996 वस्तुतस्तु भात॒लक्षतापरिणयनं वेदूमिहिततया न दोष इति ,.. विस्तरेण वक्ष्यामः | wena folio 9. 997 as स्मृतिपौराणयोर्विरोधस्तन्न विकल्पः । संस्कारसार folio 145. ¢€ 998 Report, 1885-84, pp. 58-60. 999 Vide I. 0. oat. $. 580, No. 1662. 1000 Vide Benares ‘ Pandit ’ ( New series ) vol. V. pp. 377-78 for an snnoun- cement about the नृसिंहमसाद्‌ by a learned descendant of नन्द्पण्डित. 1001 At the end of the colophon of the अद्धिकसार we have ८0७ 08४6 ^ संवत्‌ १५६८ समये आन्विनवदि ११ शुक्रवारे › and on the back of that part of the ms. the date ‘gw १५६९ वैशासवदि ७ yp’ 1. 9. 7४४ May 1512 A.D. At the end of the कर्मविपाष्छसार्‌ we have ve संवत्‌ १५६९ समये कासीप्री- भीविश्वेन्वरबरणसंनिधाने '. At the end of the तीर्थसार we have: सुवृतु १५६८ समये बेशासुदि द्वितीया रौ ,. ४, 2. §2. 410 History of Dharmatistra date of the actual composition of the work or of the copying of the ms. for Ramapandita. It seems difficult to believe that Ramapandita for whom the ms. was copied in 1511-12 A. D. was the father of the famous Nandapandita. We know that Nandapandita composed his Vaijayanti in 1623 A. 0. amapandita must have been a man of middle age before he could order the copying of a huge ms. like the Nrsirnhaprasada. If he did this in rsr1-12 A. D. his son could hardly have been alive 120 years later. Therefore it looks probable that the dates ( sarhvat 1568 and 1569 ) are not the dates when the ms. was copied for Ramapandita, but rather the dates of the composition of the original work or of the copying of the ms. from which Ramapandita got his own ms. copied. At all events it is clear that the Nysithhaprasada could not have been composed later than 1512 A. D. As the author was a minister of Nijamasaha who ruled over Devagiri, it appears that he is referring to Ahmad Nizam Shah who ruled from 1490-1508 A. D. or to his son Burhan Nizam Shah( 1508-1533 A. D. ), most probably the former.'°° It may be taken as certain that the work was composed between 1490 and 1512 A. D. 100. Prataparudradeva The Sarasvativilasa was compiled by Prataparudradeva, a king of the Gajapati dynasty who ruled at Cuttack ( Katakanagari ) in Orissa. The Dayabhaga portion of this work was published with an English translation by Rev. Thomas Foulkes in 1881. An edition of the whole of the vyavahara section of the Sarasvativilasa has recently been published in the Mysore Government publication Series. Through the kindness of the Editor, Dr. Shamasastri, I was able to secure the printed sheets of 352 pages before publication. In the following reference is made to the paragraphs of Foulkes’ edition and the pages of the Mysore edition. After invoking deities the work starts with the prasasti of the king and his family ( pp. 2-11 ). Descent is traced to the Sun himself through Daéaratha, Rama and his sons. Kapilendra was the founder of the Gajapati family whose son was Purugottama. His queen was Rupambika. Prataparudradeva or Vira-Rudra-deva 1002 Vide Lane-Poole’s ‘ Muhammadan dynasties’ (ed. of 1995 ) p. $20 for the names and dates of the Nizam 30908. 100. Prataparudradeva 411 wasthe son of Purusottama. He is spoken of as having given protection to Sultan ( Suratrina ) Husanshah who threw himself on his mercy." In the colophons'° the king is styled Gajapati, Gaudegvara ( king of Gauda ), lord of Kalubariga ( modern Gulbarga ) in the Karnataka country of nine crores (probably of revenue ) and as the protector of Sultan Husanshah of Jamunipura. It is significant that the same titles are applied to Purusottama's in his Potavaram grant of sake 1412 (1490 A. 0. ) and in other inscriptions. Prataparudradeva, while ruling his capitalte°* Kataka- nagari, called together an assembly of Pandits and compiled an extensive digest of civil and religious law. The royal author feels qualms of conscience on the question of eulogising himself and_ his family but stifles them easily by saying that a poet can also be an appreciative critic of his own productions.‘°7 He boasts that he composed the work for saving scholars the trouble of bringing harmony among the conflicting dicta of Vijiainayogi, Aparirka, Bharuci and others, that there was no work that could equal his own and that his literary effort would make his predecessors’ works afford illustrations of the maxim that when a certain purpose is served by one the existence of others is superfluous.'°® Then it 1003 7.11 ' श्रणागतट्रसनसा्िसुरत्राणवज्रपञ्जरः. ' 1004 इति वीरश्रीगजपति-गोडेन्बर-नवकोटिकणोटककटुबरिगेश्वर -शरणागतजमुनपुरार्थान्बर्‌- हृशनसाहसुर्राण-शरणरक्षण-श्रीदुर्गावरपुत्र-परमपविनि ART -राजाधिराज -राजराजपरमे- भ्वर-वरिप्रतापरद्रदेवमहाराजिराचेते स्मृतिसंग्रहे सरस्वतीविखासे भ्यवहारकाण्डे &c. I. 0. cat. p, 419 No. 1404. 1005 वीरश्रीगजपतिगेडेभ्वरनवकोटिकणोटकटुबरिगेश्वरपरतापपुरुषोत्तमदेव &. E. I. vol. XIII p, 153 ; vide Dr. Rajendralal Mitra's * Antiquities of Orissa’ vol. II, appendix pp. 165-167, Ind. Ant. vol. I. p. 355 and M. M. Chakravarti’s article on* Uriya Inscriptions of 15th and 16th centuries’ in JASB vol. 62, part 1, pp. 88-104 for insoriptions of this dynasty. 106 ' स चाये diag गजपतिरयोष्यामिवायोभ्यां ... भूकान्ताकटकं कटकनगरौ समा- नयन्‌ ) ° 11. 0) अच्र वर्णैयितृषण्ययोरभेदैकनियतयोरपि अवस्थाभेदेन मेदकथनमेकस्येव कवेः कवि- सृदयत्ववन्नं विद्ष्यते ॥ . 11. 008 यृथाविहितसभामण्डपान्तरे सभ्यपादूविवाकामात्यपुरोहितज्योतिर्विंदादिसहितो विन्नान- योगि -माषच्वपराकं मेधातिथ्यसहाय -बन्दरिकादिबहुन्थेकवाक्यतःपर्यालोचनवशायात- TSA मा भूदिति सकलसमतिसमुड्चयमतिगम्भीरं नातिविस्तृतं मबन्धै TET |... हानि गर्वमहो नेव नेव गर्वमहोधिके 1 समे तु गर्वे शङ्केत न समस्ति = 9 ॥ 1 एकेन अरिताथत्वादितरानर्थतानयः । पुर्व॑भबन्धेरविषयीभवेदिति ou 4१९ History of Divarmasiisira is said that the vyavaharakanda was first taken in hand even before the acirakanda following the special desire of the king Virdrudra Gajapati.'°°9 But it appears from references in the vyavaharakanda itself that before that part was finished the Acdrakanda had been completed.'°'° The Sarasvativilasa, being a work composed under the express orders of a king for the benefit of his subjects, makes’ the nearest approach to the Austinian conception of law as a command addressed by political superiors to political inferiors and enforced by a sanction. The principal topics dealt with in the Vyavaharakanda are : the hall of justice, the method of judicial procedure, the plaint, the reply, documents, possession, rnadana, dayavibhaga, sahasa and other titles of law. In the beginning of the work he sets out at great length the views of ancient writers on politics about the constitution of the maxdala, such as those of Parasara, USanas, Visnu, Brhaspati, Visalaksa, Manu etc. He generally follows the views of VijianeSvara on dayavibhaga, but here and there strongly criticizes him, €. g. he says that Vijnhanesvara gave a very far-fetched interpretation'®"' of Yajfiavalkya’s verse ‘ rikthagraha rnam dapyah.’ The Sarasvativilasa isa work of authority in Southern India on matiers of Hindu Law, though inferior to the Mitaksara.to? It informs us that, though the Smrticandrika passed over the ordeals of water and poison on the ground that they had gone out of vogue, in Utkala the ordeal of water alone was resorted to and in Siirasena ( Mathura ) and Magadha ( Bihar ) the ordeal of poison alone was administered.'!°3 का~ ES 6, नण, =) OSES ङ ein He pee Oo 1009 ततश्चाचारकाण्डद्र व्यवह्ारकृण्डः प्रथमारब्धः । ... तथापि वीरश्द्रगजपतिमहाराज- स्याकांक्षानुसारेण प्रथनं व्यवह।रकाण्डः प्रक्रम्यते ॥ P. 15. 1010 ay यदु बहु वक्तव्यमस्ति तद्स्माभिरपि आचारकाण्डे विवाहपरकरण एव प्रपञ्चितमिति तत एवावधार्यम्‌ । P- 343, 1011 एतदूढ्याख्यानक्रमं (१) विज्ञानयोगिना पु्वाचायंच्छयानुगश्छता (°च्छायामनुगड्छता 1 ) अधिस्िपसमाधानाभ्यामतिद्धेशमाधित्य रुतम्‌ ॥ . 26४ ; vide p. 207 for 9710109 example of the criticism of विज्ञ नेन्धर, 1012 Vide 2 Mad. H.C, R. 206 at ए. 217, 38 Mad. 439 at p. 441, 35 Mad. 152 at p. 156. 1018 यथोक्तं चन्द्रिकाकारेण जलविषयोरुत्सननुषठानत्वासद्विधिमनारूयाय कोशविधिरच्यत इति । उत्कलादिषु कविुरषु जलविधेरव प्रामाणिकत्वेन स्यवष्ियमाणत्वात्‌ । YEA मगधादिषु HASNT विषविधेरेव प्रामाणिकत्वेन परिगटितस्वात्‌ । P- 09. । 100. Pratiparadradeva 418 Besides the usual dharmasiitras and other smrtis, the principal authors and works named in the Sarasvativilasa are noted below.'o" The Sarasvativilasa presents in the case of the dharmasttras, parti- cularly of Visnu and Gautama, great variations from the printed texts of these works (vide sec. 10, p. 70 above). The Sarasvativilasa in scores of places gives the conflicting views of Bharuci and the Mitaksara (for which see under Bhiaruci, sec. 61). The Sarasvativilasa also contains valuable information about the views of such authors as Asahaya, Bhavadeva and Srikara whose works have not yet come to light. Burnell ( introduction to Varhsa Brahmana p. vu) took Prata- parudradeva to be the king of that name who belonged to the Kaikatiya-Ganapati dynasty of Warangal and who was carried captive to Delhiin 1322 A.D. Butinthis he was wrong. It has been shown above that the king connected with the composition of the Sarasvativilisa belonged to the Gajapati dynasty that ruled at Cuttack and not at Warangal. Prataparudradeva ruled from 1497 10 1539 A. D. Therefore the Sarasvativilasa must have been composed in the first quarter of the 16th century. Foulkes thinks ( Intro. p.xx ) that the work was composed about 1515 A.D. His argument is that though the commentary of Madhavicarya was written about two hundred years before the Sarasvativilasa, the latter is entirely silent about it in his work and that the reason of this is to be’ sought for in the rivalry of the two dynasties of Prata- parudra and Krsnaraya of Vijayanagara which was set at rest by a marriage alliance about 1516 A.D. Vide Prof. S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar’s ‘sources of Vijayanagar History’ ( p. 116), where we are told that the daughter of the Orissa king married to Krsnadevaraja was named Jaganmohini ( according to some ) or Tukka ( according to others ) and Sewell’s ‘A forgotten empire’ p. 320. Another argu- ment advanced by Foulkes for 1515 A.D. as the date of the work is that during the latter part of his reign Prataparudradeva had come 1014 amare, असहाय, Brea, कुलार्क, गुरु (भभाकर), बन्द्रिका (1. ° स्मृतिचन्दरिका), देवरात, देवस्वामी, धरेश्वर, निवन्धनकार, पदप, प्रदीपिकाकार, भवदेव, भवनाथ, मारुचि, मिताक्षरा, यज्ञपतिमेधातिथि, राजलासक,लक्ष्मीधर ,वरद्राज (०५110 आधुनिक a8 contrasted with aye ), विज्ञनिश्वर, वृत्तिकार ( ०० airs श्रोत ), वैश्चानस- UR, शल्िकामाथ, श्रीकर, संप्रहार, ANN, सोमेश्वर. 414 History of Dharmattstra under the influence of the great Vaisnavite saint Caitan ya, who made Puri his residence during the last years of his life and that the Sarasvativilasa has in the beginning an invocation of Siva. Caitanya was born in sake 1407 Falguna Full-moon (i.e. in 1486 A. 7. ); vide Bhandarkar’s ‘Vaisnavism and Saivism ’ Cp. 83) and Caitanya is said to have gone to Puri about 7570 A. D. and died in 1533 A. 2. (Beames in Ind. Ant. vol. II, p. 1 ff ). Both these arguments are not of much weight. As a matter of fact in some mss. there is an invocation of both Visnu ( Hayagriva ) and Siva; vide Descriptive Cat. of Government S. mss. at Madras vol. VI, p. 2426 No. 3221. The latest work of certain date thar the Sarasvativilasa names is the Smrticandrika and it is rather matter for surprise that no work belonging to the 14th and r5th centuries is quoted or named by the Sarasvativilasa. But this circumstance alone is hardly of any worth in face of the positive statement in the work itself that it was composed by Pratiparudradeva Gajapati. Vide JBORS. vol. V, pp. 147-148 and Ind. Ant. for 1929, pp. 28-33 for information about the Empire of Orissa and its emperors, Kapilendra ( who died in 1470 A. D. ), Purusottamadeva ( 1470- 1497 ) and Prataparudra-deva. There is a ms. of a work called Pratapamartanda or Praudha- pratapamartanda ( D. C. ms. No. 48 of 1872-73 ) which is ascribed to Prataparudra, ruler of Utkala, whose capital was Kataka on the banks of the Citrotpala. It mentions Kapilesvara Gajapati, his son Purusottama, father of Prataparudra. In the colophon the king is described as ‘Gajapati-Gaudesvara -navakoti -karnata -kalabaragesvara- ripa-narayana’ &c. The work is divided into five Prakagas on Padarthanirnaya, Vatsaradinirapana, Tithinirdpana, Vratanirnaya (such as Navaratra &c. ), Visnubhakti. He expressly mentions as his authorities Hemadri, Kalpataru, Ratnakara, Mitaksara, Madhaviya, Anantabhatta, Smrticandrika, Apararka, Parijata, Kaladarsa, Deva- dasa. Here there is an express mention of Madhava which refutes Foulkes’ theory set out above. 101. Govindananda Govindananda wrote several works out of which four have been printed in the Bibliotheca Indica series, viz: the Danakaumudi, Suddhikaumudi, Sraddhakaumudi, Varsakriya-kaumudi. T he last work deals with tithinirnaya, vratas on several fithis all the year 101, Govinda sanda 415 round, festivals like Durgotsava, Kojagara etc. All these works appear to have formed part of a general digest called Kriyakaumudi. Besides these he wrote a commentary called Arthakaumudi on the Suddhidipika of Srinivasa which was printed in Bengali characters, and also a commentary called Tattvartha-kaumudi on Salapani’s Prayascittaviveka ( published by Jivananda at Calcutta). His works are of great utility on account of the numerous authors and works quoted therein. The following deserve special mention.‘%5 He was the son of Ganapatibhatta and was styled Kavikankanacarya. From the introductory and final verses of his works it appears that he was a Vaisnava. His father was a resident of Bagri in the Midnapur District of Bengal. Since he quotes the Madanap§arijita, the Ganga-vakyavali, Rudra- dhara and Vacaspati, he must be later than about 1500 A. D. He is quoted by Raghunandana in his Malamiasatattva and Ahnika- tattva. So he cannot be later than 1560 A.D. His Suddhi-kau- mudi examines intercalary months'°"6 from Sake 1414 to Sake 1457 (i.e. from 1492 A. D. to 1535 A.D). Therefore it appears that he wrote his Suddhikaumudi immediately after fake 1457 (i. e. 1535 A.D. ). He wrote the Sraddha-kaumudi and Varsa-kriya- kaumudi after the Suddhi-kaumudi. Therefore we shall be very near the truth if his literary activity be placed between 1500 and 1540 A. D. Vide M. M. Chakravarti in JASB for 1915 p. 355 for infor- mation about Govindananda. ONS कुहक, चण्डीदूास, ( ००. of काश्यमकाश ), गङ्गावाक्याबलीकार, मद्नपारिजात, राजमातण्ड, उद्धर, वर्धमनोपाध्याय, वाचस्पति, विशारद, शद्धिविवेक, सायणमाष्य, 1016 अन एव विष्णुधर्मोसे-समाहूये TEAS तस्मान्मासोतिरिच्यते । स चाधिमासकः ae: काम्यकर्मसु गर्हितः ॥ इति । तथ चतुर्शवर्षाधिकचतुर्दशशतशकाष्दे वेशा मलमासः । ततः परं बोड़शधिकचतुदशशतशकाब्दे WT Hagar मलमासः। + . ततः परं द्वाविशत्यधिकचतुर्दशशतशकाष्दे ज्येष्ठे TARA मलमास इत्याय- नेकशो व्यभिचारो दृश्यते । शुद्धिकोमदी p. 266; vide p. 270 for intercalary month in dake 1449 and 1457. 416 History of Dharmatisira 102. Raghunandana Raghunandana is the last great writer of Bengal on dharmasastra. He compiled an encyclopwdic work on the different branches of dharmaSistra styled Smrtitattva, divided into 28 sections called tattvas. He cites the names of over 300 authors and works in his encyclopaedia, which have been collected together by M. M. Chakravarti ( JASB for 1915 pp. 363-375). His;wonderful mastery over smyti material and his erudition displayed in the Smrti-tattva earned for him the appellation smartabbattacarya or simply ‘ smarta’ from later writers. For example, the Viramitrodaya refers to him in that way and so does Nilakantha in his Vyavaharamayokha.'°7 His Smrtitattva was printed at Serampore in Bengali characters so far back as 1834-35 A. D. and it has also been published by Jivananda (in two volumes ). Some tattvas have been separately published as €. g. the Vyavahara-tattva and the Dayatattva ( publish- ed at Calcutta in 1828 by the Department of Public Instruction ) His Dayatattva was translated into English by Golapcandra Sarkar. In his Malamasatattva the names of his falivas are given.'°!§ Vide Mitra’s Notices, vol. III. p. 50 No. 1081 and 1. O. cat. p. 420 No. 1405 for an enumeration of the iativas and for reference to the volumes and pages in the Serampore edition. The /attvas are not arranged in the verses quoted below according to their chronological order, but according to the exigencies of the metre. In this work I have used Jivananda’s edition. Pi ene गी ee 2 ति [0 | == ~ mee: 1017 Vide dive p. 697 on. AAA's stra + सीध दुरितृशामप्तानामपनिष्टिनानः = व्यवहरमयूख (text p. 112 of my edition) ¢ स्मातहरिनायावधप्यवमेव ', 1018 मलिम्लुचे Ta इये शुचो च दुशसंस्छनो । ahaa विवाहे च तिथ्यां जन्माएमीतन ॥ दग; सवे व्यवहूनवेकादुश्यादिनिर्णये । तडागभवनोत्सगं TATA ब्रते ॥ HABA Gigi ज्योनिषे वास्तुयज्ञके । दक्षायामाहिके रत्ये छलि Ages | SAAS यजुःश शूद्ररुत्य्चःरगे । इत्यष्टाविंशनिम्थनि नत्वं वक्ष्यामि यत्नतः ॥ The 28 qzqs are on APSA (intercalary month ). दूय, tig, संस्कार, aaa, विवाद, (नि, जन्माष्टमी, sea, व्यवहःर, एक दुर, तड गभ नोत्तर, वृषोत्सर्गं ( 3 तस्० ०० छन्दूपगवृषो०, यजुषो ०, and aque ), वत, प्रतिष्ठा ( ५० ०० देव्रतिष्ठा ००० महभतिष्ठा ), दिष्य ( i ° परीक्षा), उयोतिष, वास्तयह, दीक्षा, आहिक, रत्य, TENANT, समश्र।द्‌, TNs, WAST In the Serampore edition गत्समै is not printed ( vide Chakravarti 12 JASB 1915 p. 363). In Jivananda’s edition also the water is not included and the जन्माष्टमीतस्व Seems to be included under तिधितद्व 10%. Raghunandana 417 It is not feasible to give even brief summaries of Raghunandana’s tattvas. Their vary names indicate the subject matter. But one of them, the Dayatattva, deserves special mention. It treats of partition made by father, partition among brothers after their father’s death, persons not entitled to a share, property not liable to partition, evidence of separation, stridhana and its devolution, inheritance to one dying sonless etc. His Tithi-tattva contains a description in Sanskrit of the game called Caturanga played on the full moon of Asvina by four players. Besides the 28 tattvas Raghunandana is said to have composed several other works. There is a commentary on the Dayabhaga attributed to him. Colebrooke suspected its genuineness, but the colophon of the commentary'*"? gives the same details about Raghu- nandana as are found in his admitted works. It is to be noticed that the Dayatattva of Raghunandana sets forth the same principles of Hindu law that are peculiar to Jimitavahana, though in matters of detail they disagree in a few cases. The Viramitrodaya styles the author of the Dayatattva a follower of Jimitavahana.'° It has been held by the Calcutta High Court that Raghunandana’s is the best commentary on the Dayabhaga and that the authority of Raghunandana is acknowledged and respected universally in the Bengal School.'°?! Besides the above, Raghunandana wrote also Tirthatattva or Tithayatravidhitattva, the Dvadasgayatratattva ( on the principal festi- vals at Jagannathapuri, one in each month ), Tripuskarasanti-tattva, Gayasraddhapaddhati and Rasayatrapaddhati. His works however are not very much in vogue elsewhere than in Bengal. Raghunandana was the son of Hariharabhattacarya and was a Bengal Vandyaghatiya Brahmana. He was a pupil of Srinatha- acarya-cidamani, whose works are frequently quotedin the several tattvas ( vide Chakravarti in JASB for 1915 p. 351 n. 2 ). According to tradition Raghunandana and the great Vaisnavite saint Caitanya Were pupils of the same teacher, Vasudeva Sarvabhauma, who was ee, ण मि. क इति Tera ASAP ATTA दायमागटीका समाता । “ जीमूलवाहनस्तु बाष्ादिविवाहिषु यद्धनं तदेवानेन भ्यवस्थाप्यते न तु pp ee mare TAT... इत्याह । तदनुगामी arrests । वीर्‌ ° ४, 70१. casas -L. R.4 Cal. 580 at 2. 654 ; 1. L. R. 28, Cal. 347 at p. 381 ४, ०, $3. dis. History of Dharmatisira the shining light of the new logic ( navyanyaya ) at Navadvipa and were residents of that place ( Sarvadhikari’s Tagore Law Lectures, first edition p. 403ff. ). \ Among the authors and works quoted in his encyclopaedia by ‘Raghunandana those noted below deserve mention. '°?2 Aufrecht placed Raghunandana between 1430-1612 A. D Dr. Jolly ( Tagore Law Lectures p. 10 ) places him early in the réth century. In 1. L. R. 48 Cal. 643 (7. 8. ) at p. 695 it is said that Raghunandana belongs to the latter half of the 15th century. As Raghunandana’s works are quoted and criticised by the Virami- trodaya ( pp. 79, 531, 683, 697, 703 etc., ) and by Nilakantha Raghunandana is certainly earlier than 1600 A.D. As he names Madhavacarya, Salapani, Rayamukuta, Rudradhara and Vacaspati he is later than about 1500 A. 0. 1 tradition is to be believed that he was a fellow-student of Caitanya he must have been born about 1490 A. D. Caitanya is said to have been born in 1485 or 1486 A. 0. "> In his Jyotistattva he mentions sake 14217०२4 in connection with the position of Visuva. That shows that the work was not composed probably very much long after that date (1. €. 1499-1500 A.D.) In the same Tattva (vol. 1. p. 568 ) 1022 अद्धतसागर, sara, अनिश्द्‌, अपिपाल, आजचारचन्दिका, आचारचिन्तामणि, 5 आ चरादशं, कमोपदेशिनी, Heres, कविकान्तसरस्वती, कामधनु, काभरूपीयनिबन्ध, कालकोमदी, काटनिणेय ( of माधव ), कालविवेकर, Poe, FER, Ga कोमदी, कृत्यचिन्तामणि, रप्यतत्त्रार्णव, गङ्गावाकयावलि, गहस्थरत्नाकर, गोविन्द्‌ ह, Were, Wea, जिकन, जीमूतवाहन, दृण्डपद्वति, तीथचिन्ता- माण, दनवाक्यावालि, Bee, दुगाभक्तंतरङ्धिणी, दैतनिणय, नव्यवधमान्‌।- पाध्याय, निर्णयामृत, पण्डितसरव॑स्व, पशपति, परिजात, Pagan, पितृभक्ति, Me मक्तितरङ्धिणी, पृथ्वीधरमिश्राचा्यं, प्रयेोगसार, प्रायन्मित्तविवेक, बह्छालसेनदेव, बालक, RITE, WAT, भीमपर।क्रम, भुजबलमीम, भोज, मद्नपारिजात, Ae दाननिर्णय, माधवाचाय, युद्धजयाणव, योग्ोक, रामाचैनचन्दधिका, रायमुकुट, TAN वाचस्पतिमिश्च, Rena, विवाद्‌चिन्तामणि, ब्यवहारचिन्तामणि, शूलपाणि, शाद चन्द्रिका (of his teacher), श्रीदत्त, सुगतिसोपान, stay, इरिमक्ति, हरिहर, PUR 1023 Vide Prof. Jadunath Sarkar's ‘ Chaitanya’s pilgrimage and teachings for 1485 ( as birth date ) and M. T. Kennedy's ‘ Religious life of India ( 1925 ) p. 13 for 1486 A, D 1034 विषुवं मीनकन्यार्थे वेकाक्षीने were | ( 4१६९४००20,8 vol. 1, p. 568 ). 102. Raghunandana 419 for calculating ravi-sarhkrinti he takes gake 1489 as the basis (1. €. 1567 A. D.). So that Tattva was composed just about that year. A ms. of the Chandoga-sraddha-tattva was copied in Sake 1497 (1575-76 A. D. )'°?5 and a ms. of the Matha- pratistha-tattva was copied in sake 1498 ( 1. €. 1576-77 A. D. ).1976 Therefore he must have flourished before 1575. Thus he flourished between 1490 and 1570 and his literary activity, which must have been spread over a long period if we consider the number of his works, 1165 between 1520-1570. Vide an interesting discussion about his date in JASB for 1915, pp. 354-357 by M M. Chakravarti who places Raghunandana between 1510-1565 A. D. 103, Narayanabhatta Narayanabhatta was the most famous of the celebrated family of the Bhattas of Benares. For a detailed account of the family and the contribution of the several members thereof to dharmasdstra, vide my Introduction to the Vyavaharamaytkha (v-xv1). M. M. Haraprasad Sas.ri has brought to light a biography of this family written by Sankarabhatta, ason of Narayanabhatta (Ind. Ant. for 1912 vol. 41, pp. 7-13). Narayanabhatta’s father Ramesvarabhatta whose gotra was Vigvamitra migrated from Pratisthana ( Paithan ) in the Deccan to Benares. RameSsvarabhatta was a very learned man and his learning drew to him students from the whole of India. Nara- yanabhatta was born according to Sankarabhatta’s biography in Jake 1435 inthe month of Caitra (i.e. about March 1513 A. D. ) Nariyanabhatta was the eldest of three sons, the other two being Sridhara and Madhava. Narayanabhatta learnt all the éastras at the feet of his father. Pandits all over India looked up to him as their leader and patron and he was an assiduous collector of Sanskrit mss. Itis said that Narayanabhatta brought down by his holiness rain in 1 season of drought ‘and thereby induced the Mahomedan ruler that had razed the temple of Vigvesvara at Benares to the ground to allow him to rebuild it. For his erudition and piety Narayanabhatta was honoured with the title ‘ Jagadguru ’ and his family was given the first place of honour in the assembly of learned Brahmanas and at the recitations of the Vedas. It was Narayanabhatta and his Equally worthy descendants that raised daksinatya 0411415 to the 1025 Mitra’s Notices, vol. 171, p. 80 No. 1081. 1026 Mitra’s Notices, vol. ITI, p. 53 No. 1083. 420 History of Dharmatdstra position of high eminence at Benares which they still hold. Nara- yanabhatta wrote numerous works on dharmasastra among which may be mentioned the Antyestipaddhati ( printed by Nirnayasagara Press >), the Tristhalisetu (dealing with the ceremonies to be per- formed generally at all sacred places and particularly at Prayaga, _ gS and.Gaya ) and the Prayogaratna ( printed at the Nirnayasagara Press, 1915 A. D.). This last contains detailed descriptions and rituals of the sarmskiras from garbhadhana to vivaba. His are standard works on the subjects they deal with and are used even now almost throughout the whole of India. He composed a com- mentary on the introductory verses contained in the Kalamadhava ( vide Madras Triennial cat. vol. III. Sanskrit C. p. 4114 No. 2852) and a commentary on portions of the Sastradipika of Parthasarathi- migra. He composed a work on ordeals which is referred to in the Vyavaharatattva of Nilakantha (vide p. 457 of my edition and Bikaner cat. p. 387 No. 832 for a Divyanusthana-paddhati of Nara- yanabhatta ) and also paddhatis on the dedication of gardens, tanks etc. He exercised a profound influence over later writers directly and indirectly through his sons and grand-sons. As he was born in 1513 A. D. and composed the commentary on the Vrttaratnakara in 1545 A. D., his literary activity must be placed between 1540 and 1570 A. D. This is further corroborated by the fact that his grandson Kamalakarabhatta composed the Nirnayasindhu, one of his earliest works, in 1612 A. D. There is a work on dharmasastra called Dharmapravrtti composed by a Narayana. Mr. K.P. Jayasval holds that this was composed by jagadguru Narayanabhatta (JBORS for 1927, vol. XIII, parts IlI-IV, p. IX). The same view is held by M. M. Haraprasad Sastri (Ind. Ant. for 1912 p. 7). But this identity is extremely doubtful. The benedictory verses'*?? in the Dharmapravrtti are different from those of the Prayogaratna and Tristhalisetu, the method of treat- ment and the style are different and the colophons are also different. The: author of the Dharmapravrtti does not mention his ancestors as Narayanabhatta does. Nilakantha in 115 Vyavaharamayokha 1037 The introductory verse is नारायणं नमस्छत्य कामदां च सरस्वतीम्‌ | गणनार्थं गुरेव धमैसंरक्षणाय वै ॥ धर्मपवृ्ये करियते कलो नारायणेन तु। 1, 0. at. p. 4 No. 1560. 108, Narayanabhatta 421 7145०28 fault with the Dharmapravrtti by saying that certain quotations therein are unauthoritative. 104. Todarananda Raja Todaramalla, the celebrated finance minister of Akbar, compiled an extensive encyclopedia of civil and religious iaw, astronomy and medicine. The several parts of that encyclopedia dealing with dcara, dana, vyavahara, sraddha, viveka, prayascitta, samaya were called saukhyas. An account of some of the saukbyas that were available to me may be concisely given here. The Vyava- harasaukhya ( 0. C. ms. No. 366 of 1875-76 ) begins with an invo- cation of Siva, speaks of the parasika emperor'*?? ( Akbar ) of Hind (India ) and then deals with the several topics of judicial pro- cedure such as the king’s duty to look into disputes, the sabha, judge, meaning of the word vyavahdra, enumeration of 18 vyavaharapadas, time and place of vyavahara, the plaint, the reply, the agent of the parties ( pratinidhi ), pratyakalita, the superiority of one mode of proof over another, witnesses, documents, possession, inference, ordeals and oaths,'grades of punishments and fines. The Vyavahara- saukhya does not dwell on the exposition of the several titles of law. Besides the smrti writers, it principally relies on the Kalpataru, the Parijata, Bhavadeva, the Mitaksara, the Ratnakara, Harihara and Halayudha, The several sections are styled harsas. The Vivahasaukhya ( D. C. ms. No. 868 of 1884-87 ) is concern- ed with the astrological aspects of marriage ( €. g. the proper year, month, day, sign, naksatra &c.,for marriage ). It names numerous authors and works, some of which are noted below.'°3° ee etree 1028 Vide p. 134 of व्यवहारमयुख ( my edition ). 1099 श्रीमान्हेन्द्वपारसीकधरणीशिकस्य राजा्रणी राजा AST AUS SCOTT TITAS | लोकानामतिगाढदुनैयतमोश्वैसाय TATA भ्यवहारनिणेयकर भेणीं तनोल्यु- ज्ज्वलाम्‌ पर 200 verse. 090 उत्पल, चण्डेभ्बर ( ०० राजाभिषेक ), चतुरवगंचिन्तामणि, जयतुङ्ग, नरिविकम, देवतमनोहर (Tae 1), दैवहचिन्तामाणि, पृथ्वीचन्द्रोद्य, भीमपराक्रम, भुजबल, HIP, राजमार्तण्ड, रत्नकोश, wee, Magis ( % वराह ), Marea, व्यवहार WH, ध्यवहारोश्चय, श्रीपति, सत्याचायं, ans, संहति मरदीप, सिडधान्त- शिरोमणि, | 49 History of Dharmasaetra The Sraddhasaukhya (D.C. ms. No. 257 of 1884-87) is an extensive work and deals with the usual topics such as the different kinds of Sraddhas, the time and place for Sraddha, the proper brahmanas, sapindikarana &c. The sections of this work also are divided into harsas. Besides those enumerated above the authors and works mentioned are noted below.7°3! The Jyotihsaukhya ( D. C. ms. No. 915 of 1886-92 ) constitutes the Sarhhita branch of Indian astronomy and deals with such topics as the results of eclipses, the appearance of comets, the rise of Aga- stya, Ursa major, the signs of the Zodiac &c. It frequently refers to Kasyapa, Garga (or Vrddhagarga), Parasara, Mayaracitra, Varaha. The colophons state that Todaramalla was a scion of the Tandala (or-na) family and that the work was compiled by Nilakantha at the order of Todaramalla.'°3? This Nilakantha appears to be the author of the Sanjfatantra on which a commentary was written by his son Govinda in 1622 A. D., in which it is stated that Nilakantha was honoured by Akbar and had composed the To- darananda.'°33 In the Tajika-Nilakanthi of Nilakantha it is stated that the author composed works on the three branches of Tyotisa which gave delight to Todara.'°34 The Jyotihsaukhya was composed in Sake 1494"; (1. €. 1572 A.D. ). The ms. of the Vyavaharasaukhya bears at the end the date samvat 1638 (1581-82936 A. D. ) which seems to be the date of its composition. Todaramalla was a man of versatile genius. He distinguished himself as an able commander as well as a great 1031 ककं, त्रिकाण्डमण्डन, नारायण, प्रकाशकार्‌, माधवीय, वर्धमान, वासुदेव, AAS, mare, श्रीदत्त, स्मृतिमश्जरीकार. 1082 दकि श्रीमन्महयराजधिराजश्रीरैडलवंशतिलकटोडरमह्करिते श्रीदैवज्ञवयनीलकण्ठ- uaa टोडगानन्दे ज्योतिःसुखे संहितास्कन्धे & ०. folio 838. 1038 Vide oat. of BBRAS mas. part I, 7 . 187 No. 262. 1084 यन्नाम प्रथितं हि भूमिवलये शिष्यमशिष्यमहदू म॒मीपालसमूहसेवितपदायोकड्बरेणा- न्वितः । श्रीदिष्ठीपभुणा हि टोडरषिभोरानन्दूदं ज्योतिषं त्रिस्कन्धं स्वरतः qari हेस्तत्ताजिकै चाकरोत्‌ ॥ 9th verse, Peterson’s cat, of Ulwar mas., extract No. 502. 1095 ^ तथा च सामरतिकः शकः १५९ षटूदिकपश्चद्ियुतः ४०२० › folio 38. ८ x? $ -76. 1036 संवत्‌ १६१८ समये Brae २. शुक्रवार ' D.C, ms. No. 366 of 1875-76 104, Todardnanda 433 financier and statesman. For a brief account of his life, vide Bloch- mann’s translation of the Ain-i-Akbari, vol. I. pp. 351-352. It is there stated that he was Khetri by caste, that, though it is generally stated that he was born at Lahore, he was really born at Laharpur in Oudh ( p. 620) and that he died at Lahore on the rrth day of 998 of the Mussulman era '°37 (i.e. 1589 A. D. ). The Marathi magazine ‘ Itihasasarhgraha’ publishes an inscription on a stone found in the Draupadikunda at Benares wherein it is said that Todara ot the Tandana family constructed that’ beautiful reservoir in 1646 of the Vikrama ल (i.e. 1589 A.D. ). Therefore it follows that literary works were compiled under the patronage of Yodarmal between 1565-1589 A. D 105. Nandapandita Nandapandita was a voluminous writer on dharmasastra. An account of his principal works on dharmasistra is given below, parti- cularly because most of them are yet unpublished. He composed a commentary called Vidvanmanohara on the Para- Sarasmrti. He expressly mentions therein that he follows the com- mentary of Madhavacarya.'°39 This commentary is referred to in his Vaijayanti.?°4° He also appears to have written a commentary called Pramitaksara o: Pratitaksara on the Mitaksara of Vijhanegvara.'1' This com- «~ ~~ ~~ ~ = ~~ ~ ~~ ~या छ 6 ee ee 1037 Vide also‘ Akbar’ in the Rulers of India series ( 1890) p. 134 where the date of his death is given as 10th Nov. 1589 A. D 1038 Vide इतिह्यससंग्रह ed. by the late Rao Bahadur 7. ए. ८०९९8018, vol. I, part 4, p. 20. ऋतुनिगमरस्तासासंमिते (१६४६) वत्सरेशे सुरुतिरूतिषितेषी टोडरक्षोणि- पलः | विद्धितविविधपूर्तोचीकरख्चास्वापी विमलसलिलसारां बद्ध सोपानपङ्किम्‌ ॥ 0.9 धमधिकारिकुलकैरवकाननेन्दुश्रीर।मरपरण्डतसुतेन विनायकेन । व्याख्यायते करियुगो चितवणधमेश्ं पराशरमुखोद्रतमस्यशब्दः ॥ माधवाचार्थनिरिष्व्याख्यामार्गानुसारिणः । स्खलन्नपि ( स्खलतोपि १ ) न मे दोषः परम्त्यथगामिनः ॥ verses 3 and 5, 1. 0. cat. p. 377 No. 1301. 040 विवृतं SARE विद्न्मनोहरायां दत्तकमीमांसायां चास्माभिरिति नेह प्रतन्यते । वैजयन्ती On विष्णुधरमेसूत 15. 42 104 On fey 15.9 he says ‹ स्वैरिण्याः पनःसंस्कारामावग्योपपादितोस्माभि सविस्तरं मिताक्षरारीकायां प्रतीताक्षरायामिति Aezqa |’ folio 86 b of the I. 0 ma. ( of बेजयन्ती ), ०४ विष्णु० 16. 1 पविशचेषस्तु मिताक्षरादीकायां भमिताक्षरावा- मस्मृत्छतायामवगन्तभ्यः ’ ( folio 93 ०). 424 History of Dharmasastra mentary was probably not completed, as only fragments are found with his descendants. Nandapandita also composed a work called Sraddhakalpalata, which is referred to in his Suddhicandrika'°#? and in the Vaijayanti. In this work'*+3 he refers to a city called Sadharana ( probably modern Saharanpur ) where the Sahagila family ruled. He speaks of Sirhhamalla, Vasavana, Rupacandra, Bhapacandra and Parami- nanda as successive members of the dynasty and says that he was urged to write the work by the last of them and that he relies upon the Sraddhadipika of Govindapandita.t#4 At the end of the ms. of the Vaijayanti in the Deccan College Collection it is said that the Vidvanmanoharai, the Smrtisindhu and the Sraddhakalpalata were the commentaries composed by Nandapandita.'°45 But from the contents given in the India Office Catalogue it does not appear that the work was a commentary. It is divided into five stabakas and deals with the usual topics, viz. what is Sraddha, the proper time and place for it, the proper brihmanas, various kinds of Sraddhas &c. The princi १ authors and works named therein are given below.'6 The Suddhicandrika, a commentary on the Sadasiti or ASaucanirnaya of Kaugikaditya, is also one of the works of Nanda- pandita. It is referred to in his Vaijayanti?+7, The Bhadkamkar collection made by Prof. Velankar contains a ms. of this work and it has recently been published in the Chowkhamba S. series. The principal authors and works quoted therein are noted ०९८1०५५. १० 1063 ‹ स च ज्येष्ठ एवेत्य॒पपादितं शा द्कल्पलतायाम्‌ › folio 31 bof शुद्धिबन्द्िका , On विष्णा 21. 19 “अन्नान्यो विशेषः श्नादरकल्पलतायामस्ममिष्षपादित इति नेदोर्यते ' । folio 183 ४ ( वैजयन्ती ) 1043 Vide I. 0. cat. 7. 556 No. 1731 for श्रादूकल्पलता. 1044 गोविन्द्पण्डितरूत।मवलम्ड्यातियत्नतः | द्रुकल्पलतामेतां Be at श्राददीपिकाम्‌ ॥ I. 0. cat. p. 552, 1045 “पराशरस्मृतेष्टीका विद्न्मनोहरा स्मृतिसिन्धुः । श्राद्धकल्पलता चेता नन्दुपण्डितरूना टीकाः Th D.C. ms. No, 39. of 1866-68. 1046 कालविधान, कालाद्शं, FANE, धमेभरदीप, निणयपरदीपिका, पुराणसमरुचय, भ।टुकमल, श्रादकािक।, श्रद्धचिन्तामाणि, maha, श्रद्धभदीप, स्मृतिदर्पण, स्मृतिरत्नावारे, TARA. 1047 on विष्णु 22.8 “ विस्तरस्तु शुदिचन्द्िकायमवगन्तष्यः * folio 125 b of वैजयन्ती. 1048 अमृतव्याख्या (०० पारस्करगृद्य), धर्मपदीप, धर्मवृत्ति, नारायणस्वंहञ, Meee (1), मदन, माधव, ललित, Sse, वधेमान, Marra, विश्वादुर्शं, Mpa, शङ्खधर, स्मृतिचन्द्रिका, Erk, Kea ( ०० गोतमधम॑सूज ), TEA, हारलतािषरण, luo. Nandapardéta 425 Another work of Nandapandita is the Smrtisindhu, which seems to have been an extensive digest of smrti material. Portions of it have been recovered. In the Deccan College Collection there is a ms. of the Sarhskara-nirnayataranga of the Smrtisindhu, which, according to a verse at the end, was composed by Nanda- pandita at the command of king Harivarhsa-varman of the Mahendra family and son of king Mango. '9 It appears that he compiled a summary of the doctrines of his work Smrtisindhu. That summary was called Tattvamuktavali.'os¢ It is almost certain that the fragment of the Tattvamuktavali noticed in the BBRAS cat. at p. 217 is part of this work. That fragment contains 8 verses on upakarma and three on holika with commentary and the verses are numbered from 557 to 564 and then 607-609. If the above surmise be correct, the work was a large one and con- tained over 610 verses. Two of the verses name Hemadri and Parijata.?°5? The Vaijayanti or Kesava-Vaijayanti is a famous work of his. It isa commentary on the Visnudharma-satra. Extracts from it have been published by Dr. Jolly in his edition of Visnu. This is an extensive work. The following account is taken from the ms. in the India Office Library ( vide cat. p. 393 No. 1342 for a brief description ). In this work he refers toa Brahmana dynasty of the Vasistha gotra at Vijayapura ( Vijayanagara ? ) in Karnata country, in which was born Kondapanayaka, whose son was Keéa- vanayaka, whose son was Ananta alias Vavarasa, whose sons were Kegava and Rudra. KeéSava, son of Kondapa, seems to have gone 1049 ' अस्ति श्रीहरिवशवर्मनृपतिङ्गोनृषस्यात्मजो मदिनद्रान्वयमौलिमूषणमणिः सङ्क्पचिन्त।- मणिः । Freeda निबन्धराजमरुजत्तत्कीर्तिबन्धोज्ज्वलं तस्थाज्ञामनु नन्दपण्डित इमं धर्माधिकारी भवः ॥ D. ©. ms. No. 612 of 1883-84 ; vide Bhandarkar’s Report for 1883-84 p. 353 for extract. 1050 Vide Mitra’s Bikaner cat. 7. 476 No. 1204 fora ms. of the aeqagyaa with the commentary यालमूषा The last verses are: aqua: Wag स्मृतिसिन्धोः eae) तस्वमुक्ताव्छीमेतां निरभमे नन्द्पण्डितः॥ तच्वमुक्तावलीव्याख्या THN SAT मया। बाललीलाधरः Bers प्रीपतामनया सद्‌ा ॥ 1051 It begins श्रावणे भवणे कुयुरुपाकमाश्वलायनाः ॥ 557; verse 561 is ufesiga- मण्युक्तं पारिजातमतश्रुतेः | and 564 1» हेमाद्विरप्युवाचाज पञ्चमीं SABE | He De १4 426 History of Dharmaéastra to Benares with his sons and grand-sons and made extensive gifts of all kinds.'°5 There is a hyperbolical description of his great gifts (mahadanas including tula, i. e. weighing against gold or silver), Kegavanayaka enjoined upon Nandapandita the task of composing a commentary on the Visnusmrti.'°53 Inthe colophons at the end of the chapters of Visnu, Kondapanayaka is styled Maharajadhiraja and it is said that Nandapandita was encouraged in the task by Kesgavanayaka alias Tammasanayaka. Atthe end of chapter ror, we are told that Kesavanayaka, Nandapandita’s patron, secured moksa by breathing his last on the Manikarnika in Benares.°5+ There are six verses at the end one of which says that in the Kali age there is no one more liberal than Vavarasa (a son of KeSavanayaka ) and no one more learned than Nandapandita.'°55 As he wrote on the encouragement of KeSava, the commentary is 2150 styled KeSava-Vaijayanti. Among the authors and works mentioned in this commentary are Devasvami, Budhasmrti, Bhavadeva, Madha- vacarya, Vacaspati, Sarvajiia, Subodhini ( com. on the Mit. ), Hara- datta, Hemadri. In the Vaijayanti he refers to no less than six of his works viz : the Vidvan-manohara, the Pramitaksara, the Sraddha- kalpalata, the Suddhicandrika, the Dattaka-mimarhsa ( vide note 1040 above ). But in the Dattaka-mimarhsa itself he refers to his Kegava-Vaijayanti as already composed.'°5* Therefore it follows that both works were probably being composed at the same time. The Vaijayanti is one of the leading authorities of the Benares School of modern Hindu Law.?°57 1052 श्रीविश्वनयिक्षणकाम्ययासौ Tq Vat युतः HG Tada गजः स्वयुथ्यः कदाचिदानन्द्वनं पवेश ॥ ( verse 68). 1058 ध्मययपि कोटिशोन्न विहिताः संत्रोषमन्तस्ततो नेव प्राप यदा तदा रचयितुं विष्णुस्मृते- ध्यारुनिम्‌ । रेच्छत्तत्र च रमपण्डितसुतं श्रीकेशवः क्ष्मापतिर्वि्रत्ससादि नन्दृपण्डितमति- भीत्या FATT स्वयम्‌ ॥ Verse 91. 1054 कामो वावरसाक्षणप्रृतिमिः TS: शुभैः ख्यापितो मोक्षः श्रीमणिकर्णिकामृवि तनुत्यागेन संपादितः ॥ 1055 eel वावरसादन्यो वदान्यो न महीतले । श्रीनन्द्पण्डिताद्म्यो Marat न जातुचित्‌ ॥ 1056 ' अस्मस्छतायां विष्णस्मृतिटीकायां केशववैजयन्त्यामवधेयम्‌ › ॥ (on priority among the twelve kinds of 9009 ) p. 112 of द्तकमीभांसा, 1087 Vide I. L. BR. 16 Cal. 367 at p. 97४. 206, Nandapandita 437 Nandapandita, though he generally follows the Mitaksara, was not a slavish admirer of Vijfianesvara. He does not accept the explanation the Mitaksara gives of Yaj II. 17 (saksisibhayatah etc.). Similarly on Visnu 8. 12, 22. 41, 23.11, 27.2 he emphatically says that the Mitaksara is wrong.'°5? He prefers the father to the mother as an heir (on Visnu 17. 6-7) and seems to have placed the paternal grandmother as an heir after the mother but before the brother (folio ror b). He explains sapinda relationship in the same way as the Mit.'°59 does. He says that the word ^ bhratarah ’ in Yaj. should be explained as standing for ‘ brothers and sisters’ and that in the father’s line, after the brother and brother’s son, the brother's grandson succeeds and, on failure of the brother’s grandson, the paternal grandfather, his son and grandson are heirs one after another, i. €, in each line three generations succeed and then there is a devolution in favour of the next higher line. This view is opposed to that of the Subodhini and the Smrticandrika, which take only the son and grandson of each paternal ancestor. Vide my notes to the Vyavaharamayakha for fuller details ( pp. 253-254 ) Nandapandita stands alone among modern nibandhakaras in having recognised a uterine brother'®® (i.e. the son of the same mother but of a different father ) as an heir. It is remarkable that Nanda = ----~+-- ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ न> क ----~~ — ~ er te i ee 1058 एतेन पुंसवनस्य क्षेरसंस्कारतयासरूत्करणं मन्यमानो विज्ञानेन्वरोपि परास्तः । वेजयन्ती on विष्णु 27 1059 पिण्डो Sat जनकः स॒ समानो येषां ते सप्ण्डस्तेषां भावः सपिण्डता । वेजयन्ती on विष्णु, 22. 5 ( folio 124 a ). 1060 Vide वेजयन्ती on विष्णु 17.8 ( 011० 102 8). The important portion is ' तन्न प्रथमं समानमात।पितृक। भ्रातरो wets: । पित्रवयवाधिक्यन पत्यासनन्नतरत्वात्‌ । तद्भावे समनमातापितृका भगिन्यो गृह्णीयुः । तासां भिनमातृकनात्रपेक्षया संनि- हितत्वात्‌ । मिन्नोद्राणां arn मिन्नबीजानां ar विप्रकर्षात्‌ 1 तद्भवं तु तेपि गृह्णीयुः । ... तच्रापि प्रथमे समानपितृकाः पश्चात्समानमावृका बीजस्य प्राधान्यात्य- THAT करमनियामकलवात्‌ | तद्यथा । एकष्य द्वे पल्यी | तत्रैकस्यां al पृत्रावन्य- स्यामेकः grad जनितोनन्तरं च द्विपुश्रान्यपतिमाश्नित्य पुत्रान्तरं जनयामासेति तस्मा- भयः पुत्रा Ty: | तत्र पूर्वयोरन्यतरस्मन्परमीते तदनं समनमातापितूक एव प्रथमं गृह्णी यात्‌ । तदभावे समानपितृको भिन्नोद्रोपि गृह्णीयात्‌ | बीजप्राधान्यात्‌ । तद्भवे सभानमातृको भिन्पिवृकोपीति 428 History of Dharmasistra pandita preferred a person's predeceased son’s widow (i. ९. widowed daughter-in-law ) as an heir to that man’s own daughter. "०८ The Dattaka-mimarhsa is the most famous work of Nandapandita. It was translated very early by Sutherland ( comprised in Stoke’s Hindu Law Books). In the following the edition of Bharatacandra Siromani ( published in 1885 with his own commentary ) has been used. In this work he lays down rules as to the person who may adopt, when he may adopt, who can give in adoption, who may be adopted, the motives of adoption, the necessary ceremonies of adoption, the results of adoption. Among the authors and works quoted or referred to those mentioned below may be noted.'° From very early days of the British rule in India the Dattaka- mimarns4 came to be regarded as the standard work on adoption. In Collector of Madura v. Mootoo Ramalinga’°®s the Privy Council says ‘“‘Again of the Dattaka-mimarhsa of Nandapandita and the Dattaka- candrika of Devannabhatta, two treatises on the particular subject of adoption, Sir William Macnaghten says that they are respected all over India ; but that, when they differ, the doctrine of the latter is adhered to in Bengal and by the southern jurists, while the former is held to be the infallible guide in the provinces of Mithila and Benares.” That this estimate is somewhat too strongly put has been said by the Privy Council itself in Bhagwansingh v. Bhagwan- singh*°®4 © to call it infallible is too strong an expression and the estimates of Sutherland and of West and Buhler seem nearer the true mark ; but itis clear that both works must be accepted as bearing high authority for so long a time that they have become embedded in the general law.’ The Privy Council further lays down ‘their Lordships cannot concur with Knox J. in saying that 1061 वैजयन्ती on विष्णु 17. 4( folio 1008 ) श्वशुरमरणे न्वश्रस्नुषयोः स्वत्वसताम्येन श्वभ्र मरे स्नुषाया एव साधारणसाम्यात्‌ (! ) । तदभावे क इत्याह । तद्मवे दुष्वृगानि । तेषां पुत्रादिस्नुषान्तानामभवि दुहितरो धनं गृह्णीयुः | Vide I. L. R. 16 Cal. 367 at p. 376 where this view is referred to. 1062 अपराकं, कल्यतरु, देवस्वामी, प्रयोगपारिजात, Tac, मिताक्षरा, मेधातिथि, वाच- ena, वैजयभ्ती, सर्वज्ञ, THR, शबरस्वामी ( ००५. on सत्याषाढश्रीत ), स्मृति- चन्द्रिका, हरदत्त, हेमाद्रि. 1063 12 Moo. I. A. 397 at p. 487. 1064 L. R. 261. A, 153 at p. 161. 108. Nandapanidita 429 their (of the Dattaka-mimarhsa and Dattaka-candrika) authority is open to examination, explanation, criticism, adoption or rejection like any scientific treatiseson European jurisprudence’.'°*s5 Even in those parts of the Bombay Presidency where the Vyavaharamayakha is a work of paramount authority, the Dattakamimarhsa has on the subject of adoption been preferred in certain matters to the Vyavaharamayakha. For example, the Bombay High Court, following the Dattaka- mimarhsa, has laid down that among the three higher castes a man cannot adopt his own daughter’s, sister’s, or mother’s sister’s son. The view of the Vyavaharamayakha, on the contrary, is that he can take these in adoption. The limits to which Nandapandita will be followed by the courts are laid down in Ramachandra v. Gopal 3‘ The authority of Nandapandita must be accepted except where it can be shown that he deviates from or adds to the smrtis or where his version of the law is opposed to such established custom as the Courts recognise’. 1° Several views expressed in the Dattakamimirhsa have been set at naught in the various provinces by the British Indian Courts. Nandapandita held that a widow could not adopt at all.'°¢7 Except in Mithila this view has nowhere been entertained in India and the Courts have held that the Law of Benares, Bengal, Madras and Bombay is different. Nandapandita put forward the position that the brother’s son must be preferred for adoption over any other Sagotra or sapinda.'°® This has, however, been treated in all provinces as no more than a mere recommendation and that failure to observe it entails no legal or religious consequences whatever. The expression ‘ putracchaya’ in ‘ putracchayavaham’ occurring in the text of Saunaka was explained by Nandapandita to mean ^ similarity to a son born’ and he said that the similarity consist- ed in the possibility of being begotten by means of miyoga and the like.'°69 Sutherland wrongly introduced the word ^ marriage ’ after 1065 L. R. 26 ए, A. 113 at p. 132. 1066 I. L. R. 32 Bom, 619 at p. 624. 1067 अनेन विधवाया भ्रनुज्ञानास्तभवात्‌ अनधिकारा गम्यते । 1068 संनिहितस्गोश्रसपिण्डेषु च भरालृपुत् एव पु्रीकार्य इति । ५७१ पुत्रश्छाया Game तर्च नियोगादिना स्वयमुत्पादनयोम्यत्वं यथा भातृसपिण्डसगो- भादिपुशनस्य | ततश्च भातृपितृन्यमातुलदौहि्िमागिनेयादीनां निरासः । 430 History of Dharmatasira siyoga in his translation and some of the High Courts in India, following this wrong translation, evolved the rule that no onc could be adopted whose mother the adopting father could not have legally married in her maiden state.'°7° But the Bombay High Court has laid down that the rule is restricted to the three specified cases of the daughter’s son, the sister’s son, and the mother’s sister’s son.'°7! From the text ( brahmandditraye nasti bhagineyah sutah kvacit ), Nandapandita evolved the curious rule that a widow cannot adopt to her deceased husband her own brother’s son. But the Privy Council has refused to follow this dictum on the ground that the gloss of Nandapandita is an extension not based on the authority of any smrti and has upheld such an adoption. ष्मः About the personal history of Nandapandita we do not know much. ‘Mandlik in his Hindu Law (वक्शा, n. 3) gives what information he could gather from descendants of Nandapandita living in Benares. According to him the founder of the family was Laksmidhara who was a resident of Bidar ( now in the Nizam’s dominions ) and who went to Benares. Nandapandita was the sixth in descent from him. Dr. Jolly visited at Benares Pandit Dhundiraja Dharmadhikari who was 9th in descent from Nanda- pandita ( Tagore Law Lectures, p. 15 ) and Mandlik’s information also was gathered from persons who were gth in descent from Nandapandita. Mandlik also givesa detailed genealogical tree. We learn from several works of Nandapandita and their colophons that he was also named Vindyakapandita and was the son of Ramapandita of Benares who is styled Dharmadhikari. Nandapandita also ir described as Dharmadhikari in the Samskaranirnaya-taranga of the Smrtisindhu (vide note 1049 above). It appears that Nandapandita was at different times patronised by rich patrons from different parts of India. He composed the Sraddhakalpalata for Paramananda of the Sahagila family of Sadharana, the Smrtisindhu for Harivarnsavarman of the Mahendra family and the Vaijayanti for Kegavanayaka of Madhura. a ae 1070 Vide 7. L. R. 11 Mad. 49 ( F. B.), I. L. ए. 27 All. 417, I. L. R. 43 Mad. 830. 1071 Vide I. L. R.32 Bom. 619, I. L. R. 36 Bom. 533, 15 Bom. L. R. 824 ( paternal aunt's son could be validly adopted), I. L. R. 39 Bom. 410 ( adoption of half-brother held valid ). 1072 Puttulal v. Parbati 1, L. R. 9 All, 359 ( P.O. )- 106 Nandapandita 431, Mandlik notes that Nandapandita is credited with the authorship of 13 works. Eight works of Nandapandita have been -named and described above. Mandlik names six of these. Besides these he is said to have written Navaratra-pradipa, three sections of a work named Harivamgavilasa (viz. danakautuka, ahnikakautuka and sarhskara- kautuka ), Balabhusa, Tirthakalpalata, Kalanirnayakautuka, Kasipra- kasa, Madhavananda. But we saw above (note 1050) that the Bala- 0175 is only a commentary on the Tattvamuktavali ( probably com- posed by another writer). The Kasiprakasa was certainly composed by Nandapandita as he is described in the India Office ms. to have been the son of Ramapandita.'°73 That work was composed at the order of one Sarvabhatta, who was the guru of Krsnanayaka of Madhuri. In Mitra’s Notices two works, Jyotihsastrasamuccaya and Smarta- samuccaya, are described as composed by Nandapandita, son of Devasarman and Vrnda.'°7+ The latter seems to have been an extensive work and dealt with tithiniryaya, intercalary month, marriage, sapinda relationship, the sarhskdras, daily observances, antyestt ( funeral rites ), a@sauca, Suddhi, Ssraddha, prayascitta, dayabhaga and vyavahara. Though the name of the father, Devasarman, creates suspicion in one’s mind, both these works must be regarded as the works of Nandapandita, son of Ramapandita, as in the Smartasamuccaya the author refers his readers to his Dattaka- mimamsa for the subject of adoption. It is not unlikely that just as Nandapandita had the alias Vinayaka, his father Ramapandita was also called Devagarman. Mandlik (Hindu Law (दशा, n. 3) notes that on a copy of the Madhavananda-kavya composed by Nanda the year samvat 1655 (1599 A. 0. ) is given, probably in Nandapandita’s own hand- writing. The Vaijayanti was one of Nandapandita’s latest works. That work, we are told, was composed at Kasi in Vikrama sathvat 1679 ( Nov. 1623 ) on the Full moon of Kartika when the sun was in Scorpion and the moon in Taurus.'°75 Therefore the literary 1073 Vide 7, O. oat. p. 391 No. 3701. 1074 Vide vol. V. p. 80 No. 1762 and vol. VI, p. 165 No. 2105. 1075 at विक्रमभास्करस्य गाणिते नन्दाद्विषद्मूमिमिः पर्णे कार्तिकमाति वृश्िकगते मामो वृषस्थे विधो । काश्यां केशवनायकस्य नृपतेराज्ञामवाष्य स्मृते- विष्णोभ्यारुतिमावकार्‌ विमलां श्रीनन्दश्मा सुधीः ॥ 7th verse at the ond, 43४ History of Dharmasisira activity of Nandapandita must be placed between 1595 and 1630 A. D. Mandlik in his Hindu Law (p. 281) says that the Vaijayanti of Nandapandita is referred to in the Vyavaharamayakha of Nilakantha. I have not been able to find the reference in the latter work. 106. Kamalakarabhatta Kamalakarabhatta was one of the foremost scions of the Bhatta family. He was a grandson of the famous Narayanabhatta and -a son of Ramakrsnabhatta. He was one of three brothers, the eldest being Dinakara alias Divakara'°76 and the youngest was Laksmana- bhatta,'°?77 who studied under Kamalakarabhatta. Kamalakarabhatta’s father Ramakrsna also was a very'®?® learned man and a profound mimamsaka and his mother Uma immolated herself as a sati. Kamalakara was a man of profound erudition and composed works on almost every sastra. In some of his own works there are high eulogies of his learning and proficiency in Tarka, Nyaya, grammar, mimarhsa (in both the schools of Kumarila and Prabhakara), Vedanta, Poetics, dharmasastra and Vedic sacrifices.'°77 He composed more than twenty-two works. At the end of his Vivadatandava, it is said that he composed the Nirnayasindhu, a commentary on the Vartika (of Kumarila ), a work on the mimamsa ( Sastratattva ) and a series of 20 other works.’ At the end of a ms. of the 1076 बिन्दुमाधवपादाढ्नरोलम्यीरुतविग्रहम्‌ । ज्यार्यासं wat भह्ृदिवाकरमुपास्महे ॥ 6th Intro. verse of निर्णयसिन्ध 1077 अधीत्य लक्ष्मणाख्येन कमलाकरसोद्रात्‌ । आचारदतनं Sa यथामति वितन्यते ॥ th Intro. verse of अाचाररत्न, 1078 यो माह्तन्म्गह्नार्णवकर्णधारः AAR निसिटेष्वपि मर्ममेत्ता । योन्न श्रमः किलं रतः कमलाकरेण प्रीतोमुनस्तु सुती बुधरामरूष्णः ॥ शद्रकमलाकर्‌, 1079 ag दुस्तकैमेधः फकणिपतिमणितिः पाणिनीये प्रपञ्चे न्याये मायः प्रगल्मः भ्रकटितपटिमा TATE । प्रामः प्रामाकरीये पथि प्रथितदुदहान्तवेदाम्तािन्धुः। श्रौते साहित्यकाष्ये प्रच॒रतरगति्धभेश्षु यश्च ॥ from कन्यप्रकशन्याख्या D. ©, ms. No. 433 of 1895-1902, 1080 येनाकारि प्रोद्धटा aides टीक। चान्या Ayana । भीरामाइक्रथोरर्पिता निर्णयेषु सिन्धुः Ue तस्वकोतुहृते च yy Vide 1.0. oat. 7, 455 No. 1802; also vide D. ©, ms. No. 122 of 1883-84 for a ms. of कमलाकर ® commentary on the first pdda of the 2nd chap. called भावार्थं of the तन््रवार्तिंक, ५८७. «४५१५५८० ५५.५५ uhalla 433 Santiratna in the Bhau Daji collection there is a list of 22 works of his out of which the Nirnayasindhu is said to have been the 0151. "०" More than half of these works are concerned with topics of Dharma- Sastra, viz. the Nirnayasindhu, the Danakamalakara, Santiratna, Partakamalakara, Vratakamalakara, Prayascittaratna, Vivadatandava, Bahvrcahnika, Gotrapravaradarpana, Karmavipakaratna, Sadrakamala- kara, Sarvatirthavidhi. The Sudrakamalakara, the Vivadatandava and the Nirnayasindhu are the most famous of his works on dharma- sistra. Brief references may be made here to some of the works of Kamalakara-bhatta other than the three mentioned above. It appears from the introductory verses of the Vratakamalakara that Kamalakara intended to compose a digest on dharma called Dharmatattva in ten paricchedas'®®*? and not only carried it out but added some more works on dharma. It will be noticed that nine out of these 10 sections are enumerated under the same ‘names at the end of the Santiratna quoted above, the one not named being the section on acdra. Burnell mentions a work called Acaradipa by Kamalakara on daily duties and on the same page notices another work on ahnika by Kamalakara.'°83 It is difficult to say whether both are names of the same work. It is not unlikely that the dcara section of the digest Dharmatattva is the same as the Bahvrcahnika enumerated at the end of the Santiratna. There is a ms. of the Bavrcahnika at Bikaner.'°8+ It deals with daily duties commencing with rising HC WMT तत; YHA कनकाकरः LAKH वदन्तस्तं च सनाद्दकृतू OL ॥ पार्ये CHAS व्यवहरे तथापरम्‌ । seg EFA PALATE W Tat कर्मविपाङख्यं Bras galas । सोमप्रयेभैः शूद्राणां VAL उदरस्य TEA: ॥ रिष्पणी अ लथा श्जिदीपिकालोकसंक्षिता । मीमांसायां तथा शाञ्चतश्थस्य कमलाकरः ॥ TAMAR भिरं तथोत्तमम्‌ । रामरूष्णसुततेनेत्थ कमलाकरश्मणा । दयधिका विंशतीनां च wet रतनमाछिका । सेवां कर्तुमशक्तेन atin रामपाद्योः ॥ concluding verses of हान्तिरत्न, 1082 रामक्ष्णतनूजेन कमराकरशमणा | क्रियते धर्मतश्वानां कमलानामिहाकरः ॥ ब्रतदराने कर्मपाकः ८८५8 ते तथेव च । आचारो qaqa प्रायन्नित्तमथापरम्‌ ॥ UAT स्तीर्थविधिः परि qua J | Intro. verses to ब्रतकमलाकर, vide 741४798 Bikaner cat. p. 499, No. 1071. 1083 Vide Burnell’s Tanjore oat. p. 135 b. 1084 Vide Mitea's Bikaner oat. p, 355 No. 767, He De $$ 434 History of Dharmatietra from one’s bed at the brahma mubarta. In this work Kamalakara- bhatta refers to his own PrayaScittaratna, and to the Madanaparijata Madanaratna, Madhava and Sdalapani. The Partakamalakara'®s was an extensive work and dealt with the dedication of tanks, wells, trees and gardens to the public, the dedication of Agvattha tree and five sacred trees, dedication and laying the foundation of public buildings, consecration of sacred images, of Salagrama, of temples and flags, repairing of images, accidental breaking of temples, consecration of Vinayaka, pacification of planets, coronation of kings and emperors. In this work he mentions his own Dana- kamalakara. The Santiratna or Santikamalakara is a huge work.'°8% It deals with various rites for propitiating Vinayaka, the nine planets, and for averting the consequences of portentous occurrences and evil omens, birth on such constellations as mula, the observances known as Ekadasini, Laghurudra, Maharudra, Satacandi &c. He refers to his own Nirnayasindhu in this work. For his Gotrapravaradarpana or Gotrapravaranirnaya, vide I. 0), cat. p. 579 No. 1780. He follows the Pravaramaijijari in this work. This work is referred to in his Nirnayasindhu. In the Bombay Asiatic Society’s Library there is a ms. of his Sathskara-prayogakamalakara which appears to be over and above the 22 works enumerated above.'°*7 He starts with an enumeration of the 48 samskaras mentioned by Gautama, deals with the several sarhskaras of purmsavana, jatakarma, marriage &c., and with utsarjana and upakarma, propitiatory rites on the first appearance of menses, the Astaka Sraddha &c. His Sastratattva-kautuhala or Tattva-kamalakara appears to have been a work of considerable interest dealing with the bearing of the doctrines and maxims of the MimArhsa system on ritual and dharma- ३5118. "०88 =A ms. of it is dated samvat 1695 caitra Sukla 4 Friday (i. e. 9th March 1638 A. D. ) 1085 Vide Mitra’s Notices vol. V. p. 188 No. 1881 for पर्तकमलाकर; in the Bombay Asiatic Society's collection there is a portion of this, 1086 Vide I. O. cat. p. 568 No. 1758 and BBRAS cat. p. 234 No 729 for शान्तिर्न, 1087 Vide I. O. cat. p. 514 No 1630 for संस्कारकमटाकर, 1088 Vide Mitra’s Notices, vol. III. 9 .335 No. 1831 for तश्वकमलाकर्‌, a el 106, Kamalikarabhatta 435 For the Prayascittaratna, vide Buhler’s report, 3, p. 108. I was able to secure a ms. of the Vivadatandava from the Mandlik collection in the Fergusson College at Poona. That work closely resembles in method and matter the Vyavaharamayakha of Kamalakara’s cousin Nilakantha, the section on ordeals being almost the same in both. It treats of the following subjects : the sabha ; members of the sabha ; Judge, amatya; the scribe and the accountant ; conflict of smrtis ; the plaint, the reply, the modes of proof, viz., documents, witnesses, possession ; modes of punishment ; the principal and secondary sons ; the enumeration of the eighteen titles of law ; partition of heritage and detailed description of the other titles. Like the Vyavaharamaytkha, the Vivadatandava quotes the Madanaratna as frequently as ( or perhaps more frequently than ) the Mitaksara. The other writers and works quoted are noted below.'°®9 As it mentions several works of his own, viz. Nirnaya- sindhu, the Danakamalakara, the Prayaécittaratna and the Sadra- dharma (i. €, Sidrakamalakara ), the Vivadatandava was one of his latest works. On several points he differs from his own cousin Nilakantha. For example, he prefers the mother to the father as an heir and does not give the sister a high place among the gotraja heirs 25 Nilakantha does. The Vividatandava has been frequently noticed in judicial ५८८5108. "०५० The Sadrakamalakara (also called Sadra-dharmatattva or Sadra- dharmatattvaprakasa ) has been printed in Bombay several times (with Marathi translation ). I used the Nirnayasagara edition of 1895. In this work he refers to his own Danakamalakara, Partakamalakara, Prayaégcittaratna and Nirnayasindhu. Out of about two hundred authors and works quoted therein, prominent ones are noted below.'°9 This work is a standard treatise on the duties and religious observances of Sadras. 1089 अपराकं, Seay, गोविन्दराज, जीमूतवाहन, दिष्यतस्व (of गोड † °. रघुनन्दन ), भोज, मनुटीका, माधवीय, रत्नाकर्‌, विश्वरूप, शिरोमणि, शिरोमणिभट्वाचाय, 1090 VideI. L. R. 33 Bom. 452 at p. 459, I. L. 2. 9 081. 315 at 7, 324, I. L. R. 39 Cal. 319 at p. 331 for references to विवादताण्डव 1001 आचार्नूडामणि, तिथितत््त, मदनरत्न, माधवीय, रपनारायणीय, BRITE (of BAI ), शूलपाणि, श्रीदत्त, स्मृतिकोमुदी, हरिहूरमाष्य, 436 | Fistory of Dharmatidra He first starts with the discussion that the Sadra is not authoris- ed to study the Vedas, but that he can listen to the recitation by Brahmanas of smptis and puranas and religious rites are to be performed for Sadras with Puranic mantras. Then the following subjects are dealt with:— worship of Visnu and _ other deities by Sudras and the observances of vratas and fasts by them; Sudra can make gifts of works of public utility (purta); Sudra can adopt a son; the conflicting views as to the number of sarhskaras for 2 Sidra, most authors holding that he is entitled to ten sarhskaras ( without Vedic maniras ), viz. garbhadhana, purhsavana, simanta, jatakarma, namakarana, Sifuniskramana, annaprasana, cidakarma, karnavedha and vivaha; the five great daily yajiias were to be performed for the $ddra according to the Vajasaneyagakha ;?°9 éraddhas for Sadra (to be performed with uncooked food ); actions prescribed and forbidden in the case of Sadras; the details of various rites and sarhskaras of Sadras ; the daily duties of Sadras ; impurity on birth and death; rites after death ; duties of wives and widows ; persons of mixed castes who have to follow the rules laid down for Sadras; rules for those who are born of pratiloma connections ; about Kayasthas. The Nirnayasindhu or Nirnayakamalakara is the most famous of Kamalakara’s works. It isa monument of erudition, industry and lucidity. It has been judicially referred to as a work of authority.°93 I have used the Nirnayasagara edition of 1905 (with Marathi translation ). In the whole range of nibandhakaras there is hardly any other writer, except perhapas Nilakantha and Mitra- migra, who lays under contribution as many works as Kamalakara does. In the Nirnayasindhu about one hundred smrtis and over three hundred nibandhakaras are mentioned by name. In the introductory verses he expressly says that he pondered over the views of Hemadri, Madhava and other learned writers. The work is divided into three paricchedas. The following is a very concise 1092 This is interesting ¢ तथा sect TACIT भवन्ति — a ष्य व्‌[जसनेयि- शाखया कायाः । शद्धा वाजसनेयिन इति गोडनिबन्धे दंश्ोक्ते; । हरिहरभाष्ये विवाह- THU TAHA | शृद्रक माकर ए. 51; vide शुद्ररुष्यविश्ारतरव ( Jivananda vol, II p. 634) and मलभासितश्व ( vol. I, p. 792 ) for an explanation of this. 1093 I. L. R. 3 Bom. at p. 197; Khushaichand v. Bai Mané I. L. R. 11 Bom. 247 at p. 254 ; 1. L. R.46 Bom. at 2, 556; I. L.R.49 Bom. 739 at p. 797; I. L. R. 9 Cal 315 at p- $24, ध ॥ 106. Kamalakarabhatia 437 statement of the contents of this voluminous work. The principal subject is to give decisive opinions as to the proper times for various ‘eligious acts; the various views about the year being solar, lunar, idereal etc., months of four kinds, lunar, solar etc., sarhkranti_ rites ind gifts ; intercalary month; ksayamdasa; about tithis, suddba and yidbha (combined with another tithi on same day); vratas; the various vratas and festivals during the twelve months of the year ; the iamskaras from garbhadhana onwards ; sapinda relationship ; consec- ‘ation of images ; auspicious times ( mubartas) for various actions such as sowing operations, buying horses and cattle &c. ; sraddha ; mpurities on birth and death; rites after death, rites for sati; 21070 $ ३७8. The time when Kamalakara flourished can be determined with great accuracy. We saw above that the Nirnayasindhu was one of his earliest works and that it is referred to in several works of his. According to a verse at the end of the Nirnayasindhu the work was composed in 1668 of the Vikrama era 27) the 14th day of the dark half of the month of Magha when cyclic year was Raudra (i. €, on the 20th February 1612 A. D.). In a ms. noticed by M. M. Haraprasada Sastri the same verse is read differently, so as to refer the composition to Vikrama तवथ; 1678 ; but it is clearly a copyist’s error or misreading, since the cyclic year Raudra cannot tally with Vikrama 1678.'°9* We saw above that 1 ms. of the Tattvakamalaikara is dated 1638 A. D. Kamalakara was । voluminous writer and therefore we shall be not far wrong if his ‘iterary activity be assigned to the period between 1610 A. D. and 1640 A.D. This date is corroborated in several ways. His grand- ‘ather Narayanbhatta was born in 1513 A. 0. and he quotes in his Nirnayasindhu the Todarananda compiled in the last quarter of the 16th century. Gagabhatta alias VisveSvarabhatta, who officiated at the coronation of the great Shivaji in 1674 A. D., was Kamalakara- bhatta’s nephew. L | शनि नारित ०५ वसु्तुकुममिते ted नरषलिविकमतोध याति रोदन । तपति समा रधुपतिपादुसरोदैर्धितश्च ॥ Sth verse at end ; vide Notices of mss. by Hara- prasad Sastri vol. x, p.994, No. 4233 where the reading is वसुधातुक्रतुमूमिते, 438 History.of Dharmatistra 107. Nilakanthabhatta In my introduction to the Vyavaharamayukha ( Poona, 1926 ) I have dealt exhaustively with the personal history of Nilakantha, his works, their contents, their position in dharmagastra literature, the period of Nilakantha’s literary activity and his position in modern Hindu Law. In the following a brief “Résumé of the conclusions there arrived at is given. Nilakantha was a grandson of Narayanabhatta and a son of San- karabhatta. Sankarabhatta was a profound mimamsaka and com- posed several works on mimarhsa, viz. a com.on the Sastradipika, the Vidhirastyanadisana, the Mimarhnsabalaprakasa. He also wrote Dvaitanirnaya ( vide Annals of the Bhandarkar Institute, vol, III part 2. pp. 67-72 for an account of it ) and the Dharmaprakaga or Sarvadharmaprakasa. Nilakantha composed an encyclopaedia of reli- gious and civil law, styled Bhagavantabhaskara, in honour of his patron Bhagavantadeva, a Bundella chieftain of the Sengara clan, that ruled at Bhareha near the confluence of the Jumna and the Chambal. This work is divided into 12 sections (called smayakhas ‘rays’ ) on sarhskdra, acira, kala ( or samaya ), éraddha, niti, vya- vahara, dina, utsarga, pratistha, prayascitta, Suddhi, Santi. ‘These have been printed at Benares and some of them have been printed in Bombay at the Gujarati Press and by Mr. Gharpure. Besides this encyclopaedia he composed also a work called Vyavahiratattva, which isa summary of the Vyavaharamaytikha, and probably a work styled Dattakanirnaya. The Vyavaharatattva has been for the first time published by me as appendix I to my edition of the Vyavaharamayakha. Nilakantha is one of the foremost nibandhakaras. Being brought up ina family that had made the study of mimathsa its own for several generations, he is very acute in applying the maxims and rules of mimamsa to dharmagastra. He stands unsurpassed by any mediaeval Sanskrit writer on dharmaSistra in mastery over the vast smrti lore, in lucidity of exposition, in conciseness and ease of style, in clarity of vision and sobriety of judgment. Though he admired the learning and labours of such predecessors as VijiianeSvara, Hemadri and others, he does not slavishly follow their dicta and expresses his dissent from them most frankly. 107, Nulakanthabhatta 488 His Vyavaharamaydkha isa work of paramount authority on matters of Hindu law according to the decisions of the Bombay High Court in Gujerat, the island of Bombay and northern Konkan.1995 Even in the other parts of the Bombay Presidency such as the Maratha country and the Ratnagiri District the Vyavaharamayukha occupies a very important place though it is subordinate to the Mitaksara.1°9°© The general principle on which the Bombay High Court acts in construing the rules laid down in the Mitaksara and the Vyavaharamayukha is that the two works are to be harmonized with one another wherever and so far as that is reasonably pos- sible.'°97, Though the Mitaksara is a paramount authority in the Maratha country and the Ratnagiri District and though it is silent about the sister’s right as a gotraja heir, the courts, in deference to the authority of the Vyavaharamayakha, have assigned to the sister a high place as an heir even in the Maratha country and in Ratnagiri. Among the other Mayakhas, the Sarhskaramayokha has been frequently relied upon by the courts.'998 The Prayascitta- mayukha and the Pratisthamayakha'°%9 have also been relied upon in the High Court. The period of Nilakantha’s literary activity can be settled within very narrow limits, He was the youngest son of Sankarabhatta. In the Dvaitanirnaya, Sankarabhatta quotes the views of the Todara- nanda which, as we saw above, must have been composed between 1570 and 1589 A. D. So the Dvaitanirnaya could not have been composed before 1590 A. D. Nilakantha, the youngest son of San- karabhatta, could hardly have commenced his literary career earlier than Kamalakarabhatta who was the second son of Sankarabhatta’s elder brother. Kamalakara composed his Nirnayasindhu in 1612 पम mee Hain eaten aE I — Ah 0 ॥ 1, RS ह ह 1 = ~~~ ~~~ ee, --------=-. ee स) तननि 1095 Vide Lallubhat v. Mankuvarbai I. L. R. 2 Bom. 388 at p. 418 ;7. L. R. 6 Bom. 541 at p. 546; 1, L. R. 14 Bom. 612 at pp. 623-624; 1.1L. ए. 24 Bom. 367 ( ¢. B.) at p. 373. 1096 Vide Krishnaji v. Pandurang 12 Bom. H.C. R. 65 at pp. 67-68; 5 Bom. H. 0. R, (A.C. J) 181 at p. 185; 7 Bom. H. ©. R. (A. 6. 7 ) at p. 169; I. L. R. 14 Bom. 612 at p. 616. 1097 Gojabai ४, Shrimant Shahajirao I. L. ए, 17 Bom. 114 at ए. 118 and Kesserbat ४, Hunsraj I. L. ए. 30 Bom. 431 at p. 442 ( P. 0.}. 1098 I. L. R. 2 Bom. 388 at p. 425; 1. L. R. 3 Bom. 353 at p. 361 ; 1. L. R. 32 Bom. 81 at pp 88 and 96 ; 46 Bom. at p. 884. 1099 Vide Params 9, Mahadevi I. L. R. 34 Bom. 278 at p. 283 ( for प्रायन्यिच- मयुख ) and 22 Bom. L. R. p. 334 { for मतिष्ठामयुख ). dp lhigtery off Dabrmatisdea A.D. So Nilakantha's literary activity niust have comsnenced a good deal after 1610. One ms. of the Vyavahdaratattva bears the date samvat 1700 (1644 A. D. ). This shows that the Vyavaharatattva was composed not later than 1644 A.D. The Vyavaharatattva refers to the Vyavaharamayukha as already composed. Hence we may say, without being far from the truth, that Nilakantha’s literary career falls between 1610 and 1645 A. D. This date is confirmed by the fact that Nilakantha’s son Sankara wrote the Kundabhiskara in 1671 A. D. and Divakarabhatta, the son of Nilakantha’s daughter, composed his Acdrarka in 1686 A.D. It appears that there was probably a rivalry between the two great cousins Kamalakarabhatta and Nilakantha. On many matters their views diverged. Though the Nirnayasindhu is said to have been composed in 1668 of the Vikrama era, yet from the references to several works of his own in the Nirnayasindhu it looks as if Kamalakara revised it from time to time by adding on references to his own other works and to those of others. The Nirnayasindhu (Ill pariccheda, section on Dattakagrahana ) emphatically says that he who asserts the absence of ownership in one’s son in spite of Vedic indications is a fool.''%° It is not unreasonable to suppose that this is a hit at Nilakantha who must have been younger than Kamalakara and who tries hard in his Vyavaharamayakha to establish that there is no ownership in onc’s wife and children. 108. The Viramitrodaya of Mitranrisra The Viramitrodaya is a vast digest composed by Mitramisra embracing almost all branches of dharmasastra. Excepting the Catur- varga-cintamani of Heméadri, this work is probably the largest known on dharmaéastra. But it surpasses in interest and usefulness even Hemadri’s work since it deals with vyavaharaalso. It was divided into sections called prakasas. So far the prakasas on vyavahara, paribhasa, sathskdra, rajaniti, abmika, paja, tirtha and laksana have been pub- lished, the first by Jivananda ( Calcutta 1875 ) and the rest in the Chowkhamba Sanskrit series. The text of the dayabhaga portion of the Vyavaharaprakasa was also published by Golapchandra Sarkar Sastri with an English translation ( Calcutta 1879 ).. It appears that 1100 ‹ चु सवत्व नीवं वदन्‌ at एवं ° निर्णजरसिंधु) contrast oxagrerqy 9.98 ‹ गवा quite मर्यायां eres -तरणानुत्वनपेत्ये तदुभावात्‌ 1’ | 108. The Viramitrodaya of Mitramiéra 441 Mitramisra wrote on prayascitta also.*7°? But that work has not yet been met with. The very names of the sections of the Viramitrodaya convey an idea of the subjects dealt with in them. The Laksana- prakaSa deals with the auspicious signs of men, women, the several parts of human body, elephants, horses, thrones, swords, bows and with the characteristics and qualities of the queen, the ministers, the astrologer, physician, doorkeeper, description of Salagrima, siva- litga, rudraksa beads etc. In the abnikaprakasa he dilates upon the daily duties beginning with one’s rising from bed on brahma- muharta, Sauca, 4camana and ending with going to bed. The Vya- vaharaprakaga is probably the largest nibandha on vyavahara. This is divided into four parts. The first part deals with the meaning of vyavahara, the constitution of the sabha (court of justice ), the appointment of judges, conflict of dharmaégastra and arthasastra, assessors, the various grades of courts, the procedure about plaints and defendant’s replies and their faults; the burden of proof and the means of proof. The second gives a detailed exposition of the means of proof, viz. witnesses, documents, possession and ordeals. The third treats of the eighteen titles of law including dayavibhaga and the fourth very briefly speaks of those matters which were to be started suo motu by the king and not by a private individual. The dayavibhaga portion of the Vyavaharaprakasa occupies a little more than one-fourtth of the whole of the work. In the Tirthaprakasga he deals with the nature of tirthas, the utility thereof for men, the persons entitled to undertake pilgrimage, the proper times for pilgrimage, the ceremonial acts to be performed at _tirthas such as shaving, fasts, bathing, gifts, the description of the several varsas and dvipas and of sacred rivers like the Ganges, Narmada, sacred places like Gaya, Prabhasa, Badri, Puskara and Puri. In the Pajaprakaéa he speaks of the definition of paja, persons entitled to perform paja (worship of gods), the rewards of paja, proper times and places for paja, Salagrama, the proper articles and clothes for the worship of idols, proper flowers, fragrant substances, naivedya, the detailed method of worshiping Visnu, Siva, the Sun, Durga, Brahma etc. In the printed edition there are no introductory verses here. ED 101 अत्वेद्धत्यासदक्षुषश्तीनां स्वनेनापि निष्कासनमित्यावि पायम्मि्तत्रकारो ( भकरणे 1 ) विवेश्यामः t ico Pp. 640 ( व्यवहार section, Jivananda ). He De 56. 442 History of Dharmatistra In the Sarnskara-prakaga the author enumerates the sarhskaras and describes in detail garbhadhana, purhsavana, anavalobhana, simantonnayana, jatakarma, namakarana, Sisuniskramana, annapra- Sana, cada, upanayana, vivaha ctc., the duties of brahmacarins, gotras, pravaras and sapiudya, all astrological matters in connection with marriage, pindapitryajfia, sarpabali, astakasraddha, salagava. The Rajanitiprakasa treats of the definition of rajan, the proper time and procedure of coronation, the daily routine for kings, the qualifications of ministers, commander-in-chief and the dependents of the king, forts, capital, palaces, the four expedients of sama etc., the six (पाक, auspicious and evil signs, marching for battle, Kaumudi and Indradhvaja festivals etc. In all his works Mitramigra mentions hundreds of authors and works. The portion on vyavahara is full of long-drawn controver- sies in which he refutes the views of numerous predecessors. The Viramitrodaya enters into polemics far more frequently than Nila- kantha. He generally upholds the Mitaksara of Vijhanesvara against all its critics, particularly the writers of the Bengal school. But he does not slavishly admire the Mitaksara in every thing. Now and then he rebukes even Vijiianesvara. For example, he does not approve of what the Mitaksara says about the son called Kanina.'* He finds fault with Vijnanesvara’s explanation of the verse ‘ anyoda- ryastu ’ as extremely forced and far-fetched and as simply exhibit- ing the author’s pedantry.''°3 Out of the host of works and writers that he names in the vyavahara section the important ones are noted below.''™ 1102 qq eee ययनूढायामुत्पन्नस्तर्हिं मानामरसुतेष्यूढायां aq वोदुरेवेनि ध्यवस्था BAT सापि मनसि न चमत्कारमादधाति । चीर ° P- 606. 1103 विज्ञानेन्धरेणापि मानवसंवादायान्योदर्थस्त्‌ संसृष्टी नान्योदर्थो धनं हरेदिति पाठेन योगी- श्वरवचनस्य यत्तद्ण्यावृच्यभ्याह्यरादिना द्धिष्टमत्यन्तापरतीयमाना्कं स्वपनज्ञाविलसित- माननम्‌ | वीर्‌ ० ४. 681 ; vide वीर्‌ ० pp. 183, 668 for other धमंड of the मिताक्षरा. 1104 अपरां, BETAS, गोपाल, War, जीमूतवाहन, तात्प्ैपरिशुदधि ( % उदयन ), SAAC, MEA, TAVIS, पारिजात, TWAT, प्रकाश, प्रदीप, भवदेव, भवनाथ, मद्नरत्न, माधवीय, मिताक्षरा, मेधातिभि, रघुनन्दन, रत्नाकर, लीलावती, वाचस्पति, वादभयङ्कर, विज्ञानयोगिन्‌, विद्यारण्य, व्यवह्यरतस्व, sarees (of भवदेव ) ध्यवहारजिन्तामणि, शारदातिलकः शाखदीपिका, शूलपाणि, aera, स्मृतिचम्विका, क्मृतित्तव, हृखावुध,. 108. The Viramitrodaya of Mitramiéira 448 The Viramitrodaya is a work of high authority in the Benares School of Hindu Law. The Privy Council has laid down that ‘ the Viramitrodaya is properly receivable as an exposition of what may have been left doubtful by the Mitaksara and declaratory of the law of the Benares school.’ "० Similarly it has been said by the same high tribunal that the Viramitrodaya may be referred to even in Bengal where the Dayabhaga is अला. But where the text of the Mitaksar4 on any point is quite clear, the gloss of the Virami- trodaya on the text of any sage which is in conflict with the rule laid down in the former cannot be referred to for the purpose of casting a doubt on the clear rule of the Mitaksara.''°7 The Viramitro- daya is inferior to the Vyavaharamayakha in Western India''® and its doctrines are not followed in those provinces when in conflict with those of the other two works. Their Lordships of the Privy Council say in Vedachala v. Subramania™?°9 ‘although the अप candrika in the Southern Presidency is regarded as the most autho- ritative commentary on Vijfanesvara’s work, the Viramitrodaya holds, as in Western India, a high position. It supplements many gaps and omissions in the earlier commentaries and illustrates and elucidates with logical preciseness the meaning of doubtful pres- criptions, ’ There is a ms. of the Danaprakasa in the Deccan College (No. 305 of 1884-1887 ). It is an extensive work and contains the usual topics about gifts. Besides the digest called Viramitrodaya Mitramisra composed a commentary on the smrti of Yajiavalkya. There is a ms. in the Deccan College ( No. 58 of A 1883-84) which contains portions ( with gaps ) of the commentary on the three kandas ( acara, vya- vahara, prayagcitta ). From the portion available it appears that 1105 Vide Gridharilal v. The Bengal Government 12 Moo. I. A. 448 at p. 466 ( where following the Viramitrodaya the maternal uncle was held to be an heir as a bandhu ); vide Collector of Madura v. Mootoo Ramlinga 12 Moo. I, a. 397 at ए. 438. 1106 Moniram ४, Keri KolitaniI. L. R. 5 081. 776 ( 2. 0.) at p. 89 ( where it was held that unchastity in the case of a widow subsequent to her inhe- riting her husband’s property does not work forfeiture of her rights ). 1107 I. L. R. 25 Cal. 354 at pp. 367-868, 1108 12 Moo. I. A. 397 at p. 438 and I. L. R. 3 Bom. 369. 1109 1, L, R, 44 Mad, 753 ( P.O.) at p. 764 = L. R. 481, A. 7, 349. 444, History of Dharmatastra ` the commentary was of considerable extent, though not as volu- minous and as full of polemics as his digest. The acara portion had at least 446 folios ( with 6 lines on each side and 30 letters in each line ), the vyavahara at least 257 and prayascitta a great many more than 153. Besides the works noted above he quotes the Karma- pradipa and the Smptisara. In this work he does not quite approve of the reasons for the preference shown to the mother over the father as an heir by the Mitaksara, viz. the occurrence of the word ‘ mata’ as the first word when the word ^ pitarau’ is dissolved and the greater propinquity of the mother as compared with the father, since the latter can beget sons from another wife.'**° The com- mentary gives three varieties of कवक. ग Vide I. O. cat. p. 371 No. 1288 and Peterson’s 2nd report pp. 49-53 for further details about this commentary. In the Aciraprakasa he quotes besides some of the works men- tioned above the following also, viz. Kullaka, Prayogaparijata, Pra- yascittaviveka, Madanaparijata, Sridatta ( vide I. 0. cat. p. 437 No. 1471 ). In the introductions to the several sections of his digest and also in the colophons therein Mitramigra furnishes considerable infor- mation about himself, his family and the family of his patron. Mitramisra was the son of Parasuramapandita and grandson of Harhsapandita. Harhsapandita seems to have been a native of Gopacala ( Gwalior ) and was endowed with the rare combination of wealth and learning. One Candegvara of Kagi was the guru of Paraguramapandita. Mitramisra indulges in hyperbolic?''? descrip- 1110 इत्थं च विग्रहवाक्ये मातृशब्दस्य पु्वनिपातात्‌ sera वेमात्रेयाजनकत्वेनासाधारण- प्रत्यासतिसत्त्वारबेति मितक्षरािखनं चिन्त्यम्‌ । folio 149 of the com. on व्यवहार section of याज्ञ ०; compare वीरमिश्रोदय p- 666 ( Jivananda ) where Mitra- miéra is apologetic about the same reasons of the Mit, 1111 दूासी पुर्षविशेषेण विवाह्यापरिगृहीता । सा च त्रिविधा । रकेन पुरषेण स्वभोगारथ पुरुषान्तरभोगतो निरुद्धा भुजिष्या वेश्या चेति । भुजिष्या च स्वामिन्ननियतपुङषान्तरो- भोगविषया स्वपरिचरयाकारिणी | folio 247. 1118 मा adeg मुधा बुधाः परिचयं अन्येषु नान विषे- प्वत्यन्तं न हि तेषु सवैविषयः SA ETA | पश्यन्तु प्रणयाद्नन्यमनसो मन्थं मदीयं विमं धमाधर्मसमस्तनिणैयविधिर्वस्मन्दुरीदृश्यते ॥ १७०५१ ॐ of भद्विकप्रकाश. 108. The Viramitrodaya of Mitramitra 445 tions of his own learning and naively tells his readers that they need study only his work and may neglect all other nibandhas. Mitramisra was commanded by Virasitrhha to compose his great digest.1"*3 The introduction to the Ahnikaprakasa starts with king Medinimalla who was a scion of the Kasiraja family. His son was Arjunadeva who became ruler of Bundelkhand. His son was Mala- khana, whose son was Prataparudra (founder of the capital Orccha ). His son was Madhukarasaha, whose son was Virasirhha. Virasirhha’s son was'''4 Jujhara who is described as ‘ young ’(yuva in verse 23). His son was Vikramarka whose son was Narasithhadeva. There is no such introduction to the printed Pajaprakasga and Narasirhhadeva is not mentioned in the introductions to the other prakagas. From the article of Mr. Lala Sitaram in the Calcutta Review ( May and July 1924 ) further information can be gathered about Birsinghdeo ( 1, e. Virasitnhadeva ). In the article it is shown how and under what circumstances Virasimha killed Abul Fazal, the friend of Emperor Akbar and a great literary genius. We are told there that there is a work called Virasitnhadeva-carita composed in Vikrama year 1664 ( 1607-8 A. D. ) by KeSavadasa, author of Kavipriya and Rasikapriy4. Virasithha was 7th out of the eight sons of Madhu- 1113 स्वस्ति श्रीयुतवीरसिंहनृपतेराह्वावशदुत्सुकः श्रीमिन्रामिधपण्डितः प्रतिदिशं कीत्यानिशं भण्डितः । नानानिर्णयवणनं व्यसनिनां संख्यावतां प्रीतिदं संप्राप्तस्यवहारसाधकमिमं EF TERT परम्‌ ॥ 2०० Intro. verse to व्यवहारप्रकाश ( Jivananda ). 1114 राज्यं प्राप जुज्ञारसिंहनूपतियस्याग्रतो भूपते- ATMA गृणाणवः समजनि भ्रीविक्रमार्को नृपः । तत्सुनुरनररिहदवनृपतिस्तं वीररसिंहं विना लेमे राज्यपरम्परासुखमिदं मभ्ये महेन्द्ोपि किम्‌ ॥ verse 27 of आहिकपकश, The colophon at the end of the first part of व्यवह्ारप्रकाश is इति भ्रीमत्स- कलसामन्तचक्रचडामणिमजरीधिमजरीनीराजितचरणकमलश्रीमहाराजाधिराजप्रतापख्द - तनुज-भीभन्महाराजमधुकरसाहसूनु- भीमहाराजाधिराजचलुख्दधिवलयवसुन्धराहुद यपुण्ड रीकविकासदिनिकरश्ीवरिसिंद्देवोयोजित-श्रीहंसपण्डितात्मज -श्रीपरशराममि भरसनुसकल- विदयापारावारपरणधुशणजगदरदरिद्यमहयगजपारीन्द्रविद्म्ननजीवातु-क्रीमन्मिन्नमिभ्ररूते वीरमिश्नोदुयामिधनिबन्धे भ्यवहारप्रकाशे &० Vide Pogson's‘ History of the Boondelas’ pp. 10-1] for Arjunadeva and his descendants, 446 History of Dharmatastra karastha. Not only was he a soldier, but he was a great builder. He built the palace forts of Orcchha and Datia, the temple of Keéa- vadeva at Mathura, several lakes called Birasigara, Sithhasagara and Deosagara (after the three parts of his own name ). He is said to have ruled at Orchha from 1605 to 1627 A. D. From the intro- duction to?''5 the commentary on Yajiiavalkya it appears that Vira- 51771704 commanded Mitramisra to write it and that a learned man Sadananda, the ornament of Tirabhukti( Tirhoot ), was also con- nected with its composition. It will be seen that the title Virami- trodaya very cleverly suggests that Mitramisra wrote it under the patronage of Virasirnhadeva. The title may mean ‘the rise of Vira and Mitra ’ or ‘ the rise of the friend of Vira’ or ‘ the rise of the sun, viz. Vira’. The time when Mitramiéra flourished can be easily settled on account of his relations with Virasimmhadeva. In his Ahnikaprakaéa he mentions the great-grand-son of Virasirnha. Therefore that sec- tion must have been written when Virasirhha was advanced in age. Virasithha ruled at Orchha from 1605 to 1627. Hence the literary activity of Mitramisra must be placed in the first quarter of the 17th century. This date agrees with the fact that he names VaAcaspati and Raghunandana. We thus see that Mitramisra was almost a contemporary of Kamalakarabhatta and Nilakantha. The two latter do not refer to him nor does Mitramigra name them. In the Vyangyartha-kaumudi of Anantasrama'''* of Punya- stambha ( Puntambe ) on the Godavari, a commentary on the Rasa- mafijari of Bhanudatta, the author gives a pedigree of his pairon. He describes the Kasiraja family at Benares, in which was born Prataparudra whose son was Madhukarasaha, whose son was Vira- sithnhadeva. Ananta wrote the commentary for Candrabhanu, a son of Virasirnhadeva, in 1635 A. D. This corroborates the dates above given by Mr. Lala Sitaram. Therefore it is almost beyond doubt that the literary activity of Mitra-misra lies between 16710 and 1640 A. D. वारं स्मृत्यथसारं रचयितुमथ स प्रादिश्चन्मिन्नमिशभरम्‌ । उत्त॑सस्तीरभकेरसिलवयुधगुङः धरी- सदानन्दधीमान्‌ भीमाजो मित्रमिश्वाज्जगदुपरूतये विधद्देशदीषम्‌ ॥ ज्ञानानां देन्य- दोषापटमकलिमयं याज्ञवस्क्योक्तिकोश्नाद्‌ TH स्मृत्यर्थसारं समचिनुत यशो धमलकष्मी- विहारम्‌ | verses 15 and 16, 1116 Vide I. 0, oat. p. 356 No. 1824, 109. Anantadeva 44% 109. Anantadeva Anantadeva compiled a vast digest called Smrtikaustubha divid- ed into several sections on sarhskira, acara, rajadharma, dana, ut- sarga, pratistha, tithi and sarhvatsara. The section on sarhskaras and that on rajadharma are also called Sarhskara-kaustubha and Raja- dharma-kaustubha. Each Kaustubha is subdivided into parts called didhiti. The Sarhskara-kaustubha is the most popular and most well-known work of his. It has been printed several times, the best editions being that of the Nirnayasagara Press ( 1913 ) and that issued at Baroda ( 1914 ) under the patronage of H. H. the Maha- raja Gaikwad ( with a Marathi translation by Sastri Venkatacarya Upadhyaya ). I have used the latter. The Sarnskara-kaustubha is recognised as an authoritative work by the highest court for India."!7 The following is a very brief summary of the contents :- The sixteen sarhskaras, the first being garbhadhana, the astro- logical aspects of the first appearance of menses and the various propitiatory rites therefor ; the proper times for garbhadhana and the several rites connected therewith ; punyahavacana, nandiégraddha, matrkapujana ; narayanabali and nagabali ; pancagavya, krechra and other prayascittas ; cindrayanavrata ; adoption, who is entitled to adopt, who can be adopted, rites of adoption, gotra and sapindya of the adopted son, mourning to be observed by the adopted, succession of the adopted; putrakamesti ; purhsavana; anavalo- bhana ; simantonnayana ; rites on the birth of a child or son ; impu- rity on birth ; propitiatory rites for evil aspects at birth; namakarana; niskramana ; annaprasana ; piercing the ear; celebration of birth day ; caula ; upanayana, proper times for it, the necessary materials for it, the gayatri, the vows of a brahmacarin; samavartana; marriage, sapindya for it, gotras and pravaras, proper times for marriage, forms of marriage, vag-niscaya, simantapajana, madhuparka, kanya- dana, vivahahoma, saptapadi, homa on the entrance of the married couple etc. The portion of the Sarnskara-kaustubha on the subject of adop- tion is frequently cited separately as Dattakadidhiti and is so entered in the catalogues of mss. It is a treatise of great importance and deserves to be studied along with the Dattakamima4rhsa, the Vyava- ae 117 Vide Collector of Madura ४, Mootoo Ramalinga 12 Moo. I. A. 397 at p. 438 ; Sakharam v. Sitabat I. L. R. 3 Bom. 358 at p. 361. 448 History of Dharmatistra haramaydkha and other similar works. The more important of his views are set out below. Like the Dattakamimarhsa he recom- mends that the nephew is the most suitable for adoption, then one may select any sagotra, sapinda, then an asagotra sapinda, then a sagotra but asapinda, then any one of the same caste though not sagotra, but a daughter’s or sister’s son cannot be adopted norcan a brother, a paternal or maternal uncle be adopted. A Sadra may adopt a daughter’s or sister's son. The person to be adopted must not be an only son or the eldest. A wife can adopt with the consent of her husband and a widow does not require the express permission of her husband. The boy to be adopted may be below five or above five and may be taken before or after the cada ceremony is performed in the natural family. Anantadeva refers to the'''®§ view of some that the verses of the Kalikapurana on this subject are not found in several mss. and so are unauthori- tative and tells us that others hold that the whole passage refers to the adoption of an asagotra boy. Anantadeva himself holds, like the Vyavaharamayakha, that even an asagotra boy may be adopted after his upanayana is performed in the natural family. When the ceremony of caula and the rest are performed in the family of the adopter, the adopted boy belongs to the gotra of the adopter, but where the upanayana alone is performed in the adoptive family or the adoption is made after upanayana the boy belongs to both gotras. But this holds good only as regards obeisance, Sriddha etc. while for marriage every adopted boy has to avoid the gotra and pravara of both families. If a natural son be born to the adopter after he takes a boy in adoption, the adopted boy becomes an equal sharer with the aurasa, if all the sarhskaras up to upanayana are performed by the adoptive father for the adopted boy, or he takes only a 1118 एषां वचसां बदरषु कालिक पुराणपुस्तकेष्वदशेनानिमूंलत्वादिति केचित्‌ । अन्ये तु AA HAT आयश्लोकञ्नयस्यासगोचदत्तकविषयत्वा्तत्मायपटितत्वेनान्स्यलोकस्यापि तदि- घयत्वमेवोचितम्‌ | अतः सगोत्रस्य द्तकस्य नायं नियम ईति परिणीतोपि दत्तको मवेदित्याहुः | वस्तुतस्तु नासगोघरप्युपनयनान्तसंस्कारोत्तरं दृत्तकल्वसामान्यनिषेधः कर्तु शक्यः पुराणवचोमिरवदिकणिङ्गविश्टुस्पृतिवसां प्रामाण्यास्तभवस्य चलाबलाभिकरण- वार्तिकराणकसिद्धत्वात्‌ । संस्कारकोस्तुभ॒ ए. 169-170; compare ल्यवह्ारमयूख p. 114 for remarks on the कालिकापराण passage. The निणयरसिंधं appears toregard the कालिकापुराण Verses as genuine and holds on their strength that the adoption of a boy after upanayana is prohibited 109, Anantadeva 449 fourth share if only some of the sathsk’ras ending with spanayana are performed by the adopter and he gets no inheritance but only provision for marriage if he was adopted after upanayana is perform- ed in the natural family. Anantadeva, disagreeing with Nilakantha, holds that a girl may be 2004. Like the Nirnayasindhu and the Mayakhas of Nilakantha, Anan- tadeva in the Sarhskarakaustubha and elsewhere names several hundred authors and works. It is not necessary to set out the whole lot. His authorities are practically the same as those of the former. He principally relies among sibandhas upon the Mitaksara, Apararka, Hemadri, Madhava, Madanaratna, Madanaparijata. The Smrtikaustubha was divided into several didhitis ( rays, parts). In the Smptikaustubha published by the Nirnayasagara Press it is expressly stated that the tithididinti has been already'**° expounded. At the end also it is said that the work is only the com- plete abdadidhiti (i. e. portion dealing with sarhvatsaras of five kinds ), The year is said to be of five kinds, candra, saura, savana, barhaspatya and naksatra. The printed work treats of the several rites, observances, festivals and vratas on the important 1117 of the twelve months of the candra year with the intercalary month and observances thereof, the rites proper to saura year and sarhkrantis ( the sun’s passage from one sign into another ), the rites of the savana year, the rules about rites when Jupiter is in the sign of Leo, the rites of the naksatra year, the actions forbidden and allowed in Kali age according to Anantadeva and discussion of the views of Hemadri, Madhava and the Madanaparijata thereon. The Rajadharmakaustubha''?! was divided into several parts ( didhitis ). The first deals with the characteristics and defects of 1119 दत्तकयुच्या अपि स्वीकार उकरविधिना कायैः । वक्ष्यामि पृत्रसंग्रहमित्यादिगतपुन्रस्य पुमान्‌ TT इत्यादिवैदिकप्रयोगमूलकेन sages पुश्रीसाधारण्यात्‌ । दानपति- महविधिषु Teepe | इतिहासपुराणेषु कुन्त्या दत्तकत्वोकेभ्य । संस्कारकोस्तुभ p. 188 ; contrast भ्यवहारमयुखं ए. 108 « TATE पुमानेव भवति ने कन्या &o.’ ( my edition, Poona ). 120 तिथिदीषितिङक्ता पाग्बक्यामोखब्दोषदीधितिम्‌ । अब्दभेद्‌द्ूदाम्येनां माधवोक्त्यनुसारतः ॥ Intro. verse 20 of VAHL. 1121 Vide Mitra's Bik. oat. p. 444:No. 955 at the ond ^ राज ( बाज 1 )बाह्दुर- चन््रमुपतेः कौस्तुमेन्न warn । दीधितिः प्रथमभाग ईंटशस्तोषरुत्सुरूतिनां व्यजायत ” 3 vide also Mitra’s Notices vol, I p. 196 No, 346 for the same. He De $° _ 480 History of Dharmatisira kings, the qualities and characteristics of queens, ministers, purobita, astrologer, the ritesto be performed at coronation, duties to be observed after coronation. Another portion of the same work deals with vyavahara viz., the sabha, the judge, the plaint, the reply, means of proof, ordeals etc. It is unnecessary to go into details about the other treatises on prayascitta, pratistha''*? &c. Anantadeva also wrote several prayogas such as the Agnihotraprayoga, Caturmasyaprayoga. In the Bhadkamkar collection there is a ms. of a drama called Krsna- bhakti-candrika composed by Anantadeva in which the characters are a Saiva, Vaisnava, Mimathsaka, Tarkika &c. In the Smrtikaustubha ( Nirnayasagara edition of 1909) Anantadeva gives a pedigree'**3 of his patron’s family. The family claimed descent from the moon. Whether the first three kings mentioned in the Smrtikaustubha were related as father and son is doubtful. Laksmanacandra is said to have been the son of Rudra- candra and it was he who conquered several chiefs wielding sway over the Himalayan territories.‘'*4 Trimallacandra, the successor 1122 Vide Aufrecht’s Oxford cat. p. 272b where there is a reference to प्रतिष्ठादीधिति ‘ere राजधर्मा उच्यन्ते aH राज्यामिषेकदीषधित्युक्तरक्षणलक्षितो राजा मासाद्पतिष्ठादीधित्युक्तपभकारेण वुर्गगृहनिर्माणं भद्रासनं च निमौय ... ष्यवहारा निर- cara I's vide also Mitra’s Notices, vol. II. p. 21 No. 556 for the same. 1133 The pedigree 18 as follows :— ज्ञानचन्द्र कल्याणचन्द्र | IA a coon) । याजबाहृुर 112५ तेनानेकहिमा बलस्थनृपतीन्‌ दुष्टान्विजित्य स्वके राञ्ये वृद्धिरकारि तुष्टिरमिता चाधाय दिहवदूधदि ॥ verse 5. 109. Anantadeva - 451 (and probably the son ) of Laksmanacandra, is praised for his cons tinual liberality to the learned men of Benares.*??5 It was at the command of Baz Bahadurcandra and for pleasing him that Ananta- deva compiled his Smrtikaustubha."##6 At the end Anantadeva tells us that Baz Bahadurcandra conquered several mountain forts in the Himalayas.""27. After giving a pedigree of his patrons’ family Anantadeva gives some information about himself. He was a. descendant of the great Maratha saint Ekanatha whom he describes as endowed with Vedic sacrifices and as a devotee of Krsna.78 That this Ekanatha is the same as the great Maratha saint is vouchsafed by Kasinatha, author of Dharma- sindhu, in another work of 15." 9 = Anantadeva was the great-great-: grand-son of Ekanatha and he was the grandson of Ananta and son: of Apadeva, the author of the Mimarhsanyayaprakasa alias Apadevi-. . 1195 कृशीस्थ विद्रदादिभ्यो धनराशीनदात्सदा ॥ verse 6. 1126 तस्यात्मज Seay सन्तोसरुःमाहुरनन्तदेवम्‌ । agua वचसा विधेयं निबन्धसारो दरणं त्वयेति ॥ अनन्तदेवेन तदाक्ञयाथो मुदे हरेः पुैनियन्धरूपम्‌ । सीराम्बुरषिं बुदविगुणेमेथित्वा प्रकाश्यतेयं स्मृतिकौस्तुभः को ॥ Verses 17-18. 1157 येनार्जितानि युधि सर्वरिपून्‌ विजित्य वुगीणि दुर्महतराणि धने्युतानि 1 श्रीयाजबाह्‌- SUIT तस्य वाचा हिमाचलगतावनिदेवतुष्थं ॥ योनन्तदेवरुतमन्यनसन्नियन्ध- क्षीराश्िजोथ सततं हरिणा धतो यः । नित्यं निजे हृदि सतां cated तस्य सर्वाब्द्‌- दीधितिं स्मृतिभास्करस्य || Verses 2 and 3. 1198 आसीदरोद्‌।वरीतीरे वेदवेदिसमग्वितः । श्रीरुष्णभक्तिमानेक एकनाथामिधो द्विजः ॥ verse 13 of स्मृतिकोस्तुभ, The pedigree of अनन्तदेष is एकनाथ न त न ऋ . | जीवदेव 1129 Vide his RgwageneTereg follo 37 ° ( D. 0. ms. No, 100 of 1869-70). 4s: History of Dharmattsira Mimarhsa lore seems to have been a hereditary. endowment in the family as in the case of the Bhattas of Benares. In all his works, particularly in the Sarhskarakaustubha, Anantadeva applies at every step the maxims and doctrines of the Parvamimarhsa for the decision of doubtful points of Dharmaégastra. Anantadeva had a younger brother Jivadeva whose Gotrapravaranirnaya he draws upon in the Sarhskarakaustubha while dealing with sapindya for marriage.''3¢ Bhandarkar notices an Aégaucanirnaya of Jivadeva in which the Nirnayasindhu is cited as an authority."'5" ~ West and Buhler in their digest?'3? thought that Anantadeva flourished about the same time as the author of the Nirnayasindhu. But this requires some correction. Baz Bahadur, the patron of Anantadeva, seems to have been a scion of the Candra ( or Chand ) family and ruled over Almora and Nainital from 1638 to 1678 A. D. It is said in the Imperial Gazetteer''33 that the first of the Chandra- rajas was Somachand who hailed from Jhisi near Allahabad and came to the Himalayan regions in the roth century and that in 1563 the capital was transferred to Almora by Kalyancand, whose son Rudracandra was a contemporary of Akbar and made his obeisance to the latter in 1587 A. D. at Lahore. The Smptikaustubha does mention the ancestors Kalyanacandra and Rudracandra of Baz Bahadur. Between Baz Bahadur and Rudracandra there are three names. Supposing that they are the three direct ascendants of Baz Bahadur and allowing a period of 25 years for each after Rudra- candra’s known date of 1587 A. D., we get the year 1662 A. D. for Baz Bahadur. We are told in the Gazetteer that in 1672 Baz Bahadur introduced a poll tax, the proceeds of which he remitted to Delhi as tribute. Therefore Anantadeva must have been patro- nised by Baz Bahadur between 1645 and 1675 A.D. A greater approximation can be made in another way. The saint Ekanatha finished his Marathi Bhagavata at Benares in fake 1495 and 1630 of the Vikrama era on Kartika full-moon day ( 1, €, 9th November 1130 अथ गोत्रपवरनिणयो मदनुजजीवदेवरूत एवास्मिनवसरे प्रदश्यते । संस्कारकौस्तुम Dp. 687, . dee a eae as! 1181 Vide Bhandarkar’s Report, 1883-84, p. 58 ( for जीवदेव ). 1138 Vide Digest p. 24 ( Srd ed. ) and p. 25 ( 4th ed.). 1138 Vide Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. XVIII. p. 324 and vol, V. p. 245. 109. Anantadeva 458 1573 ) as he himself tells ४७.०८५ Anantadeva was the fourth in descent from him ( exclusive of Ekanatha ). Counting 25 years for each of the four generations, Anantadeva should have been a grown up man in 1673 A. D. There are controversies about the dates of the birth and death of Ekanatha, the commonly accepted dates being Sake 1450-1521 (b. 1528-d. 1600 A. 0.2.738 The date of his death is Sake 1521 Falguna dark half 6th day (25th February 1600 ). Others give 1548-1599 A.D. as the dates. Whichever date is correct, the literary activity of Anantadeva must be assigned to the third quarter of the r7th century. This date is confirmed by the fact that in the Asaucanirnaya of Jivadeva, younger brother of Ananta- deva, the Nirnayasindhu composed in 1611-12 A. D. is cited as an authority. 110, Nagojibhatta The learning of Nagojibhatta was of an encyclopaedic character. Though his special forte was Vyakarana ( grammar ) he wrote standard works also on poetics, dharmasastra, yoga and other Sastras. The total number of his works is about thirty. On dharmadgastra he composed several works, viz. Acdrendusekhara, ASaucanirnaya, Tithindusekhara, Tirthendusekhara, Prayascittendusekhara or Pri- yascittasarasathpraha, SriddhenduSekhara, Sapindimaiijari and Sapin- dyadipika or Sapindyanirnaya. Of his far-famed works on the Paninean system, such as the Mahabhasya-pradipoddyota, the Pari- bhasendugekhara, the Vaiyakaranasiddhantamafijisa (in large and small recensions ), the Subdendusekhara( big and small ) and of his 1484 वाराणसी महाम॒क्तिलेन्न । विक्रमशक वृषसंवत्सर्‌ । Was Sart तिसोत्तर । टीका एककार जनादृनरूपा ॥ Ras कार्तिकमासी | gare पूर्णिमेसी । सोमवार ज्षिवयोर्गेसी । दीका एकादशी समाप्त क्षाली ४ स्वदेशा शक संवत्सर | दण्डकारण्य भीरामक्षेच् । गोदावरीतीर । यथी उच्चार तो रेका । शालिवाहनश्चक वैभव | संख्या चोदा पंाण्णव | fee संवत्सरारचे नाव । टीका अपूर्वं ते जाहृटी ॥ verses 552-555 ofthe last अष्याय ( 1995 ४886978 edition ) 1135 Vide Mr. Bhave's महाराष्रसारस्वत ed. of Sake 1846 part 1 7, 245 and Mr. L. R. Pangarkar’s life of Ekanath ( Marathi) chap. II ( ed. of 1911 ) 404 History of Dharmattieira commentaries on the Kavyaprakasa-pradipa, the Kuvalayananda, the Rasagangadhara, the Rasatarangini, the Rasamaiijari, nothing can be said here for want of space. For his Prayascittendusekhara, vide, Mitra’s Notices vol. V, p. 23 No. 1735, where detailed contents are given ; for the Sraddhendu- Sekhara, Ulwar cat. extract No. 360 p. 139, for the Tirthendusekhara, Ulwar cat. p. 120, extract No. 312. Nagojibhatta was the son of Sivabhatta and Sati and was a Maharastra Brahmana surnamed Kala ( Kale ). At the beginning and end of several works of his (such as the Rasagangadhara-mar- maprakaséa, the Manjiisa) he tells us that he was patronised by Rama of the Bisena family,?#3 the ruler of a city named Srngavera ( which seems to be on the Ganges above Allahabad ). He was the pupil of Haridiksita,?"37 son of Viresvara and pupil of Ramasrama and grand- son of the great grammarian Bhattoji-diksita.%3® Tradition says that he composed the grammatical work Sabdaratna and ascribed it to his teacher Haridiksita in gratitude. In पा commentary on the Prandhamanorama Haridiksita refers to the Sabdaratna as his own work and to the Sabdenduégekhara as that of his pupil. Bhattojidiksita was a pupil of the Mimarhsaka Sankarabhatta and of Sesa Srikrsna and almost a contemporary of Jagnnathapandita. Bhattoji’s pupil Nilakantha Sukla wrote a work in sathvat 1663 ( Dr. Belvalkar in ‘ Systems of Sanskrit Grammar’, p. 47 2). There- fore he flourished in the first half of the 17th century. Nagojibhatta was a pupil of Bhattoji’s grandson. Therefore Nagojibhatta must have flourished towards the end of the 17th century and the first half of the 18th century. Nagojibhatta’s literary activities, looking 1136 याचकानां कल्पतरोररिकक्षहुताशनात्‌ | नागेशः शृङ्गवेरेशरामतो कब्धजीविकः ॥ रस- गङ्गाधरमर्मपकाश. 1137 अधीत्य कृणिमाष्या््धि सुधीन््रहरिदीक्षितात्‌ | at the end of the aL 1138 गुढोक्तिरयितां fraraapat Rgeriqnat भक्स्याधीत्य भनोरभां frect- व्राभाश्मात्सदरोः | तश्वा्ञानवशात्यरेण कलितन्दोषान्‌ समुन्मूलयम्‌ भ्याषष्टे हरि रेष at फणिमतान्यालोल्य चैरे्थरिः ॥ And Intro. ०२४० ६० the geared, I, 0. oat. p. 174 Nos. 651-52, 1139 विस्तरस्तु अस्मत्ते NST मदन्तेवासिरूत्दन्दुशेसरादा च Awe | at ond of D. O. ms. No. 520 of 1886-1892 and Tri. cat. Madras Govt. mss. for 1919-22 p. 4915 ( ist verse ). ~ 110. Nagoftbhatia 455 to his vast out-put, must have extended over a long period of more than 50 years. The pedigree''4° from Bhattojidiksita, through a succession of teacher and pupils or father and son, is given below. Vide introduction to the Rasagangadhara ( Nirn. ed ); Trivedi’s introduction pp. 18-20 to the Vaiyakaranabhigana of Kondabhatta, a nephew of Bhattoji( B. S. series ); Dr. Belvalkar’s Systems of Sanskrit grammar pp. 46-50 and Kielhorn’s preface to the Paribha- sendusekhara p. xxv ( where the succession of teacher and pupil is brought down to the days of Kielhorn himself ) for further details. In the Indian Antiquary, vol. 41 p. 247, Mr. ऽ. P. V. Ranganatha नन 9 cae = [रणि 1140 The pedigrees are :— (8) शोषन्रीरूष्ण | _ सेषवीरेश्वर (son ) wzifidiera ( pupil) a भा का | | son rarest वीरेश्वरदक्षित मानुजीदीक्षित ( pupil ) (son) or TAT (son ) हरिदीक्षित (son ) | नगेशम्‌ ( pupil) | वयनाथ पायगुण्ड ( pupil) 1 | | ASS ० वालमष्मट्‌ गोपाल ( son ) ( pupil ) (b) लेकष्मधिर ee - | weer रङ्गोजि son ) (son ) कोण्डभह्‌ ( gon ) 4h History of Dharmatistra Svami makés Bhattoji a pupil of Sesa Vireévara and not of Sesa Krspa But the passage of the Manoramakucamardana, if properly interpret- d, makes it clear that Bhattoji was the pupil of Sega Krsna and not of Viregvara.44" Ams. of Nagojibhatra’s commentary on the Rasa~ majfijari is dated samvat 1769, Magha 7th bright half, Wednesday, i, e. 21st January 1713 A. D. ( vide I. O. cat. vol. III p. 365). It is not unlikely that Nagojibhatta first composed his commentaries on the comparatively easy Sastra of poetics and that he then worked upon Dharmaéastra and Vyakarana. The edition of the Rasagangi- dharain the Kavyamala series says that there is a tradition that Nagoji was invited by king Savai Jaising of Jaipurto a horse-sacrifice in 1714 A. D., but that Nagoji declined on the ground of Ksetra-samnyasa. Therefore his literary activity must be placed between 1700 and 1750 A.D. Mahamahopadhyaya Haraprasad Sastri says ( Ind. Ant. vol. 41 p. 12 ) that Nagoji died about 1775. But this appears rather improbable. If one of his works was copied in 1713 A. D. he could hardly have lived up to 1775, unless he was about 100 years ojd at that time Balakrsna or Balambhatta The Laksmivyakhyana alias the Balambhatti is a commentary on the Mitaksara of Vijfanesvara, ascribed toa lady named Laksmi- devi. The commentary is a voluminous one and displays uneven workmanship. The commentary on the Acara section of the Mitik- sara is the most learned part of the whole book and is almost an 1141 इह केचित्‌ ... शषवेशावतंसानां श्रीकृष्णपण्डितानां ernst पाहुकयोः प्रसा- द्‌सादितशब्दानुक्षासनाः तेषु च पारमेश्वरं पदं Tay... TETRA प्रकि- याप्रकाशमाशयानवयोधनिवम्धनेदूषणैः स्वयं. निर्मिताया मनोरमायामाकुल्यकार्षः | सा च प्रक्रियाप्रकाश्रूतां पौत्रैः ... अस्मद्ररपण्डित्ीरेश्बराणां तनयेदषितापि स्वमति- परीक्षार्थं पृनरस्मामिरनिरीक्ष्यते ॥ P- 3 of the Intro. to the रसगङ्गमधर. Lf पादका means ‘ pupil’ here as Mr. Ranganath Svami contends ( Ind. Ant. vol. 41 p. 251 ), why should the dual be necessary or be used and not the singular er plural? The प्रक्रियाप्रकाश 18 8 com. on the प्रियाकोमुदी of राभबन्द्राचाय. Vide Journal of Oriental Research vol. III, part 2, 7, 146 where it is said that Jagannatha was a pupil of बीरेन्वर्‌, son of रोचरृष्ण, who lived under the partronage of Giridhari, son of Todarmal and that Bhattoji wag pupil of gyqesoy and later of अण्पयदीक्षित, 111. Balakrsna or Balambhatta 457 independent work. The cara portion has been published by Mr. J. र. Gharpure. The vyavahara portion of the Balambhatti was published by Mr. S. S. Setlur, Advocate, Bombay in 1911 and by Mr. J. R. Gharpure (1914). This portion of the commentary explains the Mitaksara word by word and also engages in lengthy discussions on important topics. The portion of the commentary on the prayascitta section has not yet been published; but Mr. Govinda Das who examined it ( vide Mr. Gharpure’s edition of the ३८214 portion, p. 27 at end ) reports that it is meagre as compared with the preceding sections. In the following Mr. Gharpure’s edition has been used. In the Balambhatti the author quotes by name a host ot writers and works. As the Balambhatti is almost the latest work on Dharma- astra worth special mention in this work, no useful chronological purpose will be served by giving the names of all such writers and works. It may however be stated that he names the Nirnayasindhu, the Viramitrodaya, the Mayakhas of Nilakantha, the Sarhskara- kaustubha, SiddheSvarabhatta the nephew of Nilakantha, Khandadeva the author of Bhattadipika on the Mimarbsastira, the Kayastha- dharmapradipa of Gagabhatta and the author’s father’s commentary thereon. Of the Balambhatti ascribed to Laksmidevi, West and Bihler say ‘she generally advocates latitudinarian views and pives the widest interpretation possible to every term of Yajnavalkya. lier Opinions are held in comparatively small esteem and are hardly ever brought forward by the कर, if unsupported by other autho- tities 7." 4 For example, in the Balambhatti the word ‘ bhratarah’, Occurring in Yajnavalkya’s verses laying down the order of succession to a man तण without male issue, is interpreted as including sisters and the author says that sisters succeed immediately after brothers.'!43 This dictum of Balambhatta taken along with the words of the Vyavaharamayukha seems to have influenced their Lordships ot the Privy Council in Vinayak ४ Lakshmibai on the question of the rights of the sister as an 1148 Digest of Hindu Law, 3rd ed. p. 17. 1143 ‹ Tag FSI पगु क्तसिद्ान्तरीत्या पूर्व भराता तदभावे स्वसा ।* वाटम्भदवी p. 209 ( Gharpure ) on याज्ञ, II. 135; « तत्पुन्ना ईते भ्रातः IMs कन्याश्च स्वसुः पुत्रा कृन्याश्येत्यर्थः > p. 210. H. ॐ. 58. 458 History of Dharmasistra heir.''44 In Sakharam v. Sitabait'4s Sir Michael Westropp C. J. went so far as to say on the construction of the term ‘brethren ’ in the Mitaksara as including sisters, which construction was adopted in that case (in Vinayak v. Lakshmibai) both by the Supreme Court and the Privy Council, “we must treat the Mitaksaré also as pre- ferring sisters to half brothers, whom it brings in after brothers. ” But this was a mere obiter dictum, since the case in which these observations were made was governed by the law of the Vyavahara- mayikha which expressly prefers full sisters to half brothers. It has been laid down in several cases in Bombay''4* that Balambhatta’s doctrine that the word ‘ brothers ' includes ‘ sisters’ has not been accepted in that Presidency and that Sir Michael Westropp was under a misapprehension as to the exact drift of the Balambhatti which nowhere says that the term ‘ brothers’ excludes half brothers and which does not bring in the full sister before the half brother, but expressly says that the full brother inherits first, then the half brother and then comes the sister. The Balambhatti not only brings in the sisters after full and half brothers, but places the sons and daughters of sisters after the sons and daughters of brother's, full or half. This is in direct conflict with the order of succession expressly mentioned by the Mitaksara and the Bombay High Court has refused to give-the sister’s son the place which the Balambhatti assigns to him and treats him as a mere bandhu.''47, The Balam- bhatti is regarded as of little authority in the interpretation of the Mitaksara in the Bombay Presidency and its interpretations cannot be accepted without due caution and examination.'48 Even in the Benares'*49 School where the Balambhatti has been accepted as one of the leading authorities, the authority of Balambhatta has been held to be inferior to that of Nandapandita in matters of adoption, it being held that a widow cannot adopt in the Benares School without express authority from her husband ( while Balambhatta holds that she can adopt without such authority ). Similarly it has 1 1 । 1144 9 Moo. I. A. 516 = 1 Bom. H. 0. R. 117 at pp. 122-123; vide also Sakharam ४. Sitabat 1. L. R. $ Bom. 358 at pp. 360 and 363 1145 I. L. ए. 3 Bom. 353 at ए. 363. 1146 Vide Mulji v. Cursandas Natha 24 Bom, 563 at p. 579 and Bhagwan ४. Warubai I. L. R. 32 Bom. 300 at p. 305. 1147 Vide Bhagwan ०, Warubai I. L. R. 32 Bom. 300 at p. $12. 1148 Vide Dattatraya v. Gangabaét I. L, R. 46 Bom. 557 at p. 558. 1149 Vide Tulshi Ram v. Behari Lal I. L.R.12 All. $28 at p. 368 ( ए. B. ). ee ch eee 0 al te, 111, Balakrena or Balambhatta 459 been held that the Balambhatti cannot prevail over the views of the , Viramitrodaya and that a daughter-in-law is not in the line of heirs at all though the Balambharti says that she is so.?75° The author of the Balambhatti is somewhat of an enigma. Such women as Sila, Vijji, Avanti-sundari have been worshippers at the shrine of the Muse of Poetry. A lady has been associated with the composition of a work on Mathematics, viz. the Lildvati. Inspiration for several works on Dharmaéastra was, we know, deriv- ed from queens and princesses, as in the case of the Vivadacandra compiled by Queen Laksmidevi through Misarumigra, the Danava- kyavali compiled by Mahadevi Dhiramati of Mithila through VidyA- pati, the Dvaitanirnaya composed by Vacaspati at the bidding of queen Jaya, wife of king Bhairavendra. It gives one great pleasure to contemplate that at least one work on Dharmagastra, the Balam- bhatt, is claimed by a lady as her own. But this pleasure receives a rude shock if the question of the authorship of the Balambhatti is dispassionately considered. The introductory verses no doubt start by saying that Laksmi, the wife of Vaidyanatha Payagunda, and the daughter of Mahadeva of the Mudgala gotra and surnamed Kherada, composed the work, her maiden name being ता. ष्ण The colophon at the end of the वद्वा portion says that the work was composed by Laksmi, the daughter of Mahadevaand Uma, the wife of Vaidyanatha Payagunda and the mother of Balakrsna.*5? At the end of the vyavahara section in the printed editions we have the words ^ mother of Lalakrsna’ but this is obviously a mis- reading of the mss. or a mistake of the copyists. The pretence that the work was composed by a lady is made extremely plausible by ~ "=^ ae नान्‌ EP ce ee te 1150 7, L. ए. 9 Cal. 315 at p. 324; vide alsol. L. ए. 16 Cal. 367 at pp. 376-77 ( about brother’s widow ). 1181 श्रीलक्ष्मीरमणं नत्वा sedioel Aap: | सेरडामुद्रलापत्यगणेशापत्यरुष्णकः । महदेवः सुतस्तस्य वेदमूविजेान्तवित्‌ । भ्रोतस्मातौथेनिपुणो दीक्षितो राजपूजितः ॥ पत्नी तस्य ह्यमारूपा AMAL तस्य कन्यका । पायगुण्डोपाख्यवेयन।थपत्नी पति- बता । मिताक्षराया विवृतिं तनुते सर्वसंविदे ॥ बालम्भट्वी, Intro. verses of आचारकाण्ड. 1158 इति श्रीमन्मिताक्षरान्याख्याने महदिवभद्चत्मजोमाङ्गजवेयनाथाधाङ्गभूत वालकरजननी- पायगुण्ड इत्युपाख्यश्रीलक्ष्मीदेवीविरिते sents भाचारमकरणम्‌ । . Vide for an identical colopbon at the end of the ष्यवहार्‌ sootion, I, 0, cat. p. 369-370 No. 1282 and aufrecht’s Oxford oat. p. 262 ४ 460 ` History of Dharmatistra the frantic efforts made in it for the rights of women in matters of inheritance. But this pretence is not kept up in the body of the work at all. In several places the author of the Balambhatti refers to the Manjasa and other works of his guru and to works of his father.''53 We know that Vaidyanatha Payagunda was a pupil of Nagojibhatta,'"5+ who composed several Manjisas (on grammar ) and a work on prayascitta. Therefore it follows either that the Balambhatti was composed by Vaidyanatha himself and ascribed to his wife or that the work was composed by Balakrsna alias Balam- bhatta, son of Vaidyanatha, and was ascribed to his mother. Nago- jibhatta who certainly attained a very advanced age was the guru of Vaidyanatha as well as of the latter’s son Balakrsna. That Balakrsna or Balambhatta Payagunda was a learned man _ like his father Vaidyanatha follows from several circumstances. He wrote a work called Upakrtitattva.'"55 Gopala alias Manudeva, in his commen- tary called Laghubhisanakanti on the Vaiyakaranabhusanasara, styles Balambhatta Payagunda his guru.t15° Looking to the colo- phons where Laksmi is referred to as the mother of Balakrsna and to the fact that the work is known as Balambhatti, we must con- clude that it was composed by Balambhatta and not by his father Vaidyanatha. What motive impelled Balambhatta to publish the work in the name of his mother it is difficult to say. Tradition 1153 ०. £. आचार ० P 448 ' अत्र मनुबक्ये नवोस्पथकत्वेन यागीयर्हिंस्ायामपि wed aerate प्रतिपादितं गुरुचरणेमञ्जृषायाम्‌ । विशदीरुतं चेतत्‌ पाषण्डण्डनेपि अष्टपशुप्रकरणेस्नाभिरिति दिक्‌ '; P- 814 (तथा उम्र दिरूपक्षत्रियसच्वेपि तेषां न ahr यत्वं किं तु शद्रत्वमेवोति गुरुचरणरूतवःतस्यश्रायग्ित्तनिणैषे श्यष्ट{ । ततं एव बोध्यम्‌ । wetted चेतयितृचरणेः छऋावस्थनिणेये । ... तत्सव गागमहटृरूतकायल्थप्रदपि पिवरृचरणरूततसमदीपे च स्पष्टमिति नेह प्रपञ्य्यते |’, The first passage is not properly arranged in Mr. Gharpure’s edition; vide p. 415 for व्ात्यप्रायस्ित्तनिर्णंय. 1154 gee पाधगण्डा नत्वा नगिन्वरं TET व्याख्यां भभाख्यां तनुते कस्तुभस्व पवबुदधमे ॥ , V'de I. 0. cat. ए. 163 No. 610 for the प्रभा, > ००. ० अहोजि TERT. 1155 Vide Stein’s cat. p. 302 sfiszi@armte नुत्वा asa कपर्दिनम्‌ । पायगृण्डो सालषृष्णः प्राह AAT ॥ 1156 वःटम्मटाभिधं ESET TTL! Meta पण्डितो बालबुद्धये ॥ रुष्णदेवानुजो लोके मनुदेवापराभिधः | ॐ 0. cat p. 189 No, 717, 111. Balakrgya or Balambhatta 461 says that he did so to console Laksmidevi in her bereavement on the death of a child. Vaidyanatha composed several commentaries on grammatical works such as on the Mahabhasyapradipoddyota of Nagojibhatta, on the Paribhisendusekhara ( com. called Kagika and Gada ), on the Vaiyakarana-siddhantamafijasa ( com. called Kala ), on the Laghusabdendusekhara ( com. Cidasthimala ), on the Laghu- Sabdaratna (com. Bhavaprakiéa ). Mr. Govinda Das ( 0. 27 in Mr. Gharpurc’s edition of acira portion ) says that these works were really composed by Balambhatta and ascribed to his father. In these grammatical works the names of Vaidyanatha’s parents are given as Mahadeva and Veni. The I. 0. cat. ( pp. 458-59, No. 1507 ) notices an incomplete work called Dharmaégistrasarhgraha compiled by Balagarman Paya- gunda, son of Vaidyanatha and Laksmi and _ patronised''s? by Cole- brooke. The work dealt with topics of civil law, viz. definition of vyavahara, sabba, the judge, the sabhyas, the relative strength of smrtis etc., return of debts ctc. It breaks off at folio 79. On the ms. there is a note in Colebrooke’s own hand ( which is not com- plimentary to the honesty of Balasarman ) dated rst may 1800 “ fresh sheets were received from Balagarma Payagunda on this date. This is little else but the Viramitrodaya revised. As it is a scarce book and very little known Balasarma and his pupil Manu- deva did not suspect I could detect the plagiarism.” The foregoing shows that Balakrsna Payagunda was a Deccani Brahmana, that his father and mother were Vaidyanatha and Laksmi, that his maternal grandfather was Mahadeva, also a Deccani Brahmana surnimed Kherada, that he was the pupil of Nagojibhatta and that he was a pandit of Colebrooke. Mr. Govinda Das is not right when he identifies ( p. 27) Vaidyanatha the commentator of several grammatical works of Nagojibhatta with Vaidyanatha the author of several commentaries on Alankara works ( such as the Udaharana- candrika on the Kavya-prakasa and the Prabha on the Kavyapradipa). The reasons are two. Vaidyanatha, author of the Udaharanacandrika, 119 श्रीकोपणी विजयते रणरङ्गधीरः ॥ * श्रीशं नत्वा श्रीनिवासी दाक्षिणात्यो Freeper । AMINA वे्यनाथातमजः सधीः ॥ ५ सुमनःकुटुबुरुकसहिबाहटब्धजीविकः। टक्ष्मीसुनुभवःन्यम्बो विपरहयविलेखकः ॥ ६ धमेशाज्ञिमहदेवमन्त्‌ (नु †) देवसह्मयकः। बाठशमीवालबुद्धिः पायगुण्डोपनामकः ॥ ७. 462 History of Dharmaflastra was the son of Ramabhatta, son of Vitthala Tatsat, while Vaidya- natha the grammarian was a son of Mahadeva and Veni. Besides the Udaharanacandrika was 60710056 "8 in samvat 1740 Kartika Suddha 8, Wednesday ( 1. €. 17th October 1683 ). We saw above that Vaidyanatha Payagunda was a pupil of Nagoji, who flourished towards the end of 17th and the first half of the 18th century. If Vaidyanatha, the writer on poetics, were the same as the com- mentator of Nagoji, he could not have composed a work on poetics so early as 1683 A. D. Dr. Belvalkar ( Systems of Sanskrit Grammar p. 60 ) says ‘ Laksmidevi, the wife of king Candrasirhha of Mithila, was probably his patroness in whose honour he is report- ed to have composed a commentary on the Vyavaharakanda of the Mitaksara.’ This throws to the winds all chronology. We saw above (pp. 399 and 404 ) that the Mithila princess Laksmi or Lachimadevi flourished in the first half of the 15th century, while the Balambhatti quoting as it does writers and works like Gagabhatta and the Kaustubha could not have been composed before 1700 A.D. Mr. Govinda Das says that a ms. of the Acdrakanda of the Balambhatti in the Benares palace library is dated samvat 1831 (i.e. 1774-75 A.D. ). ThelI. 0. cat. (pp. 458-459 )notices that Balam- bhatta was about 80 years old when Colebrooke entrusted the Dharmasastrasarhgraha to him about 1800 A. D. Besides both Balambhatta and his father Vaidyanatha were the pupils of Nagoji- bhatta. The ms. of the Upakrtitattva ( Stein’s Jammu cat. p. 302 ) is dated samvat 1848 i. ९. 1791-92 A. D. and the ms. of the Laghu- bhiasanakanti of Balambhatta’s pupil is dated samvat 1856 (1, ९, 1799-1800 A. 9. ). Hence it follows that Balambhatta must have flourished between 1730 and 1820 A.D. Mr. Govinda Das says that Balambhatta died at the age of 90 and gives his dates as 1740 to 1830 A. D. (p. 29 of Mr. Gharpure’s वद्वा section of Balam- bhatti at the end ). 1158 Vide I. 0. cat. ए. 329 No. 1151 for the TACOS eA HT and its date वियद्ेदमुमिकष्माभिरभितेष्टे ete सिते । वुधाष्टम्यामिमे मन्थं वैयनाथोभ्यपूरयत्‌ ॥ ; vide Stein’s cat. pp. 60, 61, 62, and 80 for commentaries on the कृव्यप्रदीप, PISIMEZ, चन्द्रालोक 20d the कदुम्बरी by वेयनाथ, 80 of रामचन्द्र फ 112. Kastinaitha- Upadhyaya’ 463 172. Kasinatha-Upadhyaya Kasinatha Upadhyaya or Baba Padhye composed an extensive work called Dharmasindhusara or Dharmabdhisara, which is popular- ly known as Dharmasindhu. It is now the leading workin matters of religious observances in the Deccan and has been referred to even in judicial decisions.''59 It has been published several times. In the following the Nirnayasagara edition of 1926 with Marathi trans- lation has been used. He says that he consulted former nibandhas and, following the order of the subject matters in the Nirnayasindhu, composed the work which sets forth only the established conclusions after eliminating the original smrti texts.***° At the end he says that the work is not meant for learned men conversant with mimamsa and Dharmasastra, but for men whose intellect is not sharp and yet who want to know the established conclusions on matters of dharma. The work is-divided into three paricchedas, the third being the longest and split into two parts. ‘The first deals with kala in general, viz. the kinds of year, month, the sarhkrintis, intercalary months and ksayamasa, what tithis are proper for what rites, conclusions about tithis from the first to the 15th and about amavasya, eclipses; the second deals with the festivals, fasts and observances of particular months from Caitra to Phalguna ; the chird in the first part speaks -in detail about the sathskdras from garbhadhana to marriage, sapindya, gotras and pravaras, duties of brahmacarin, the daily duties from rising to going to bed, the five daily mahayajiias, consecration of sacred fires, idols and dedication of tanks and works of public utility, kalivarjya ; the latter part of the third pariccheda dilates upon the details of sraddha, impurity on birth and death, the rites after death, the duties of widows, sarinyasa. Kasinatha was a very learned man and a great devotee of God Vithoba at Pandharpur in the Sholapur District. He wrote several other works, such as the Prayascittendusekhara ( Buhler 3. 110), an exposition of the Vedastuti in the Bhagavatapurana ( X. 87 ) 1159 1. L. K. 49 Bom. 739 at p. 756. 1160 नत्वायौन्‌ वितनोमि माधवमुखान्‌ अधर्माब्धिसारं मितम्‌ | Srd Intro verse ; तस्थानन्ताभिधानस्योषाभ्यायस्य सुतः Set । कारीनाथामिधो धर्म॑सिश्धुलारं समा- तनोत्‌ ॥ 195५ verse; टृ पर्वनिबश्धान्‌ निणयसिन्धुकरमेण Rarely । प्रायेण मूल वचनन्युञकषत्वा लिखामि बालबोाधाय ॥ Ath Intro. verse. 464 History of Dharmatisira anda work called Vitthala-rmmantrasdrabhasya.'"** In the latter he takes several Rk verses (such 25 RgvedaI. 95. 1-11 and I. 164. 31) and explains them as applying to God Vitthala. We know a good deal about the family of Kasinatha Padhye from his own works and from the biography of the great Marathi poet Moropant published by Mr. L. R. Pangarkar (ed.of 7908, chap. 16 pp. 107-119 ). His family hailed from Golavali, a village in the Ratnagiri District. They were 1410243 Brahmanas and had the Joshi and Upadhye urtti of seventy-two villages in the Sangame- vara taluka of the Ratnagiri District. At the end of the Dharma- sindhu he says that his grandfather was Kasyupadhyaya who had two sons YajfieSvara and Ananta. Ananta was a very pious man and a great devotee and left his native land Konkana, and resided at Pandharpur on the banks of the Bhima. The Dharmasindhu does not give the reason for Ananta’s migration from Konkana. But it is said that the Padhyes had a dispute with another family about the upadhye vurtti, took it for decision to the Peshwa’s Court at Poonaand were defeated, on which they cursed the Peshwa, vowed not to stayin the territories under the Peshwa’s rule and migrated to Pandharpur. The Dharmasindhu was composed?" in Sake 1712 1. €. 1790-1 A. D. KaSinatha was related to the great Marathi poet Moropant, as his daughter Avadi was married to Rama- krsna, the second son of the poet. He had great veneration for Moropant and refers to the Mantrabhagavata of the ल." ज = = ~ ~~~ ~~ त 71 oe 1161 Vide D.C. ms. No. 100 of 1869-70 dated $ˆ ake 1731. In this faga is derived as ^ faq वेदनं ज्ञानं तेन ठट।; शून्याः तान्‌ wa स्वीकरोति. ' 1162 “अयनांशाः उयोतिःशाख्च प्रसिद्‌।; । त Vad ददशा धिकसपतद्‌ श शतसंसख्यके शालि. बाहनशके एकर्विशतिरयःशा इति &०. ' धमैसिन्ध . 3 1163 एकेनेव प्रकरेणकेचचेव पये BAT Fog व्यवधनेपि चमत्कार तिशयोनमवसिद्धा नापलपितं Wai अत एव नीमयुरेन्वरपण्डितकवीन्बरेण मन्ननयमागक्षते मन्नमर्य- रामायणे च द्वादशाक्षरमन््रषणः श्रीरामजयरामेत्वादिन्रयोदशाक्षरवणंश्च क्रमणोप- नियध्य वर्णान्तरसंमिश्रणेन Sur योधयन्तो मन्त्ानुपर्वीमपि बोधयन्तीति चमत्कार विशोषासतावृशकाम्यरचनोपपयते | विहलक्ङ्ग्माभ्य १०1७ ६6० of 2, C.ms. No. 10 of 1869-70, 118. Katindtha- Upadhyaya 465 Kaéginatha became a sarhnyasin and died in Sake 1727 i, e, 1805-6 A. 0.64 113. Jagannatha Tarkapancanana After the British took over the administration of Bengal from the Nabobs, attempts were made to compile easily accessible digests of the personal law of the Hindus. The Vivadarnavasetu?'*s com- piled in 1773 for Warren Hastings by several pandits was translated into English from a Persian rendering and was published in 1774 A. D. as Halhed’s Gentoo Code. But this was a very unsatisfactory work. Another attempt was made at the instance of Sir William Jones by Trivedi Sarvorusarman who compiled in 1789 A. D. a digest of civil law called Vivadasararnava''® in nine tarangas. But the most famous of such digests that owed their inspiration to the British is the Vivadabhangarnava compiled by Jagannatha Tarkapaii- canana of Triveni on the Ganges, son of Rudra Tarkavagiéa, This digest was suggested by Sir William Jones and two parts of it on contracts and succession were translated by Cole- PE ED 1164 The pedigree is :— ASST उपाध्याय ० पाभ्ये RE War अनन्त died s’aks 1696 == erage who became @ satt | | [ काशनिथं alias धावा Rae died s’ake 1727 died about e’ake 1747 1165 The विवादाणैवलेतु is published by the Venkateévara Press in Bombay ( 9 ०८७ 1810 ); vide also I. O. oat. p. 458. 1406 Vide I. 0. ont. p. 457 for दिवुदुसाराणेष, He De §9. 466 History of Dharmatistra brooke in 1796. The translation was first published in 1797 A. D. and is known to the legal profession as Colebrooke’s Digest. This work exercised great influence over the courts in their admi- nistration of Hindu Law in the early days. The work is divided into dvipas, each dvipa being subdivided into ratnas. The principal topics dealt with are: recovery of debts, deposits, sale without ownership, partnership, rescission of gifts, non-payment of wages, rescission of sale and purchase, emancipation from slavery, disputes between master and servant, duties of man and wife, inheritance and partition. Jagannatha is said to have died at the venerable age of rrz in 1806." Though Jagannatha exercised great influence in-moulding Hindu Law in Bengal, his work has been held from very early times not to have any binding authority in Western India. " "< 114. Conclusion In the foregoing pages most of the classical works and the most prominent writers on Dharmasastra during a period of about twenty five centuries have been passed in review. The number of authors. and works on dharmasastra is legion. All these numberless authors and works were actuated by the most laudable motives of regulat- ing the Aryan society in all matters, civil, religious and moral, and of securing for the members of that society happiness in this world and the next. They laid the greatest emphasis on the duties of every man as a member of the whole Aryan society, as a member of the particular class to which he belonged and very little en.phasis on the privileges of men. They created great solidarity and cohesion among the several classes of the Aryan society in India in spite of their conflicting interests and inclinations and enabled Hindu society to hold its own against successive aggressions of foreign invaders They preserved Hindu culture and literature in the midst of alien cultures and in spite of bigoted foreign domination. There is no doubt that the authors on dharmasgastra in their desire to evolve order out of chaos and to adjust and harmonise the varying practices of people with the dicta of ancient sages were guilty of the faults of raising hair-splitting arguments, divisions nd. ae 1167 Vide ‘Dawn of new India’ by Mr. Brajendranath Banerjee, 1927, Caleutts ( pp. 81-91 ) ~. 1165 Vide Vinayak v. Lakeshmidat, 1 Bonk. H.-G.'R. 117 at p. 134, $ ७. ud # ५ ९. 114, Conclusion ` 467 sub-divisions and also of thinking that religious rites and formularies were the be-all and end-all of human existence. But living as most of the later writers did in the midst of aggressive and violently unsympathetic cultures and rulers and possessing no powerful central government that sympathised with their ideals, they were driven more and more to revolve within their own narrow grooves and could not see far in order to regulate society in a free and buoyant spirit. In spite of these defects, the work done by the writers on dharmasastra should excite our admira- tion and entitles them to the regard of all those that are interested in the study of the vicissitudes of Hindu society for thousands of years. GENERAL INDEX N. 9, In the oase of several works and authors like the Mitaksari, Apararka, Smyticandrik&, which occur almost on every page, exhaustive re- ferences are not given. Where a work or author is described as the special subject of a section or as a special topic, thick type has been used toindicate such pages. ` Abdhi, relied on by Smrtyarthasira, p. 336. Abhidhdnaratnamala, p. 297. Abul 7821, killed by Virasithha, p. 445. AcBracandrik&, p, 418n. Achracintamant of Vacaspati, pp. 363, 399, 418. Aciradaréa, pp. 278, 318, $63, 396, 418 ; com. on, pp. 363-364. Actramaytkha, p. 117. Ac&rapradipa, pp. 401n., 433. Ac&rarka, of Divakarabhatta, p. 440, Aocairasaigara, of Ballalasena, pp. 340, 382n. Ac&Srendusekhara, of Nagoji, p. 453. Acaryas, meaning of, pp. 16-17, 99-100; views of, acoording to Kautilya, pp. 98-99. Actors, looked down upon, p, 73. Acyutacakravartin, p. 339, Adbhutasigara, pp. 248, 299-300, 341. Adhi, four varieties of, p. 281. Adiétea, king, brought 0८005928 into Bengal, pp. 300-301, 324. Adityabhatta, p. 285. Adoption, whether a girl oan be taken in, ए. 449; rules of, in Vasigtha, p. 59; Atri on, p. 108; of a ksatriya boy, allowed to a braihmaya, by Medh&tithi, p. 273; rules of, in Dattakadidhiti, p. 448. Adultery, with pravrajiti, a mortal sin, acoording to Ni&rada, p. 208: fine for, p. 235; punishment for, in case of women, p. 235. Adverse possession, vide under pos- session, Agastya, pp. 103, 152 ; rising of star, in Ujjayini and Radha, p. 325. Agnipurina, borrows from Yajiaval- kya and Narada, pp. 162, 170-178; date of, p.172; dharmaé&stra mate- rial in, p. 162; extent of, p. 162; portion on vyavahfra of, pp. 170-173. Abnikacintamani of Vaicaspati, p. 399. Ahnikatattva, 2, 278, Aila, p. 102. Ain-i-Akbari, p. 123. Aitareyabrahmana, pp. 2, 6, 2), 50, 136, 153. Afigarta, who was ready to sacrifice bis son, pp. 152, 153, Afjivaka, p. 102. Ajfitkraya, ए; 131. Akhyinas, named by Manu, p. 143. Aksam&, of low birth, united to Vasigtha, ए. 152. Alathka@rasastra, beginnings of, in Kautilya, p. 100. Alekbana, p. 126. Ambarisa, p. 102. Ambhiyas, pp. 99, 81518, . General Index Anadhytys, p. 158 ; rules about, apply only ‘to Vedio study and not to sacrifices, p. 43. An&kuld, commentary on Apastambe- grbya, p. 347. Xnandasafifivana, ascribed to Madana- pala, p. 388. Ananta, p. 253. Anantadeva, pp. 447-458. AnantSérama, author of Vyabgy&rtha- kaumudi, p. 446. Ananta Vasudeva, temple of, p. 304. Anfvila, commentary on Advaléyana- grbya, p. 347. Andhra, p. 44. Andbuka, an author, p. 325. Angas, of Veda, cannot be designated as Veda, ए. 42 ; six, p. 54, Angiras, pp. 120, 147 ; smrti of, pp. 221. 223, 4091288, story of, pp. 152, 153. Angirasa-smrpti, pp. 83, 147. Aniruddha, pp. 305, 314, 317, 337-340; guru of Ballalasona, 248. Antyajas, seven, pp. 108, 222. Antyestipaddhati, of Nardyanabhatta 7. 420. anusdsanaparva, pp. 3, 67. Anuvéda, cannot be a vidhi, p. 42 Anviksikt, one of the vidy&s, pp, 81-82 179 4790668, meaning of, p. 90. Apadeva, author of a Smticandriks, १, 347, Apadeva, author of Mim&rhsinyaya- prakiéa, p. 451 Apararka or Apar&ditya, pp. 18, 43, 46, 58, 66, 72, 78, 115,146, 181, 194, 210, 328-334; criticizes Mitikgard, Pp. 930-332; and Smptioandriks, b. 338 ; views of, coincide with Jimu- tavthana’s, p. 380 ; wrote NySyamu- ktivali, p. $34 469: ApAstamba, pp. 147, 288; his views opposed to those of others on several points, p. 45; home and personal history of, p. 44; his school earlier than Hiranyakedin's, p. 44. Apastamba, school of, a subdivision of Khandikiyas, ए. $2. Apastamba-dharmasttra, pp. 4, 32ff, 147 ; age of, pp. 44-45 ; bh&syakira of, p. 45; commentary Ujjvala on, ए. 347; conflict between views of, and of Baudh&yana, p. 40; contains many strange words, p. 37;contents of, pp. 34-37; has many siltras and verses in common with Baudhayana, p. 30; has special relation to Purvamima- thet, p. 41-42; language of, p. 37; lays down stricter views than Bau~ dh&yana, p. 29 ; literature known to, pp. 38-39 ; presupposes grbhya sitra, p. 38; striking coincidences bet- ween, and Gautamadharmasttra, p. 40 ; teachers of dharma named by, p. 39. Apestamba-dhvanitartha-karika.p.251. Apastambagrhyasttra, pp. 33, 186, 265 ; commentary Anfvild on, p. 347; commentary on, by Sudargandoarya, p. 265 ; composed by author of dhar- masttra, p. 33; refers to teaching of dharmastitra, p. 33. Apastamba-kalpa, divisions of, 7, 32. Apastamba-érauta-sttra, pp. 45, 91. Apastambiya-mantrapatha, commen- tary of Haradatta on, p. 347. Apekgitarthadyotini, of Narayana, p. 390. Apip@la, p. 418n. Aranyaka, composed by Y&j., p. 179. Aratta, a country, p. 102 Arhat, words of, delude people, p. 224 Arjuna, 7 102 Arthakaumudi, p. 415, Arthaéastra, commentary Srimfla by Pandit Ganapatiéastri, 2, 86 ; com 470; mentary Nayacandrik?, p. 86; is upa- veda of Atharv aveda, pp. 41, 87; of Kautilya, pp. 85-104 ; modern works based on, p. 86 ; is a branchof Dhar- masastra, p. 87 ; purpose of, p. 87; rules in case of conflict with Dhar- masastra, pp. 87, 179. Arthasastra of Brhaspati, p. 126, Ary&varta, definition of, p. 65 ; defini- tion of, according to Sankha, p. 78. Asafcetida, use of, forbidden according to Haradatta, p. 349. Asahiya, pp. 19, 247-251; composed ०08. syas on Narada, ए. 248, and Gautama, p. 338 ; probably composed ॐ com- ` mentary on Manu, pp. 248-249. Aéauca, none, in marriages, famines, fairs &०. p. 122; none for kings, royal officors, physicians &c., p. 229. ASaucadagaka, p. 290; authorship of , pp. 290-291 ; commentaries on, ए. 291. Aéauca-nirnaya, of Jivadeva, p. 452. Agéaucanirnaya, of Nagoji, p. 453. Aéauca-sSgara, of Kullitka, ए. 361. Ascetios, yellow-robed, sight of, p. 67. Asmarathya, p. 126. Agoka, p. 185. Aéramas, division into four, ascribed to asura Kapila, according to Bau- dhiyana p. 25; what varnas entitl- ed to which, ४, 189. Astangabydaya, pp. 65, 358; com. Ayu- rvedarasayana on, by प्श); p. 358, Astrology, p. 101. Aévaghoga, refers to Brhaspati and Sukra, p. 124; refers to Manava- dharma, p. 147. Aévalayanagphya, p. 139 ;commentary on, by Naraéyaya, p. 279; commen- tary An&vil& on, p. 347, . Aéval&yana~srauta-sttra, p, 91; com- mentary of N&rdyanga on, pp. 279, OL. Eiistory of Dharmatistra ) Atat&yin, 7. 130 ; killing an, pp. 130, 214, 302. ~ & ८097९478 व00 ०४९, p. 3611, Atharvaveda, pp. 1, 5, 7n, 143 ; Artha. éistra is the Upaveda of, ए. 41. Atheism, referred to,by Manu, p. 1438. Atri, work of, on dharmaéastra, pp- 107-110; named by ‘Manuamrti, pp. 132, 143. Aufrecht, Prof.., pp. 292, 295, 297, 418, 450n. Aupajanghani, named by Baudha&yana as holding that aurasa son only to be recognised, pp. 25, 132. Auganasa-dharmasastra, p. 115, Auganasas, pp. 98, 99. Ayakraya, meaning of, p. 131. Avasathika, meaning of, p. 299. Aviévisa, sheet anchor of Brhaspati's policy, p, 124. Ayurveda, eight aigas of, p. 106. Ayurvedaras&y ana, com. on Vagbhata’s work, p. 358. Baédar&yana, p. 341n. Bahlika, a couhtry, p. 102. Bahudantaka, named by Mah&bhiarata, pp. 100, 137. B&shudantiputra, pp. 99, 100. - Bahvycahbnika, 7, 433, Baijavapa, p. 390. Baijavipa-grhya, on Vindyaka, p. 181. BSlakrid’, a commentary on Yj. p. 252. Balambhatta, pp. 456-462, Balamb hatti, pp. 250, 257, 290. Balaka, pp. 283-284, 323, 418. 88197009, pp. 284-286, 373. Balavalabhibhujatga, meaning of, pp. 305. Ball&lasena, pp. 238, 248, 300, 339, 40 341, 4182. General Index pana, pp. 88, 161, 204. | Banavase, country of, p. 380. Bandhus, p. 135 ; three kinds of, p. 285. Banoeriji-sastri, Dr., p. 104. Barhaspatyas, pp. 98, 99. Bathing, in rivers, disallowed in the rains, p. 230; on touching certain people, p. 239. Baudhayana, a teacher of Krsna Ya- jurvedé, p. 20; his siltras, how arranged according to Burnell, p. 20; tyled K&nvayana, p. 21; styled pravacanakara, p. 20. Baudhbfiyana—dbarmastitra, pp. 20-32, 189 ; age of, pp. 28-30 ; and Pardéara, p. 194; authors named in, 0. 25; borrows one chapter from Gautama, p.17; cdntents of, pp. 21-23; has many sUtras in common with Gautama, p. 18; has many sittras in common with Vasistha, p. 31 ; has many sltras in common with Apa- stamba, p.30; hume of, pp. 27-28; language of, p. 24; literature known to, p. 24; names Gautama, p. 17; one chapter of, taken from Gautama, p. 23 ; one chapter of, agrees closely with Visnudharmasitra, p. 33; refers to Baudh&yanagrhya, ए, 20; text of, rather suspicious, p. 23. Baudhayangphbya, pp. 20, 28, 186; quot- edin the Mitaksara, p. 23, Bauddhas, delude people, p. 224. Baz Babadurcandra, king of Kumaon, p. 457, Belvalkar, Dr., pp. 357, 454, 455, Bergaigne, A., p. 156. | Bhagavad-gita, verses of, borrowed by Vignudhermasttra, p. 64, Bhagavantabhakara, a digest, p. 438, Bhagavantadeva, patron of Nilakan- tha, p, 438, Bhigavata-purtina, 130, 161, 168, 340, Bhagavattattvamasijari, ४" 340, 411 Bhaguri, a commentator of Manu, pp. 157, 320n, 369n. Bhairavendra, king of Mithila, pp. 402° 404. Bh@llavins, gatha of, quoted in Baudha- yana, about limits of Arya- varta, 7. 25 ; g&thaé of, quoted by Vasistha, p* 54, Bhamati, on Sankarabbasya, pp. 184, 262, Bhandarkar, Dr. 452. Bhandarkar, D. R., pp. 10n. 206. Bhiaradvaja, writer on dharma, pp.126- 127 ; who accepted many cows, p. 152, Bhiaradvaja, writer on Arthasdstra, pp. 90, 99, 100, 127-128; views of, p. 127; Kaninka, p. 99. Bhiradvajagrhyasitra, pp. 21. 126. Bharadvajasrautasitra, p. 126. Bharatacandra, Pandit, p. 322. Bharatitirtha, teacher of M@adhava- 0४५४०, p. 377. Bhargava, mentioned dipa, p. 219. Bhargaviya, p. 341n. Bhartfyajiia, pp. 251-252, 271. Bhacuci, pp. 264-266; and the Mitak- sara p. 266; and the Vignudharma- 80४९8, p. 265. Bhasa, p. 148. Bhasarvajiia, p. 334. Bhaskara, bha&syakara on Vedanta- 80४८8, p. 361. Bhaskaracarya, pp. 388, 389. Bhasyirthasanmgrahakira, p. 344, Bhattadipika, of Khandadeva, p. 457. Bhattasvamin, commentator of Artha- éastra, p. 104, Bhattoji, pp. 59, 157, 196, 206, 280, 454 &o., author of com. on Aéaucada- gaka, p. 291; son of Lakgmidhar a, p. 924; pedigree of, 4557. Sir, pp. 409, 414, in Karmapra- author of Nydyasira, 472 Bhau 781, Dr., p- 380. Bhavabhtti, p. 263. Bhavadeva, pp. 284, 301-306, $73, 418n; styled Balavalabhibhujanga pp. 308-4. Bh&vadhana, p. 320n. Bhavanatha, p. 344. x Bhave, Mr., 453n. Bhaveéa, king of Mithila, pp. 368, 372, 398, 402, 404. Bhavisyapuréna, on Manu, pp. 138, 146, 161; quotes Gautama, 18; quotes Vasistha, p, 58. Bhavigyat-puraiga, quoted by Apas- tamba, pp. 41, 160. Bhavisyottarapuraya, ए. 352. Bhike&tana, p. 206. Bhikgu, used by Gautamain the sense of parivrajake, p. 19; four kinds of, p. 105. Bhimaparakrama, a work, pp. 401n, 418n, 421n. Bhogan&tha, brother of Méaudhavé- oarya, p. 379. Bhoja, author of Dharmapradipa, p. 279. Bhojadeva, vide under Db&reévara, p. 418n; and Manusmyti, pp. 157, 273, 329, 378; numerour works asorib- ed to. -p.276; wrote on grammar, medicine and yoga, ए. 276; aythor of Raejamartanda and Bhujabalabhima, p. 278. Bhojaprabandha, p. 279. Bhojarajiya, 27%n. Bhrgu, named by Manu, pp. 182, 148; son of fire p. 149: quoted by ह 8८. yayana, pp. 214-215. 20008, meaning of, p. 88. Bhujabalabhima, a work of Bhoja, . PP. 278, 397n, 418n, 421n. Bhtp&la, stands for Bhojadeva in works on dharma, pp. 378, 364, 369n, History of Dharmatasira Bhupsla~kptyasamucoaya, p. 366n, Bhupalapaddhati, stands for 27008. deva’s work, 278, 369n. Bhuvaneévara, temple of Ananta at, p. $04. Bloch, Th., p. 107. Blochmann, p. 423. Bodh&yana, wrote Krtakoti on Bra- masttra, pp. 264, 281. 8९81171, oredited with a huge work on dharma, artha and kama in the Mahabharata, pp. 123, 137 ; and also according to K&mastitra, p. 124. seven sons of, 7. 223. Brahma, form of marriage, distinguish- ed from Prajapatya, p. 349. Brahmaocirin, duties of, p. 6; four kinds of, p. 105; duration. of period of order of, p. 189. Brahmagupta, p- 320. Bréhmana, succession to wealth of childless, p. 251 ; never to be awar- ded corporal punishment, p. 234. Braéhmaya, avocations allowed to a, p. 17 ; whether could marry a girl of any one of the four castes, pp. 69, 96, 114, 148, 180, 203: of certain localities not honoured, p. 109; virtues of, p. 108; privileges of, p. 111; एच्छ इ २6०1४४४ for killing, pp.111, 1380; not to dwell in kingdom of éUdra, p.151; power of, p. 152. Brak mananda~bharati, p. 261. Brahmanandia, p. 364, Brahmayasarvasva, a work of Halé- yudha, pp. 218-299, 498n. Brahm&ndapuraga, p. 340. Brahmapur&ya, p. 69. BrahmasiddhSnta, p. 841n. Brahmasttra, p. 188; Seikara’s bbs- aya on, pp. 43, 184. Brahmayajiia, p. 72n. Brhad-Angiras, p. 228. Brhad-devats, pp. 101, 158, General Index rhad-Srapyakopanisad, pp. 82, 168, 177, 191. Brhad-Gargya, p. 119. Brhad-Rajamrtanda, p. 278. Brhad-Vasistha, p. 60. Brhad-Visnu, p> 69. Brhad-Vy&sa, p. 238. Brhad-Y4@jiivalkya, work of, p. 188. Brhad-Yama, pp. 282, 235. Brhad-Y ogiy&jfiavalkya, p. 190. Brhan-Manu, pp, 150, 158. Brhan-Na@rada, p. 206. Brhaspati, on Arthasa&stra, pp. 123-126; on dharmas&stra, views of, quoted by Kautiliya, p. 124. Brhaspati-smrti, pp. 207-213; and Narada-smpti; p. 209; contents of, p, 208; date of, p. 210; differences of, with Manusmrti, p. 209; explains and illustrates Manu, pp. 207-8; first to distinguish betweon oivil and orimina) justice, p. 228; on 2०27८ and éraddha, pp. 211-212, Brhat-kath@, p. 88. Brhat-Katyayana, p. 218. Brhat-Par&éara, pp. 135, 195-196. Brhat-Pracetas, p. 229. Erhat-Sazshvarta, p. 244. Brhat-Satatapa, p. 129. Bride, tests for selecting, mentioned in stftras, p. 189. Brother, full, and half-brother re- united, p. 394. Brothers, include sisters for inheri- tance, according to Nandapandita, p. 427. Brother's son, includes grand-son for inheritance, according to Nanda-~ १०१९१४४, p. 427. Buddhist, inviting of, at dinner in honour of gods or manes, prohibit- ०0, 2. 427; sight of, an evil omen, 9, 187, 43, 45, र 2, 60, 473 Budha, dharniastitra of, p. 123. Buhler, D.,r pp. 17, 26, 3l, 143, 151, 204, 269, 351, 362; criticized, pp. 8, 16, 19, 28, 29, 32, 54-55, 56, 80-83, 97-98, 152, 153, 155, 270-271, 272, 313-14. Burmese, governed by Manusnti, p. 157. Burnell, Dr., pp. 20, 349, 377, 413, Buyer, rights of, to recover price paid, p. 231. Caitanya, relations of, with Pratap- rudradeva, p. 414 ; pupil of Vasudeva Sarvabhauma, pp, 417-418. Cakranarayani, p. 394n. Caland, Dr., pp. 20, 68, 71, 106, 121, 139, 182. Calukyas, of Kalyana, p. 290. Cambridge, History of India, p. 59. Canakya, vide under Kautilya, p. 87; sitras attributed to, p. 104 ; men- tioned as a writer on Dandaniti, p, 270. 08११६1९, p. 45 ; 77 इ 2801४८४ for touch- ing, 2. 117. Candana-dhenupramana, a work of Vaocaspati, p. 403. Candesvara, pp. 204, 294, 296, 306, 366- 372; pedigree of, pp. 370-371; five predecessors of, p. 369. Oandraprakaéa, p. 434n, Candrasizbha, great-grandson of Bha- vesa of Mithila, pp. 398-99. Oaraka, pp. 65, 103. Caranavytiha, pp. 32, 60, 85, 87, 105 ` oOommentary on, pp. 13, 44, 47. 08185988, Dirgha, named by Kau- tilya, p. 99. Carvaka ,words of, delude people,p-224. Castes, mixed, home of, p. 28; men- tion of, in ancient works, p. 45; seven lowest, ¢. 2980, 474 Caturanga, game of, p. 417. Citurmssya-paddhati, p. 340. Caturvargavintamani, pp. 78n, 1928, 138, 212, 218, 354-356, 383, Caturvedatatparyasamgraha, p. 353. CaturvirhSatimata, pp. 133, 223-225 ; commentary of Bhattoji on,pp.59,73n, 196, 206, 205, 224; subjects treated of in, p. 224; authors quoted by p.224. Caula, p. 238. Caundappa, commentator of Apastam- biyasiitras, p. 32. Chakravarti, Rai Bahadur M. M., pp. 208, 301, 302, 316, 319, 325, 362, 372, 393, 399, 402, 415, 416, 419. Chalas, are cases in which king took action without complaint, 226. Chand, dynasty of Almora, 7. 452. Chandah-siitra, p. 297; of Halayudba ८0, p. 297. Chandoga-grhya-bhasyakara, p. 347. Chandogabnika, of Sridatta, p. 364, Chandog&hnikoddhara, by Sankara- migra, 7, 364. Chaindogyaparisista, p. 388, Chandogyopanisad, pp, 13, 28, 39, 160. Children, sale of, among Mlecchas, p. 102. Cinas, mentioned by Manu, p. 151; silks from, p- 101. Clothes, whether impartible, p. 147. Coercion, vitiated all transactions, p. 234. Colas, p. 348. Colebrooke, pp. 322, 461, 466. Compromise, period within which could be set aside, pp. 128, 131. Conflict, of smptis and puranas, 0. 409, Coronation, rites of, p. 295. Corporations, of warriors, p. 101, Council, of ministers, to consist of 16, according to Brhaspati, p. 124; to commentary History of Dharmasistra consist of 7 or 8 according to Manu- smrti, p. 97; to consist of 12 accord- ing to Manavas, p. 97. Courts, gradation of, for trial of suits, p. 227. | Cow, prayascitta for killing, pp. 117, 118, 125, 128, 147. Cunningham, General, p. 185. Cyavana, p. 112. Dahlmanp, p. 159. Daivajiacintamani, p. 421n. Daivajfiamanohara, ए. 421n. Daksa, and his daughters, p. 152, Daksa, smppti of, pp. 225-226. Daksinadpatha, meaning of, pp. 28, 298 ; home of mixed castes, p. 28, Dalapati, author of Nrsimhaprasada, p. 407. Dana-Brhas pati, p. 126. Danadharmaprakriya, of Bhavadeva, p. 306. Danakamalakara, p. 433. Danakaumudi, p. 414. Danaratnakara, pp. 126, 278, 306, 341, 367, 371. Danasdgara, pp. 238, 339, 3692 ; con- tents of, p. 340; work of Aniruddha, according to Raghunandana, p. 341. Danaviky&vali, of | Candeévara, pp. 369, 4187. Dana- Vyasa, p. 238. Dandaniti, pp. 81, 88, 111, 179. Dandaviveka, of Vardhaména, p. 404. Dandin, pp. 87, 91. Darpanarayana, grandson of Bha- veda, p. 398. Dasa, what was bestowed on, by mas- ter, still under the master’s control, p. 293; who could be made to work as, p. 214. DasSakarmapaddhati or - pp. 302-303, dipika General Index Dadéakum&racarita, pp. 87-88. Daéagloki, same as p. 291. D&si, three varieties of, p. 444. Dattaka, inferior position of, accord- ing to Vasistha, p. 58. Dattakacandrika, p. 428. Dattakadidhiti, part of Sarhskarakau- stubha. p. 447, Dattakamima1hsa, pp. 32, 47, 108, 196, 280n, 318, 426, 428-430, Dattakavidhi, p. 403. Daughter, excluded from inheritance by son, p. 6; succeeded, if putrikd, according to Visvartpa and Srikara, p. 267 ; unmarried, succeeds in pre- ference to married. ए. 285; accord-— ing to Diksita and ह १200863, one having sons preferred to barren or widowed ones, p. 323. Daughter-in-law, p. 459. Daughter's son, rights of, pp. 283, 314; postponed to heirs expressly men- tioned According to Balaka, p. 283. Daya, definition of, pp. 240, 250, 345; Sapratibandha and apratibandhe, pp. 266, 290. Dayabhiaga, pp. 188, 218, 253, 282, 329- 324; doctrines peculiar to, p. 323; commentary on, by Raghunandana, p. 417, Dayatattva, pp. 76, 283, 307, 322, 362, 417. Debt, threefold, theory of, pp. 5, 6; of deceased man, to be paid by whom, p. 125 ; five modes of recover- ing, p. 207. Debtor, refusing to pay though able, punished, p. 235, Decision, rule of, when litigants of different countries, p. 227. Delhi, ए. 406. Deposits, should not be appropri ated by king, p. 122, Aéaucadasakay whether an _ heir, 475 Desa, extent of, according to Brhas- pati, p. 212. Devaditya, grandfather of Cande- évara, p. 370. Devagiri ( modern Daulatabad ), p. 406. Devala, on एत इ ०६५७1४४० for contact with mlecchas, p. 121. Devala, pp. 120-121. Devala, as a jurist, p. 121. Devannabhatta, pp. 289, 343; vide under Smrticandrika, Devarata, p. 344. Devasvamin, author of digest on dharma, pp. 267, 279-281, 344; com- mented on Pirvamimamsé, p. 281. Devayajfiika, author of Smptisara, p. 374, 6९०8९878, p, 369१. Devipurana, approved of by heterodox systems according to Danas&gara, p. 340. Dhammathats, p. 157 Dharasena, inscription of, p. 145. DhareSvara, vide under Bhojadeva, pp. 275-279 ; agrees with Sarhgraha- kara on many points, p. 24} ; age of, p. 279; on ownership, p. 240; on son's right, 240; on widow's right to succeed, pp. 241, 275; placed grandmother immediately after mother, pp. 241, 275; and Déaya- bhiga, p. 276; and Mitaksara, points of conflict between, pp. 277-278. Dharma, definition of, p. 3; five-fold division of, p..3; meaning of, in Reg- veda, p.1; meaning of, in Vajasa- neyasamhita, p. 1; meaning of, in Atharvaveda, p. 2; meaning of, in Aitareyabrahmana, p. 2; meaning of, in Chindogya-Up. p. 2; meaning of, in Taittiriya-Up. ए. ४ ; meaning of, in Bhagavadgit3, p, 2; meaning of, according to Visvamitra, p. 236; sources of, p. 4; three branches of, p. 2; 100000 81088 on, composed by 476 Supreme Being, pp. 196-187; word, ` used in the neuter also, ए. 1. Dharmabh&sya, p. 344. Dharmadbyakga, ए, 298. Dharmadipa or -pradipa, p. 344. Dharmaprakaéa, of Sankarabhatta, p. 488. Dharmapravftti, of Narayana, pp. 420- 421. Dharanidhara, a commentator of Manusnrti, pp. 157, 361. Dharmapradipa, of Bhoja, pp. 289, 424 n. Dharmaratna, a digest projected by Jimttavahana, p. 319. Dharmaéastra, literature on, falls into three periods, p. 246 ; referred to by Gautama and Baudhbayana, p. 8; nine- teen expounders of, named by श व}, p.179; rule in case of conflict of, with arthasastra, p.179; rule in case of conflict of, with usages, p. 203; what is, according to Pitimaha, p. 226; works on, when first composed, p. 8. Dharmaé&strasathgraha, of Balaéar- man Payagunda, p. 461. Dharmasindbusaira or Dharmasindhu of Kaginatha, pp. 463-464, Dharmasttras, concerned with,instruc- tion in :dharmas of varnas and Séramas, p. 3; existed in Pataiijali’s day, p. 9 ; some formed part of Kalpa p. 10 ; some presuppose grhya sttras, p. 10; which, studied in particular sakhais, p. 11; closely connected with gphya stltras, p. 11; points of difference between them and other 8771६18, p. 12; of Gautama, 12-20; some formed part of Kalpasttras, p. 10. Dharmatattva, digest of Kamalikara, Dp. 433, Dharmaviviti, p. 382 2. Dh&tuvetti, of Madhava, p.379, History of Dharmatastra Dhavala, p. 320 n. Dhigvanas, sales of hides was means of livelihood of, p. 115. Dhirasithha, son of Darpan&rayana, p. 399, Dhunghupaddhati, p. 418 n. Dhirtasvamin, p. 344. Diksita, a predecessor of Jimita- vahana, pp. 287, 321, 323. Dinakara, alias Divakara, elder brother of Kamalakara, ए. 432. Dinara, also called Suvarna, pp. 205, 209; mentioned by Narada, p. 203 ; meaning of, p. 205; defined by Brhaspati, p, 209. Dipakalika, com. of Stlapani on Yajfiavalkya. pp. 393-94, 418n. Dipik&vivarana, of पि 8110109, p. 409. Divorce, not permitted by Dharma- sastra, ए. 96, permitted by Kautilya in certain citoumstances, ०. 96. DivySnusthanapaddhati, of Narayana, p. 420. Doouments, p. 150; referred to by Va- sistha and Gautama, p. 59; of vari- ous kinds, defined, p. 226: rule of superiority among, p. 227 ; varieties of, pp. 237, 239; importance of, in transactions, p. 245. Prahyayanasrauta, Pp. 13. Dravida, an author, relied on by Sri- dhara, p. 336. Dravidas, practices of, p. 348. Drinking, pray ascitta for, p. 130. Drinks, twelve kinds of, p. 228. Durg&bhaktitarangini, pp. 401n, 4181. Durghatavrtti, p. 352. Durgotsavaviveka, pp. 284, 320n, 365, 394, Duryodhana, p. 102. DvSdasavikyavivarana, p. 261. Dvidaseyatratattva, p. 417, General Index Dvaitacintamani of Vacaspati, ए, 400. Dvaitanirpaya, pp. 350, 351, 438; of Sankarabhatta, p. 247; of Vacas- pati, 401-402, 4181, Edumiéra, p 324. Eka, 8 writer nsmed by Apastamba, pp. 39, 116, 132. Ek&daféi, 18 varieties of, p. 263. Ek&gnidanapaddhati, p. 365. Ekan&tha, finished his Marathi Bha- gavata at Benares, pp. 407, 452-453; ancestor of Anantadeva, p. 451. Ek&vali, p. 278. Epics, the two Indian, and dharma- 6888४९४, 158-160 Eran, ioscription, mentions week-day p. 69. Evidence, oral, when in conflict with writing, to be discarded, p. 243. author of Kulakarika, Father, could divide wealth among sons, 7. 6; power of, over ancestral property. 0. 259; preferred to mother as an heir by Apararkxa, ए. 330. Fleet, Dr., pp. 58, 69, 380. Flesh, eating of, pp. 101, 148 ; of cows, eating of, not condemned by Apas- tamba and Vasistha, p. 45; offering of, to manes, effect of, p. 113; of certain birds, allowed, p. 232. Food, of astrologers and bellmakers, forbidden, p. 122; whose, allowed, p. 116. Forchhammer, Dr., p. 157. Foulkes, Rev. Thomas, p, 410. Fuhrer, Dr., p. 207. Gad&dhara, bhigya of, on Paraskara, Pp. 252, 274. ७8001, story of son of, p- 152. Gadya-Vianu, p. 70. Aq? Gadya-Vyasa, p. 238. Gagabhatta, pp. 437, 457. Gajapati, dynasty of Orissa, ppe 410. 413 Gambling, condemned by Manu but allowed by others, pp. 147, 180, 202; evil effects of, known to Regveda, p- 153. Ganapati Sastri, Pandit, pp. 86, 252. ७8९88, appellations of, mentioned by Baudha@yana. p. 31; worship of, according to Ha@rita, p. 73. Ganesamiéra, pp. 363, 365. Ganesvaramisra, author of Sugati- sopana, pp. 365, 370, $74, 400. Gangakrtyaviveka, of Vardham§na, ए. 404, Gangavaky4vali, pp. 278, 4!8n. Gangeya, ए. 382. Garga, pp. 119, 361, 422; on astronomy, pp. 329, 341. Gargiyas, p. 215. Gargya, writer on dharma, p. 119; writer on astronomy. p. 119. Garudapurana, p. 162; borrows from Ydjiavalkyasmrti, pp. 173-75; bor- rows from Naradasmrti, ए. 173. Gathas, Narasarhsi, ए. 179. Gaudapada, pp. 256, 262. Gauragiras, on politics, named by Mahabharata, p. 100, Gauripati, author of com. on Acara- daréa, p. 364, Gautama, a subdivision of the R&naya- niya school of S&maveda, p. 13; ४ generic name, p. 13; referred to in Baudbayanadharmasttra p. 17; re- ferred to by Manu and Y4jfiavalkya p. 13 ; and Vasigtha, pp. 55, 132, Gautamadharmastitra, pp. 12-20, 132, 160, 208; studied by S&mavedins, p. 11; probably oldest among extant dharmasttras p.13; closely connected with Sdmaveda, p. 13; commented upon by Haradatta, and Maskarin 478 and probably by Asahiaya. p. 19; commentary Mitaksara on, by Hara- « datta, p. 347 ; contents of, pp. 14-15 ; language of, n. 15 ; literature known to, p. 16; many sitras of, corres- pond to Baudhadyana’s, p. 18; view of, quoted by Vasistha, p. 18; many 87४८४६8 of, identical with Vasistha's, p. 18 ; age of, between 600-400 B.O.,: pp. 18-19. Gay&éraddhapaddhati, pp. 403, 417. Gbarpure, Mr. J. R.,, pp. 268, 385, 438, 457. Ghose, author of Hindu Law, pp. 324, 349, 362, 393, 404. Ghosh, Mr., Panchanan, p. 325. Ghotakamukha, 2, 99. Gifts, nine things that could not be ubjects of, p. 2251 ; necessity of writing for completing, p. 231. Goa, capital of Konkana, p. 380. Gobhilgrhya, p. 186 ; studied by Sama- vedins, p. 11; names Gautama as an authority, p. 13; and Karmapra- dipa, pp. 218-220. Gocarma, a measure of area, equal to ten nivartanas, ए. 212. Goldstticker, pp. 10n, 168. 0070818, pp. 294-295, 364, 369”; author of Kamadhenu, p. 294. Gotrapravaradarpana, p. 433. Gotrapravaranirnaya of Jivadeva, p. 452. Govindabhatta, p. 418n. Govindacandra, king of Kanoj, pp. 316, 317, Govinda Das, Mr., pp. 385, 457, 461. Govindamanasollasa,, p. 418n. Govindananda, pp. 303, 320, 339, 365, 414-415; quotes Rajamartanda of Bhoja more frequently than any other work, p. 277n Govindaraja, pp. 3, 130, 232, 276, 309-315; ` [७ than Medhatithi, p. 2753, Fiistory of Dharmasastra placed daughter's son before married daughter, p.314; wrote Smrtimafijari, p. 310. Govindasvamin, commentator of Bau- dhayana, pp. 17, 21, 23, 32, 60. Govindopadhyaya, p. 355n. Grahaé&nti, in शठ). p. 176. Graheévaramiéra, p. 369n. Gramakitas, p. 122. Grandmother, rights of succession 0१ p. 208. Grants, of land, verses in, p. 150; by kings, verses about, p. 237. Grhastha, duties of, p. 120n; two kinds of, p. 120. Grhastharatnakara, pp. 212), 252, 259 366-367, 4187. Grhyasttras, subjects of, p.11; some refer to dharmasistras, p. 12. Guest, cow or bull, offered to, p. 7. Guilds, wealth of, does not go to king, p. 122. Gurumata, p. 304. Guruvamsa-kavya, pp. 262, 377. Haihaya, p. 102. Halayudha, pp. 307, 296-301, 369. 369n; author of Abhidhdiaratoamala, pp. 297-298; author of Brahmana- arvasva, pp. 298-300; author of commentary on Sriddha-kalpastitra of Katyayana, p. 301; the jurist, pp- 296-297. Halhed, compiler of Gentoo Code, p. 465. Haradatta, pp. 3, 6n, 14, 15, 16, 38, 42, 44, 59, 105, 114, 194, 208n, 347-353 commentator of Gautama, p. 19; commentator of Apastamba, p. 44; commentator of Dharmasastra, whether identical with author of Padamafijari, pp. 351-852; was 9 southerner, p. 348; whether identical with Rudradatta, 7, 349. General Index Haradatt&oarya, cited in Sarvadar- éanasathgraha, p. 353, Ha@ralata, pp. 180, 248. 276, 277, 314; contents of, pp. 337-338 ; com. called Sandarbhasttika on, p. 329. Haraprasad Sastri, M.M., pp. 277, 291, 317, 342, 399, 402, 419, 420, 437, 456. Hara(i)sithhadeva, king of Mithila, Harasimhadeva, pp. 398, 402, 404. Haribhakti, p. 418n. Haridiksita, guru of Nagoji, p. 454. Harihara, pp- 290-291, 341-343; bhasya- kara of P&raskaragrhya, pp. 291, 342. Harihara, p. 377%. Hariharabhattaoarya, father of Ra- ghunandana, pp. 343, 417. Hariharacarya, author of Samayapra- dipa, p. 343. Haribarapaddhati, p. 4017. Haribaratadratamya, ए. 393, Harililé, of Vopadeva, ए. 358 ; com. on, called Viveka, p. 358. Harinatha, 318, 372-374, 418n. Harita, definition of dharma given by, p.3; dharmasitra of, pp. 70-75, bha- syakara of, p. 71; belonged to Krsna Yajurveda, p. 71; Pp. 71-72; mentioned by Kumirila, p. 71; peculiar doctrines of, ए. 73; named by Apastamba, pp. 39, 132; named by Baudhayana, pp. 29, 29, 132 ; named by Vasistha, pp. 39, 54, 152 ; the jurist, pp. 244-246. Harivarhéa, reading of, as a penance for infanticide, p. 128. Harivathéa, 8n author on dharma- sastra, p. 3201, Harivathéavarman, prince of M&ben- १९४ family and patron of Nanda- pandita, p. 495. son of Bhavesa king of Vijayanagara, contents of, ¦ 419 Harivathéaviladsa, of Nandapandita, p. 431, Harivarmadeva, a king, p. 304. Harsacarita, ए. 161, Hastinibhitta, a village in Bengal, p. 304. Heirless property, inheritance to, p. 122. Hells, twentyone, in Visnu and Y4j- fiavalkya, p. 67. Heméadri, pp. 71, 123, 129, 138, 196, 199, 212, 259, 280, 294, 354-359 ; and his relations with Yaddava king, pp. 356- 5? ; works of, p. 358. Heretics, guilds’ of, spoken of by Ma- nusmrti,p. 143. Hillebrandt, p. 89. Hiranyakesi-dharmasutra, pp. 46-50; borrowed from Apastamba-dharma- sutra, p. 46; commentary of Maha- deva on, p. 47-48. Hiranyakesigrhyastitra, p. 20n; com- mented on by M&trdatta, p. 46. Holidays ( for schools ), p. 158. Holtzmann, p. 159 Hopkins, pp. 143, 152, 153, 154. Horses, breeds of, p. 102. Householder, four varieties of, p. 105 two varieties of, p. 120. Hultzsch, Dr., 20, 23. Illegitimate, son, of stidra, p. 260. Images, of Siva, Skanda, Visakha, p. 103. Impartible, what things are, pp. 147, 210 ; yogaksema is, p. 236; fields, in what way, 251. 1lmpotent persons, 14 kinds of, p. 202 Impurity, on birth, period: of, p. 112. ` India, in close touch with Egypt’ Greece and Syria in 4th and 3rd centuries B. C., p. 185. Indra and yatts, p. 7, (80 ` Inheritance, divergent views as to, p. #7; rights of uterine brother, p. 427. Interest, rates of, according to castes p. 125 ; rule about rate of, accord- ing to Vasistha, pp. 58, 200; four varieties of, p. 207; not allowed in ome cases, if not stipulated, p. 243. 16802, brother of Haldyudha, p. 298; author of Dvijabnikapaddhati, p. 299. Itihisas, mentioned by Manu, pp. 148 152 ; mentioned by Y4j. p. 179. Jacobi, Dr,, pp. 86, 89, 104, 159; oriti- cized, pp. 90, 185. Jagannathapandita, pp. 454, 455. Jagannatha Tarkapaiicdnana, pp. 465- 466. Jaimini, pp. 3, 7, 9. 30, 41, 85; author of Smrtimimamsa, p. 329; denies in- dependent authority of Kalpastitras, p. 85. Jalpa and vyavahara, p. 295. Jimadagpnya, p. 108. Janamejaya, pp. 102, 110. Jativiveka, p. 407n. Jatikarnya, pp, 119-120 ; certain texts of, not authoritative according to Bhojadeva, ViSvaripa and Govinda- raja, p. 276 Jaya, queen of Bhairava, patroness of Viacaspati, pp. 404-405. Jayantasvamin, criticized by Harihara, p. 343. Jayapatra, defined by Ka&tydyana, p. 217. Jayaéarman, p. 400. Jayasitbha, successor of Bhoja, p. 279. Jayasimha-kalpadruma, p. 277. Jayasval, Mr., 104, 151, 187, 208, 205, 368, 370, 372, 420. Jayatsena, opponent of Nala, p. 133, Jayatupgs, p. 421n. History of Dharmatistra Jha, Dr. Ganganath, p. 268. Jikana, quoted by Kullttka, pp. 962, 369, ; and Stlapani, p. 394n. JimUtavahana, pp. 123, 129, 204, 258, 278, 281 ; and Apar&rka, pp. 330 JimUtavahana, of the Vidyadhara race and progenitor of Silab&ras, pp. 328 333. Jitendriya, pp. 188, 281-283, 323, Jivadeva, brother of Anantadeva4,p.452. Jivatpitykanirnaya, p. 335. Jolly, Dr., pp. 23, 57, 60, 61, 71, 74, 86, 89, 94, 100, 121, 150, 196, 200, 204, 207, 247, 310, 317, 338, 418; criticized, pp. 100, 103, 182-4, 185, 187, 205, 206, 210,250, 257, 269, 313-314, 325, 330, 353. Jones, Sir William, pp. 360, 465. Jonker, Dr., p. 157. Judicial, procedure, p. 150. Justice, civil and oriminal, clearly distinguished by Brhaspati, p. 208; eight angas of hall of, p. 227. Jyotih-Parasara, p. 196. Jyotir-Brhaspati, p. 212. Jyotir~Gargya, p. 119. Jyotir-Narada, p. 206. Jyotistattva, p. 278. Kadambari, p. 204. Kaivalyadipika, a com. by Hemadri on Muktadphala, p. 358. Kaludaréa. p. 285, 375, 394, 418n. Kalakaumudi; 3947, 418n. Kalamidhava, same as KSlanirnaya of Madbava; com. on, by Narayana, p. 420. Kélanirnpaya of Madh&v&o8rya, 70. 375-76, 418n. K&lanirnaya-dipikf, com. on Kala- nirgaysa, p. 381. Kélanirpaya-siddhinta-vytkby2,p.265- Kaltvali, De 9648, General Index K&lavidbana, p. 424n. K&laviveka, pp. 123, 236, 277, 281, 319. 320, 418n. Kali, nosin in, due to mere contact of sinners, p. 294; things forbidden in, p. 449. K&lik&purana, pp. 163, 363, 448. Kalpalata, p. 336. Kalpasttras aod Jaimini, p. 85. Kalpataru, pp. 77, 123, 238, 289, 256, 315-318, 336, 369. Kaly&na, capital of Vikramarka C4lu- kya, pp. 288, 290. Kalyaynabhatta, revised Asahdya-bha- sya, pp. 196, 247. 7020081४, pp. 293-296, 369; com- posed by 87012 according to Hara- prasad Sastri, p. 277 and according to Jayasval, p. 296 ; composed really by Gopéla, pp. 294-295 ; composed by Sambhu, according to Aufrecht, p. 295. Kamalakara, pp 91, 270, 276, 293, 325, 482-437. Kamandaka, age of, p. 91; named by Mahabharata, p. 100. Kamandakiyanitisara, pp. 81, 82, 87. K&martpiyanibandha, p. 4182. Kaimasitra, p. 100; and Kautiliya, pp. 100-101; mentions tradition about works on dharma and artha, pp. 124. Kaémbhoja, pp. 101-102. Kambojas, mentioned by Manu, p. 151. Kaninka-Bh&radvaja, p. 99. Kanva, author, named by Apastamba, p. 39. K&nva, 116-117. K&yva-BodhSyana, p, 21. K&pSlikas, pp. 67, 115. Kapilendra, founder of Gajapati dy- nasty, p. 411. Karka, pp. 301, 342, 364, 401n. प्र, D. 61, 481 Karmanusth&napaddhati, pp. 302-303; com. on, p. 306. Karmapradipa, attributed to Katya- yana, pp. 218-220, 372, 401n; oon- tents of, p. 219. Karmavipaka, meaning of, p. 383. Karmavipaka of Satatapa, p. 129. Karmavipakaratna, p. 433. Karmopadesini, of Aniruddba, pp. 305, 317, 337, 418n. Karnata, dynasty of Mithila, p. 370. Kasika, commentary on Panini, p.351. Kasin&tha, pp. 380, 451, 463-465. Kastha, capital of Taka kives. p 386. Kasyapa, pp. 25, 117-118, 422: quoted by Baudhayana, pp. 117, 132. Katakanagari, capital of Orissa, p.44l. Kathakagrhya, pp. 57, 60, 68 ; and Vis- nudharmasitra, p. 68. Kathopanisad, p. 13. Katiyakalpa, p. 364. Katya, pp. 25, 132, 213. Katyayana, ए. 213-221 ; quotes Brbas- pati as authority, pp. 210, 214 ; men- tioned as author of Sraddhakalpa and Srautasitra, p. 213; expounds Narada, p. 213; expounds in detail law of stridhana, p. 213; and Bhrgu, p. 214-215; and Manusnyti, ए. 215: date of, pp. 217-18 ; stltra of, quoted by Medhatithi, pp. 217-18; author of Karmapradipa, pp. 218-220; whether KAatySyana the jurist is identical with author of Karmapra- dipa, pp. 220-221. Katya&yana, p. 117; named by Kautilya p. 99. K&ty&yana, author of vartikas, p. 168; éraddhakalpa of, pp. 182, 301. KatySyanaésrautasttra, commented on by Bhartryajfia, p. 252. Kaunapadanta, named by Kautilya, pp. 99, 100. ` 482 Kausika, mentioned by Katydyana, p. 316. Kautalya, p. 293. Kautilya, pp. 16, 20; cited as autho- rity in the work itself, pp. 89-90 ; derivation of, p. 90; proper form of name, pp. 90-91. Kautiliya, age of, pp. 99, 104; agree- ment of, with Kamasitra,pp.100-101; agreement of, with Manusmrti, p.140 and YdAjiiavalkya, pp. 94-95; and Mahabb@rata, pp. 102-103 ; and Na- rada, pp. 201-202; authenticity of, p. 89; authors named by, p. 99; com- mentaries on, p. 104; contents of, pp. 93-94; form of, p. 91; judicial administration in, pp. 95-96; know- ledge of drugsin, p. 103; literature known to, p. 100 ; oldest extant work on arthasdstra, p. 86; points of difference from Manu in, pp. 95-96; style of, pp. 92-93. Kautsa, named by Apastamba, pp. 39, 116. Kavikantasarasvatl, p. 418n. Kavirahasya, p, 297. Kavya, vide under {1880828 ; abridged work on dharma, artha and kama composed by Brabma, pp. 110-111. Kavyamimainsa, of Rajasekhara, p.139. Kaya, means prajapatya form of marriage, p. 176. Kayasthadharmadipa, of Gag&bhatta, p. 457, Kedara, p. $36. Keith, Prof., pp. 89, 101, 106, 205; cri- ticized, pp. 90, 91, 100, 101. Kennedy, M. T., p. 418n. Keéavadasa, author of Virasithhadeve. carita, p. 445. Keéavasarman, author of Smrtisa&ic. p. 374. Kesava-vaijéyanti, of Nandapandits. com. on Visnudharmasitra, p. 425. History of Dharmatistra Kesavanayaka, of Nanda- pandita, p. 425. Khandadeva, p. 497. Khilas, mentioned by Manusmyti, p.143, Kielhorn, Dr., p. 455. King, eight activities of, p. 111; had to restore stolen property from his treasury if the thief not found, p.125; high prerogative of even a weak, p. 203; took action without a complaint, in cases of chalas and of aparidhas, pp. 226, 243; to look into disputes of people, p. 234. patron 1714118, an author, p. 99. Knauer, Dr., p. 189. Konkan, king Aparadditya of, sent embassy to Kashmir, 333 ; capital of, p. 380. Kramapatha, p. 253. Kriya, meaning of, p. 321. Kriyaéraya, a work on astronomy p. 329. Kriyasakti, teacher of Méadhava- mantrin, p. 381. Krsna, Rastraktta king, p. 298. Sriddhak&siks, Krsna, author of p. 301. KrsyabhakticandrikS, a Anantadeva, p. 450. Krtyacintamani, p. 263, 367, 400, 418n. Krtyakalpataru, vide Kalpataru, pp.9?, 915, Kytya-kaumudi, p. 418n. Krtya-mah&rgava of Vaoaspati, p. 405. Kytya-ratnakara, pp. 365, 366. Krtya-samuccaya, p. 369. Kytyatattvarnava, p. 418n.. Ksatriyas, Srenis of, in p. 101. Ksemendra, p. 88. Ksirasvamin, pp. 197, 969. Kubera, p. 152. drama of Kautiliya. General Index Kukura, p. 101. Kulak&rika, of Edumiséra, p. 324. Kulfrnava, p. 401 2, Kullttka,pp. 3, 18, 72, 111n, 115, 146, 189, 212, 214, 273, 313, 359-363 ; criticizes Govindar&ja, 311; Sraddhasigara is a work of, pp. 361-362 ; mentioned in R&janitiratnakara, 369. Kumara, p. 372. KumGrila, pp. 26, 82, 85, 145, 161, 303 ; called Tautatita, 303. Kundabh@skara, of Sankara, p. 440. Kunika, pp. 39, 116, 132, Kiirma-purana, extent of, p. 162. Kuru-Pajicala, p. 101. Kushans, gold coins of, 187; chronology of, p. 187. Kutala, a gotra, p. 91. Kutsa, p. 39. Lachim&devi, queen of Candrasithh>. p. 398. Laghu-Hf@rita, p. 74. Laghu-Narada, p. 206. Laghu-Saikha, ए. 76. Laghu- Visnu, p. 69. Laghu-Vyiasa, p. 238. Laghu- Yama, p. 235. Laksmanabhatta, younger brother of Kamalakarabhatta, p. 432. Laksmanasena, king of Bengal Pp. 298-300; finished the Adbhuta- ए ०८8, p. 300 ; date of, ए. 300; era of, p. 300, Laksmanopadhyaya, p. 301. Lakgana-prakaéa, of Mitramisra, p.44i, Laksmi, com. on K@lanirnaya, p. 381. Laksmidevi, reputed authoress of com. on Mitaksara, ए. 459. Laksmidhara, vide under Kalpataru, Pp, 77, 289, 295, 296, 315-318. Lala Sitaram, Mr., p. 445. Lalita, ए. 424n. Lane-poole, Mr., p. 410n. Lank&vatarasttra, p. 184, Latyayanaérauta. p. 13. Laugaksi, pp. 235-286. Licchivika, p. 101. Likhita, mentioned by p. 216. Likhitasmrti, p, 76. Lingapurana, p. 163. K&tya&yana, Liquors, twelve kinds of. p. 228. Lokayata, school of, known ४० Kauti- lya, p. 100. Lollata, pp. 336, 424n ; quotes Madha- tithi, p. 274. Madana, son of Sah@rana, p. 269, Madanapfla, pp. 381-389. Madanaparijata, pp. 73n, 76, 135, 221, 308, 340, 381-382. Madanaratna, pp. 389-393. Madanavinodanighantu, ए, 387. Madhavacarya, pn. 43, 135, 150, 188, 191, 261, 280, 374-381 ; personal his- tory of, pp. 376-378; distinct from Madhavamantrin connected with Goa, p. 380-381. Madhava-mantrin, joa, pp. 380-381. M&dhavasvamin, p. 369n. who conquered Madhavayaivan, commentator of Kau- tillya, p. 104. Madhaviya Dh&atuvrtti, pp. 351, 379. Madhustidana-Sarasvati, p. 358. iadhyama-Angiras, p. 225. Padraka, p. 101. Magadha, p. 102. ` Magadba, caste of, p. 103. 404 Mah&bh&rata, pp. 26, 100, 109, 110, 323 &c.: authors of Dandaniti, named by, pp. 100, 123; dhar- 10886878 topics in, p. 159; names Brhaspati, pp. 123-124; names Bha- radvaja, p. 127; relation of, to Kau- tilya, pp. 102-103; relation of, to Manusnrti, p. 1517 ; relation of, to Narada, p. 201, 206: says Supreme Being promulgated dharinas, p. 197 ; says Brahma composed work on dharm:), artha, kima, p. 137; styled dharmasastra, ए. 158. Mahabhasya, pp. 103, 148, 160, 168, Mahddananirnya of Vacaspati, pp.402, 418n. Mahadeva, Yadava king of Devagiri, p. 356. Mahadeva, commentary of, on Hi- ranyakesin, pp. 49-50; relation of, to Haradatta, pp. 49-50. Mahapatakas, pp. 130, 236. 71 80808९8, of Maodhata, pp. 382-383. Maharnava, pp. 44, 47, 308, 343. Maharnavaprakasa, p. 308; same as Maharnava, p. 308. Mahasdatapana, penance, p- 68. Maha-Vyasa, p. 238. Maheévara, p. 4217. Maidens, brotherless, found marriage difficult in Vedic times, p. 5. Mailugi-karmavipaka, p. 407n. Maitrayaniyasambita, vp. 5, 51. Makkhali Gos&la, p. 102. Mallaka, p. 101. Man, master in his own house, p. 203. M4nasollasa-vrttanta-vilasa, p. 261. Manavadharmasttra, pp. 55-56, 79-85; and Vasistha, pp. 55-56. M4navagrhya, pp. 73n, 82, 139, 180; doctrines of, opposed ४० Manusnpfti, 7. 139 ; borrowed by शह. smrti on VinSyaka, pp. 180-181. Kistory of Dharmatistra Ménavam, meaning of, 7. 55. Manavas, meaning of, pp. 81-82; views of, about vidy&s, pp. 81, 97; and Kautilya, p. 97; and KatySyana pp. 215-216, Manava School, subdivision of Mai- triyaniyas, p. 85 ; not found in Vis-~ variupa’s day, p. 85. Ma&navaérauta-sltra, p. 82. Mandala, constitution of, p. 412, Mandanamiéra, p. 263, Mandapala, and Sarangi, p. 152. Mandavya, story of, pp. 102-103, 208n. Mandhata, son of Madanap§la, p. 382. Mandlik, Rao Saheb V. N.., pp. 268, 309. Maiijarikara, p. 314. Mankha, p. 333, Manoramakucamardana, p. 456. Manu, 28 author of floating mass of verses, p. 152; as the founder of the institution of 8750008, p. 41; Vedic references to, p. 136; divided his wealth among his sons, p. 136; and the deluge, p. 136; Svayambhuva promulgated dharmas, p. 137; and Narada-smpti, p. 187 ; Svayambhuva and Pracetasa distinguished, p. 139. Manusnfti, pp. 2, 4, 135-158 &c.; abridged several times, according to Narada, p. 149; age of, 72.144; agree- ment of, with Kautiliya, p. 140; and introduction to Narada, p. 137; and Brhaspati, pp. 146-147; and Raméa- yana, p. 148; and Viévartpa, pp. 144- 145; and Yajfiavalkya, pp. 150-151; commentators of, p. 157; contents of, pp. 140-143; difference of view between, and Yajfiavalkya, p. 180; extent of literature known to, 143f ; four versions of, according to Bha- visyapurina, p. 138 ; influence of, beyond India, pp. 156-157 ; on num- ber of king’s counoillors, p. 97; on vidyas, p. 97; opposed to several General Index views of M&navagrhya, p. 139; re- lation of, to Mahabharata, p. 151ff ; relation of, to Narada, pp. 200-202 $ relation of, to ८818278, p. 193; re- lation of, to Vrddhamany, ए. 150: whether a recast of MAnavadharma- ५०६, p. 80 ; whether the first smrti, p. 144; whether contains earlier and later strata, pp. 148-149: whether underwent several recasts, pp. 149- 150. Manvarthamuktavali, p. 359. Marici, smrfti of, p. 230-231. Markandeya, pp. 137, 323. Marriage, Brahma form of, pp, 5, 68; Brahma form of, as distinguished from Prajapatya, p. 349 ; Asura form of, pp. 5, 68 ; GAndharva form of, p.5; forms of, generally eight, pp. 29, 68, 148 ; forms of, only six, according to Apastamba, p. 29 ; forms of only six, according to Vasistha, p. 59; inter- caste, pp. 59, 79 ; prohibited degrees 10, p. 122 ; with maternal uncle's or paternal aunt’s daughter, condemn- ed, pp. 130, 349-350 and allowed, pp. 313, 409; guardians for, p. 170 ; auspi- cious naksatras for, p.186; proper age for, in case of girls, p. 233n, 244; with maternal uncle's daughter, ए, 244 ; of person of one Vedic Sakhia, with a girl belonging to another Vedic Sakha, p. 356. Matra, duration of, p. 189. Matrdatta, commentator of Hiranya- kesigrhya, p. 46. Matsyapurana, pp. 160, 161, 163, 282, 338 ; contains much dharmas&stra material, p. 161, Maudgalya, named by Baudhayana Pp. 25, 13%, Maurya, pp. 88, 103, 151. Max Miller, p. 168; criticised, pp. 10, 80. by Maydracitra, pp. 341n, 422. Kulltka, ` 485 Miyana, the father of Madhaviacarya, p. 376. Medh&tithi, pp. 27, 42, 43, 58, 90, 111, 170, 198-199, 278-275, 35691 ; gives fivefold division of dharma, p. 3: quotes Gautama more frequently than any other smrtikara p. 18; and Naradasnrti, p. 138 ; quotes Yaj. on writers of DharmaSAstra, p. 170n; summarises first section of Narada, p. 199 ; quotes the views of Asahaya, p. 249: bhasya of, and Madana, p. 269; a southerner according to Jolly, p. 269; and the text of the Manusmrti, p. 273; and his Smrti- viveka, pp. 274-275 ; and Govinda- raja, pp. 313-314. Megasthenes, p. 89. Mekala, p. 102. Mimamsabalapraka$a, p. 438. Mimamhsanyadyaprakaéa, p. 451. Minor, wealth of, should not be appro- priated by king, p. 122. Minority, period of, up to sixteenth year, p. 203. Miszrumiéra, pp. 284, 302, 305, 373, 398- 399. Mitaksara, pp. 27, 43, 53, 59, 69, 120 169, 287-290 ; place of, in Dharma- Sistra, p. 287; and Visvartpa, pp.169- 170, 259-260; and Bh@ruci, p. 466 ; and Smrticandrika, pp. 289, 345-346; commentaries on, pp. 290, 456; and Jimtitavahana, ए, 325; and Apararka, pp. 330-332; and Nandapandita p.427; and Vyavaharamaytikba, p. 439; and Viramitrodaya, p. 442. Mitaksara, commentary on Gautama- dharmasttra, p. 347. Mithila, valuable contribution of, to dharmasastra, p. 363; Karnata dynasty of, ए. 404 ; Kamesvara dy- nasty of, p. 404n. Mitra, Dr. Rajendralal, p. 41111. Mitramisra, pp. 238, 440-446. 486: Mixed castes, pp. 45, 111, 115. Mixed marriages, offspring of, pp. 79, 112. M leochas, p. 67 ; language of, not to be learnt, according to Vasistha, 7. 54 and according to Bharadvaja, p. 126; sale of children among, P. 102; mean pulindas and tajikas, Pp. 256; coun- tries of, not fit for performing sacri- fices, p. 311. Moksa, results from combination of jiina and karma, according to Yoga-Yajfiavalkya, 0. 189 and according to Govindaraja, p. 256 : from correct knowledge alone, pp.206, 329. Monasteries of Brihmanas, p. 187. Monopolies, of kings, 7. 269. Moropant, Marathi poet, p. 464. Mortgage, by conditional sale, p. 131; neceesity of writing for, p. 231, Mother, as heir, whether preferred to father, pp. 345, 435, 444. Mourning, on death of unmarried daughter, p. 281. Mrcchakatika, pp. 88, 903; refers to Manusnrti, p. 145. Mrtasafijivani, pp. 297-298. Mudraraksasa, pp. 88, 111. Muhtrtas, fifteen, of the day, ?. 282. Muhtirtavidhanasara, p. 378. Mukerji, Sir Asutosh, pp. 318, 322. Muktaphala, p. 35४. Muiija, pp. 279, 298; also called Vak- patiraja, p. 298. a work of Vopadeva. Murariraja, 7. 369n. Nag&nanda, a drama, p. 333. Nagojibhatta, pp. 453-454, Nahusa, p. 152. Naiskarmyasidadhi, +, 261. | | | History of Dharmatastra Naksatras, arranged from Krttik® in Yaj., p. 186; divided into auspicious and inauspicious from days of Tai. Br., p. 186 ; auspicious for marriage, p. 186. Naksatras, consulting of, p. 101. Nala, pp. 102-108. Nanakas, p. 181 ; mentioned by Y3j., p. 187; mentioned by Mrcchakatika, p. 203; mentioned by Brhaspati p. 209; punishment for counterfeit- ing, p. 187. Nandana, a commentator of Manu, p. 157. Nandapandita, pp. 196, 281, 290, 302, 423-432 ; author of Vaijayanti, p. 70; author of Dattakamimamsa, p. 196 ; author of com. on Sadasiti, p. 335 authority of, superior to Balambhatta in Benares school, p. 458. Narada, on politics, ए. 204 ; his 7616 in puranas, ए. 206. Narada, pp. 69, 87, 137, 196-207; abridg- ed work of Manu, PP. 137, 149; and Agnipurana, Pp. 199; and Manu- smrti, pp. 198, 900-202; and Kautilya, pp. 201-202; and Mahabharata, pp.201, 206 ; authenticity of text of, pp. 198- 199 ; commentary of Asahaya on p. 196; contents of smrti of, p. 197; date of, pp. 202-205 ; home of, p. 206; literature known to, Ppp. 900-201 ; peculiar views of, p. 203 ; quotations from, on acdra and sraddha, PP. 199- 200 ; relation of, to Bana, 9. 204 ; re- lation of, to Brhaspati, p. 909 ; smrti of, based on Manu, Pp. 149; two ver- sions of smrti of, p. 196. | Naradiyapuraya, Pp. 340. ' Nardsathsi gaithas, p. 179. , Narayana, author of Prayogaratna: pp. 350, 419-421. | Narayana, of the Naidhruvagotra, com- mented on Aévaldyanagrbya, P- 279 (द्व, commented on Agvalayan4 grauta, pp. 219, 281. General Index Narayana, commentator of Manusmrti, p. 157. Narayana, worship of, p. 199. NarSyana, author of Vyavahirasiro- mani, ए. 292; differences of, from Vij- fdnesvara, p. 293. Narayana, ancestor of Halayudha and and of the Tagore family, p. 301; one of the five brahmanas brought by Adistira, p. 324. Narsimbachar, Rao Bahadur R., p.378. Nathamuni, p. 264. Navadvipa, p. 418. Navakandika, of Katyayana, p. 301. Navaratrapradipa of Nandapandita p. 431. Navasdhasanka, p. 279. Navya-Vardbamanopadhyidya, p. 418n. Nepal, blankets from, p. 101. Nibandhas, pp. 246-247. Nibandhanak4ra, mentioned by Saras- tivilasa, is probably Asahdya, p. 249. Nid&na, a kind of work, p. 25. Nighantu, p. 280. Nijamsaha, king of Deccan. p. 407. Nilakagthabhatta, pp. 438-440. Nilakantha Sukla, pupil of Bhattoji, p. 454. Nimantrana, meaning of, p. 308n. Nimi, p. 152. Niravadyavidyoddyota, an author men- tioned in Dayabhaga, pp. 323-324. Nirgranthas,- outside Pale of Vedic orthodoxy, p. 271. Nirnaydunrta, pp. 277, 418n. Nirnayasindhu, pp. 266, 211, 221, 264, 301, 337, 433, 436-437. Nirukta, pp. 5, 8, 16, 17, 25, 38, 63, 100, 136, 191, Nisada, mention of, in ancient works, ए. 45 ; who is a, p. 112. 487 Niska, value of, p. 237. Niticintamani of Vacaspati, p. 400. Nitiprakasika of Janamejaya, p. 110. Nitivakyamrta, pp. 124, 207; com. on, p. 207. Nityadcdrapradipa, pp. 119, 252. Niyama. p, 253. Niyoga, approved of by stitrakaras except Apastamba, pp. 29, 45, 58, 69; allowed and condemned by Manu, pp. 30, 95, 148, 180 ; allowed by Kau- tilya, ए. 95 ; ailowed only to sidras by Vrddba- manu, p. 150 ; allowed by Yaj., p. 180; allowed by Narada, », 202; not allowed in Kali age, p. 240; views of VisSvaripa and Mitaksara on, p. 260 ; views of Bha- ruci on, p. 266, Nivartana, a measure of area, p. 212. Non-Aryan tribes, mentioned by Atri, pp. 107-108. Nrsithha, author of Prayogaparijata; p. 350. Nrsimha, son of Ramacandracarya; wrote vivarana on Kalanirnaya- dipika, 0. 381, 409. Nrsimhaprasada, pp. 406-410; divided into saras, p. 406, Nyaya, means mimarmsa doctrines yp. 42, 255. Nyadyamuktavali, commentary on Nyayasara, p. 334. hydyasara, of Bhasarvajiia, p. 334. Nydyasticinibandha, pp. 188, 262. Oldenberg, Prof. pp. 33, 159. Omens, p. 67. Oppert, Dr., p. 116. Ordeals, pp. 78, 151; not treated of by Manu, pp. 151, 176, 202 ; five, treated by Yaj. p. 176 ; nine, according ४० Br- haspati, p. 207; nine, according to Pitadmahba, p. 226; seven, described 488 by Narada, p. 202; what, appropriate to which wrongs, pp. 239-240; what ordeals in vogue, in what countries, p. 412, Ownership, whether laukika, pp. 240, 277 ; whether son has by birth, p. 240; sources of, p. 355; none over wife and children, 7. 440. ee, ~~ ome ~ -----~ ~ च ~~ Padamaiijari, of Haradatta, commen- | tary on Kasika, pp. 351-352. Padap&tha, p. 253. Padmapurana, pp. 69, 163. Padya-Visnu, p. 70. Pahlavas, mentioned in Manu, p. 151. Paijavana, p. 152. Paitbinasi, pp. 121-122; names 36 smrtis pp. 133. P&kayajiiapaddhati of Pasupati, 7. 298, Palakapya, p. 341n. Pallava, a work mentioned by Raja- nitiratnakara, p. 369. Pajicanada, southern, p. 65. Paficaratras, pp. 115, 329: outside Vedic orthodoxy, p. 271. Paficatantra, pp. 88, 124. Pandharpur, shrine of Vithoba at, pp. 463-464. Panditaparitosa, a work quoted by He- 7118071, pp. 268, 314, 355n; criticized Govindaraja, p. 314. Panditasarvasva, of Halayudha, p. 299, 41898. Pangarkar, Mr. L. R., 453n, 464. Panini, pp. 44, 54, 172, 191. Pafijikakaramisra, p. 320n. Papeya, p. 102. Paramananda, patron of Nandapan- dita, p. 424, 2928872, named by Kautiliya, p. 99. Parasara-madhaviya, pp. 70, 128, 1917, 204, 210n, 211, 214n, 261, $75, &c. History of Dharmasastra Pér&Saras, school of, mentioned by Kautiliya, pp. 99, 191. Pardsarasmrti, pp. 75, 92, 118, 190-196 ; and Manusmrti, 193-194; and Bau- dhayanadharmasiitra, p. 194; authors and works cited in, pp. 193-194. contains no treatment of vyavah3ra, p. 375 ; contents of, pp. 192-193; date of, p. 195; drawn upon by Garuda- purana, p. 191 ; enumerates 19 smrti- karas, pp. 133, 192 ; peculiar views of, pp. 193-194 ; Vidvanmanohara, com. on, p. 423. ParaSava, meaning of, p. 112. ` P&rasikas, touch of, regarded as simi- lar to that of mlecchas, p. 188. Paraskaragrhya, pp. 252, 291, 299 ; and YAjiiavalkyasmrti, ए. 182 ; bhadsya of Harihara on, p. 291; com. of Gada- dhara on, p. 274n. Parasnis, Rao Bahadur, D. B., p. 428n. Paraéurdmapandita, father of Mitra- miéra, p. 444. Parents, rights of, according to Sola- pani, pp. 393-394; succeed together to their deceased son, according +o Srikara and Sambhu, pp. 267, 295 ; succeed before brothers, according to Hal&yudha, p. 296, Pargiter, p. 88. Paribhadriya, br&hmanas, p. 324. Parihal or Pari Gai, p. 324. Parijata, a work, pp. 308-309 ; frequent- ly coupled with Prakaga, pp. 306, 369, 418n, Parisad, constitution of, according to Angiras, p. 222; may comprise 12! brdhmagas, ए. 221. Parisamkhy§, p. 253. Parisista-dipakalik& of Stlapayi, p.596. Pariveiijakas, four kinds of, p. 290. Partition, allowed to son in ancestral property, even against father’s wish p. 237 ; between brothers, unmarfi General Index aster's rights in, p. 273; larger share to eldest son on, p. 29 ; period within which could bo set aside, pp. 128, 131 ; necessity of writing for completing, p. 231; son’s right to, according to Dayabhiga, p. 323. Pasoatkara, defined by K&tyayana: p. 217. Padéupatas, pp. 115, 329 ; outside Vedic orthodoxy, p. 271. Pasupati, brother ° pp. 298, 301, 418n. Pataliputra, p. 250. Patafijali, pp. 9, 160. Patani, who is, p. 117, of Haladyudha, Paulkasa, & mixed caste, p. 45. Peterson, Dr., p. 315. Pingala, p. 297. Pisuna, named by Kautilya, pp. 99, 100; identified with Narada, p. 206. Pisunaputra, named by Kautilya, 7. 99. Pitamaha, smrti of, pp. 226-227 : speak: of nine ordeals, p. 226, Pitrbhakti, a work of Sridatta, pp. 277, 295, 364, 401n, 418n. Pitrbhaktitarangini or SrAddhakalpa of Vacaspati, pp. 399, 418n, Pitrdayita alias Karmopadesinipad- dhati, pp. 337, 418n ; contents of, p. 338, Pitrhitakaranikara, p. 864, Plaint, characteristic of, pp. 239, 245, Planets, Seven, mentioned by Baudha- yana, p. 31; arrangement of, whether borrowed and from whom, pp.185,186, Pledge, divided into four varieties, P. 128, Pogson, author of History of the Boon: delas, p, 4457, Politics, teachers of, ?. 110-111. प्र, D. 62. —- gm 489 Poor, the, entitled to a share of state wealth, pp. 268, 295. Possession, as opposed to title, p. 245 १ adverse, for twenty years, conferred ownership according to Bhavadeva, p. 305 ; five characteristics of juri- dival, p. 227; entitled to protection, Pp. 227, 237 ; how many years’, con- stitutes title, pp. 237, 284, 286, 305, 306 ; when protected, pp. 243, 245. Prabhakara, p, 304. Pracetasa, Manu, pp. 97, 139, 154 ; on rajadharma, p. 154 ; smrti of, p. 229. Pradipa, pp. 334-335, 4017 ; oriticized Bhavadeva, p. 305. Prajapati, named by Baudhdyana pp. 25, 132, 229; named by Vasistha, Pp. 95, 132, 229 ; smrti of, pp. 229-230. Prakasa pp. 251, 274, 306-308, 369. Prak&sSa, commentary on sraddhakal- pastitra of Katyayana, p. 301. Prakrtis, eighteen, according to Pit&- maha, p. 227. Pramitaksaraé, com. on Mitdksara' p. 423. Pranavakalpa, of Saunaka, p. 358. Prapafcahrdaya, pp. 264, 281. Prapaiicaséra, mentioned by Madhava- carya, p. 375. Pratipamiartanda, a work of Pratapa- rudradeva, p. 414. Pratiparudradeva, king of Orissag pp. 410-414. Pratijia, a drama, p, 92. Pratiloma, p. 120. Pratimanataka, p. 148. Pratipadapaficika, p. 104. Pratisthamaytikha, p. 439. Pratisthina, on the God&vari, ए. 419. Pratisthasagara, ए. 340. Pratitakgaré, same as Pramit&kear&, . p. 423. 490 Pravacanakira, pp. 20, 27. Pravacanasiitra, pp. 27-28. Pravaradarpana, p. 91. Pravaramafijari, p. 91, Priyagoitta, pp. 291, 222; for Indra, ° 7; for minors and women, less than for men, p. 83n ; for killing cow, p. 117; for various acts, p. 118; for cessation of grhya fires, p. 127; for 12080868 88, p. 130 ; for Br&ihmana guilty of mahdp&taka, p. 221; for dvijati having children from a Stdra wife, p. 224. Prayaécittamaytkha, pp. 184, 238, 439. Praéyascittanirupana of Bhavadeva, pp. 284, 308. Prayascitta-ratna, p. 433. Priyasécitta-sudhinidhi of Sa&yana, p. 376. Prayascitta-viveka of Sulapini, pp. 394, 396, 4182. Prayascittendugekhara of Na&goji, p. 453, Prayogaparijfata, pp. 308, 337, 350; enumerates upasmrtis, p. 133. Prayogaratna, of Ndard&yana-bhatta, pp. 300, 350, 420. Prayogasira, p. 418n. Pre-emption, p. 131. Proof, means of, p. 321, Prthu, p. 152. Prthvidharamiséra, p. 418n. Pujsratnakara, p. 367. Pulastya, smrti of, p. 228. Punarbht, seven kinds of, p. 118 ; three kinds of, according ४० Narada,p. 202. Pundarika, a tirtha, is modern Pan- dharpur, p. 409. Punishment, of death, prescribed for whom, p. 234. Pupil, as heir to teacher, ए. 251. Purana, p. 88 ; mentioned by Apastam- badharmasttra, pp. 37, 160 ; known History & Dharmatisira to Kautiliya, p. 103; mentioned by Manusnpyti, p. 143; mentioned by N&radasnyti, ए. 200. Puranas, antiquity of, p. 160; diver- gence as to extent of, p. 162; divi- ded into three groops, s&attvika, rajasa, anil t&masa, op. 163; tale of dharmaéastra material in, pp. 164-167; mentioned by Yaj., p.179; valuable information about, in Dina- sigara, p. 340. Purdnasamucoaya, p. 4247. Puraynasira, mentioned by Madhavia- carya, pp. 375, 408, Puri, Caitanya lived at, p. 414. Purification of things, p. 126; of food touched by insects, sinners &c.,p.234, Purtakamalakara, pp. 433, 434. Purusakira, a work, p. ३5४१ Purusirtha and kratvartha, p. 256. Purusarthaprabodha, p. 261. Purusottama, as 26th tattva of Raghu- 98001878, p. 234. Purvamimamsa, pp. 3n, 5n, 9n, 132; Apastamba's relation to, pp. 41-42; and Viévarupa, p. 255; commentators of, p. 281. Pugkara, opponent of Nala, p. 108. Pugkaras&di, author named by Apas- tamba, pp. 39, 116, 132. Pusyamitra, p. 151. Putrik#, oustom of, is ancient, p.9; inheritance to, p. 122. Radha, part of Bengal, pp. 304, 324. R&dhiya, br&hmanas in Bengal, 7. 395. RaghavSnanda, a commentator of Manu, p. 157. Raghunandansa, pp. 206, 264, 278, 297, 300, 316, 416-419. Raghun&tha, commentator of Agauca- dasaka, P. 291, R&jim, copperplate, p. 58. General Index 491 288, stands for Bhojadeva in dharma- ( Ratnikara, of Candesvara, p. 366. 888४९ works, p. 277. Raéjadharmakaustubha of Anantadeva, pp. 449-50. Rsjamfrtanda, Bhoja’s commentary on Yogasttra, p. 276; Raijamartanda Bhoja’s work on dharmaé&stra’ pp. 276, 369१, 401n. R&jampgbnka, a work of Bhoja on astronomy, pp. 276-277. , R&janitiratnSkara, pp. 204, 268, 294, 362, 368, 370. Rajaputra, p. 341n. R&jasastra, teachers of, according to Nitiprakasik@, pp. 110-111. Rajaéekhara, p. 139. Raéjatarangini, p. 269. Rajya, seven constituents of, p. 130n. Raima, of Bisena family, patron of N&goji, p. 454. Raémabhadea, king of Mithila, pp. 402, 404. R&macandra, Y&dava king of Deva- giri, p. 357, RémacandraoSrya, author of K&élanir- nayadipika, p. 381. R&maka, meaning of, p. 59. Ramakrgya, author of Jivatpitrkanir- paya, p. 335 ; and father of Kamala- kara, $. 432. Rim&npujaobrya, p, 264. Ramarcanacandrik&, pp. 401n, 418n. RémByana, p. 103; and Manusmrtie p. 148 ; dharmaéSstra topics in,p.160, Rémeévarabhatta, father of Narfyana- bhatta, p. 419, Rasagaig&dhara, of pp. 455, 456. Rasay&tr&paddhati, p. 417. Ruéis, not mentioned by रह}, p. 186. Ristrakttas, p. $98. Rathakira, upanayana allowed to, Jagannatha, Ratnakarandika, quoted in Pitrbhakti, p. 364. Ratnakoéga, p. 421. Rayamukuta, p. 418n. Remarriage, of women, N@rada, ए. 202. Renudiksita, p. 342, Res judicata, rule of, in Katyayana, p. 21१9. Re-union, rights of full brother supe- rior to half-brother after, p. 394. Reviling, examples of, p. 349. Rgveda, word dharma in, p. 1-2; quoted, pp. 9, 153, 186; Jupiter in, p. 186 ; speaks of auspicious days, p. 186. Rju, a commentator of Manu, p. 271. Rsyagpnga,, ए, 223; texts attributed to, not accepted as authoritative by Dharesvara and others, p. 275. Rudradatta, commentator of Apastam- ba-érauta-sUtra, p. 349, Rudradhara, pp. 279, 339, 364, 371, 395, 396-398, 418n. Rudradhara, author of Krtyacendrika p. 398. Ripandrayaya, title of king Raéma- bhadra of Mithila, pp. 402, 404. allowed by Sabara, Pp, 7, 26, 85, 8304; and Manu, pp. 145-146; quotes Apastamba Dh. S., p.42; commented on sitra of Satyisidha, p. 47; oriticizes Dharmasttras, p. 85. Sadaéiti, 7. 335 ; oom. Suddbicandrika on, p. 484, 88008898, father of Madanap8la, p. 386 ; a city, p. 424. Saduktikarnamrpta, p. 300. SSgara, p. 369n. Sahagila, family of Saharanpur, p. 434. . 82088, meaning of, p. 241, 492 Sahdrana, same as Sadharana, p. 387. S&hudiyala, section of brahmanas in Bengal, p. 395, Sakas, mentioned by Manu, p. 151. Sa&kuntala, p. 27. Sale, necessity of writing for comple- ting, p. 231; without consent of mombers of family, ए. 131; for arrears of revenue, p. 131. Salihotra, p. 3411. Samanodaka, p. 150, Samasravas, addressed by Y4j., p. 177. Samavidhana, Brabmana, p. 13. Samavit, king of Delhi, p. 406. Samayavradipa, of Sridatta, pp. 278, 364, 369n, 397. Samayapradipa, astrological work of Harihara, p. 343. Sambhramabhatta, pp. 282, 320n. Sambhu, author of Kamadhenu according to Aufrecht, p. 295; writer of digest, pp. 267, 295, 336, 344. 88108118, king of Vijayanagara, p. 379. Sarhgraha, vide Smrtisamgraha, Samhitapradipa, p. 421n. Sarmkara, of nine kinds, 7. 212. Samkhya, pp. 121, 234, 329. Samkhyakarik4, p. 271. Sarbnydsa, meaning of, p. 273. Sarhny4sin, p. 117 ; four kinds of, 7. 230. Sarhsara-paddbatirahasya, p. 306. Sarhskdra-kaustubha, pp. 206, 211, 447, 337. 881181८8 ८8785 ए ६18, pp. 1330, 138, 221, 439. 88152118, pp. 242-244, Sathvatsarapradipa, not a work of Stlapani, p. 395. Bandarbhasticika’, oom. on Haralata p. 339. Bandilya, p. 219. Sindilyay ana, p. 219, History of Dharmaéastra Sangha, of Vrgnis in Kautiliya, p. 101. Saijiatantra, p. 422. Sankarabhatta, pp. 247, 438, 351, 419. Sankaracarya, pp. 82, 184; call Manusmrti Manavam, p. 145; pupils of, pp. 261-262; quotes Apastamba- dharmasiitra, p. 43; quotes Gautama- dharmasttra, p. 18; quotes Vasigtha, ए. 93; quotes Manusnpfti frequently, p. 145. Sahkaramiéra, author of Chandog@hni- 10001188, ए. 364. Sankarsakanda, p. 281. Sahkha-Likhita, dharmasttra of, pp. 75-79 ; bhdsyakara of, pp. 77, 317 ; date of, pp. 78-79; doctrines of, p. 78; story of, in the Mahabharata, p. 75; studied by V4ajasaneyins, pp. 11, 75. Saikha, smrti of, p. 57. Saikhadhara, pp. 301, 3201, 338. Sanksepa-Sankarajaya, p. 261. Sannavatisraiddhanirnaya, p. 268. Sanskrit, official language, according to Kautilya, p. 100. Sdintapana, p. 68. Santiratna, of Kamalakara, pp. 433, 434. Sapinda, relationship, p. 150 ; meaning of, according ४० Mitaksar@, p. 290. Sapindimafijari, of Nagoji, p. 453. Sadpindyadipaka, of Nagoji, ए. 453. Saptarsa, a sacred place, p. 68. SaptasUtrasarhnyasapaddhati, p. 262. Sarabhanga, p. 128. Saranadeva, author of Durghatavytti, p. 352. Sarangi, united to Mandap&la, 7, 152. Sarasvatikanthabharaga, of Bhoja, p. 276. Sarasvativildse, pp. 6n, 70, 128, 130, 161, 918, 249, 268, 266, 280, 30%, 410-414, General Index Saravati, river, location of, 3517. Saravali, a work on astrology, pp. 329, 4291, SdrirakamimaibsG, 2, 329. Sarkar, Benoy Kumar, p. 116, Sarkar, Golapchandra, p. 440. Sarkar, Prof, Jadunath, p. 418. Sarvadaréanasamgraha, 7, 353. Sarvadhikari, pp. 310, 389, 418. Sarvatirthavidhi of Kamalakara, p,433. SarvoruSarman, p. 465. Sastradipika, of Parthasa&rathimisra, pp. 420, 438 ; com. on, by Narayana - bhatta, p. 42099; com. on by Sankara- bhatta, p. 438. Sastratattvakautthala, of Kamalakara, p. 434, Satapathabrahmana, pp. 6n, 7, 51, 101, 136, 168. Satatapa, pp. 128-129, Sati, practice of, p. 222; eulogised by HGrita, p. 74; eulogised by Pardasara, p. 193; not allowed to brahmana wife, p. 222; recommended by Vis- nudbarmasiitra, p. 67 ; recommended to all women, except brahmanis, p. 122, Satruijaya, king of Sauvira, p. 127. Sat-trirhdanmata, pp. 133, 238. Satyacarya, ए, 421n. Saudayika, a kind of stridhana, p. 2338. Baunaka, p. 330; author of Carana- vytha, pp. 87, 105; named by Manu- amrti. pp. 132, 143 ; author of Prana- vakilpa, p. 358. Saurapuraya, p. 168. Sauvira, country of, pp. 102, 127, Sdyana, brother of MAdhavdoarya, pp. 376-378 ; author of Prayasoitta- udhanidhi, p. 376 ; guru of Harihara, 807 of Sangama, p. 377; was a_ Bau- dbayaniya, p. 27, 493 Sea-faring, peculiar to-the south, p. 28. Self-acquisitions, what are, pp. 259- 260 ; according to Jitendriya, pp.282- 283 ; according to Balaka, p. 283. Setlur, Mr. 8. S., pp. 253, 385, 457. Sewell, p. 413. Shamasastri, Dr., pp. 86, 104, 410. Siddhantasiromani, pp. 376, 421, Siddhesvarabhatta, p. 457. Silaharas, dynasty of, said to have Sprung from Vidy&dhara Jimita- vahana, 0. 328; three branches . of pp. 332-333. Sindhu, p. 102. Sindhula or Sindhuraja, p. 279. Sister, unmarried, entitled to one- fourth share as provision § for marriage, pp. 249, 261, 273; not placed high as an heir by Kamala- kara, p. 430. Sigupila, p. 108. Sitaram Sastri, Mr., p, २५३. Sivabhatta, p. 263. Sivarahasyapurana, pp, 340, 352. Sivardma, pp. 263, 274n. Sivasvamin, pp. 269, 3.14. 375, 382n. Sivavakyavali, p. 369. Slaves, kinds of, according to Manuand Narada, p. 202; who could be, according to varnas, p. 214, Sloka-Gautama, p. 19. Sloka-Katyayana, p. 218. Smrtis, pp. 131-135 ; age of, pp. 134-135 divided by Padmapuraya into three groups of sattvika, rajasa and ta- masa, p. 163; discarded, when in con- flict with Sruti, p.41 ; meaning of the word, pp. 131-132; number of, pp. 132-134; option, when in conflict with [02 ५28, p. 409. Smrtibhaskara, p. 344, 494 Smrticandrika, pp. 45, 46, 59, 66, 114 115, 198, 199, 209, 211, 295, 343-347 . and Mitiksard, pp. 345-346; several works named in, p. 347; quotes 600 verses of Katya&yana, p. 214. Smrticandrika, of Bhavadeva, p. 306. 870६५1०0 8118, pp. 401n, 424n. Smytikamadhenv, p, 294. Smrtikaumudi of pp. 383-384. Smrtikaustubha, of Anantadeva.p. 447. Madanapala, Smrtimaharnava, pp. 123, 308, 382n. Smrtimaharnava-prak&éa, p. 369१. Smrtimafijari, of Govindara&ja, pp. 1807, 311-313, 364, 382n. Smrtimanjisa, pp. 364, 272. Smrtimimamsa4, pp. 320n, 329, Smrtiparibhasa, ए. 401n. | Smrtipradipa, p. 335. Smrtiratnakara, of Vedacarya, 308, 340; of Candesvara, p. 366. Smptiratnavali, pp. 223, 4241. Smrtiratnaviveka, p. 369n. Smrtisigara, a digest bhatta, pp. 361, 401n. Smrtisathgraha, p. 239-241, 280; its view about widow's right cf suoces- sion, ए. 257. Smptisamuccaya, p. 320n. Smptishra, pp. 266, 267, 284, 294, 296, 318, 372-74, 3971. Smrtisindhu, of Nandapandita, p. 425. by Kulladka- Smptitattva, digest of Raghunandana, p. 416. Smrtiviveka, 8 work of Medhitithi, p. 274; digest of Stlap&ni, p. 394. Smptyarthasara, pp. 267, 294, 295, 314, $34, 335-337, 344, Somadeva, p. 88. History of Dharmasistra Somesévars, commentator of Tantra- vartika, p. 408. Son, adopted, p. 6; adoption of only, or eldest, p. 448 ; aurasa, importance of, p. 5; called kanina, p. 442; eleven varieties of subsidiary, pp. 29, 45, 212, that are condemned by Apastamba, p. 45; equal rights of, with father in ancestral property, pp. 257, 290, 347; has no ownership by birth in ancestral pro- perty, according to Dayabhaga,p.323; illegitimate, of sUdra, p.260; ksetraja’ p.6;of brahmana from 8१९७ wife’ share of, p. 260; only four kinds of mentioned by Pardéara, p. 193; ownership of father over, ए. 440: special share of eldest, p. 240, 289; thirteen kinds of, mentioned by Manv, p. 146; what debts of father not bound torepay, p. 116; whether has ownership by birth, p. 240. Sriddha, foods forbidden in, p. 127; foods proper to be used by the dif- ferent castes, p. 228; performance of, on 13th tithi, by one having a son, p. 314; should be performed in ac- cordance with directions in all kalpa works and 8707४18, p. 355. Sraddhacandriké, p. 418n. Sraddhacint&mani, pp. 320, 395, 401. Sriddhadipika’ of Govinda-pandita, p. 424, Sraddhakaliké, p. 3630; vivarana of 7, 269, Sraddhakalpa, p. 3911, Srfdhakalpa of Sridatta. p. $64. Sriddhakalpa of V&caspati, p. 403. Srtddhakalpacint®mani, p. 4012. Sraddhakalpalats, p. 424. Sriddhakalpasttra, of Kity&yan4, p. 301. Sraddhakamala p. 424n. Sraddhakusiks, pp. $01, 424n. General Index ५९ Sriddhakaumudil, pp. 320, 414. Sriddhakriy&kaumudi, pp. 277, 294, 389, $64, 395. Sraddhakrtyapaddhati, of Pagupati, p. 298. Sraddhamaytkha, pp. 117, 301. Sriddhanirpays, p. 4841, Sraddhapallava, p. 397n, 401n, 428, Sriddhapabii, ए. 401n. ° Sraiddhapradipa, p. 424n, Sraddhae®gara, of Kullitka, pp. 961-362, Sraddhasaukhya, pp. 306, 422. Sraddhatattva, ए. 278. Sriddhaviveka of Rudradhara, pp. 279, 294, 364, 371, 397; of Sulapani, pp. 394, 3917१, Sraddhonduéekhara, of N&goji, p. 453. Srimanaka, meaning of, pp. 16, 25, 52 ; fire, pp. 105-106. Srenis or corporations, 7, 101. Sridatta, pp. 277, 278, 294, 295, 318, 363-355, 369n, 4181. Sridattamigra, author of Ekagnidana- paddhati, p. 365. SridharBo&rya, pp. 294, $14, $84; author of Smptyarthasira, pp. 335-337. Sridharadaa, p. 300. Sridhariya, p. 387. Srikantha, author of digest on dharma, Pp. 267, 336. Stikantha, guru of Mé&dbavictrya, p. 377, Srikanthacarita, of Mankha, p. 333. ae PP. 266-268, 295, 322, 328,-336, Srindtha-oSrya-otdamani, p. 417, Srinivasa, p, 344, Stinivisadasa, p. 264. eee re Sriparvata, pp. 65, 68. Spngtrapraktéa, of Bhoja, p. 276, Srotriya, property of heirless, does not go to king, p. 122. State, ruined, if supreme authority wielded by many, p. 295. Stcherbatsky, Dr., p. 32. Stein Dr., p. 89. Stein, Sir Aurel, p. 4602. 8४९02185, Dr., p. 182. Subhakara, 7, 364. Subodhini, com. on Mit&ksara, p. 46, 257, 350, 382, 385, 427. Succession, order of, according to Samgrahak@ra, p. 241; propinquity, the guiding principle in, according to, the Mitaksara, p. 290; superior spiritual benefit gave right to, according to Srikara and D&ya- bhiga, p. 267, 328. Sudarsundcarya, commentator of Apastambagrhya, 265. Sud&s Paijavana, p. 152. Suddhibimba, ए. 396, Suddhicandrik’, of Nandapandita, p. 4247. Suddhicintamani, p. 401. Suddbidipika, p. 344. Suddhikaumudi, pp. 277, 414. Suddbimaytkha, P. 222. Suddhinirnaya, of Vacaspati, p. 402. Suddhipradipa, p. 396. Suddbiratnakara, p. 367. Suddhitattva, p. 301, Suddhitattvarnava, of Srindtha, p. 403. Suddhiviveka, of Rudradhara, pp. 339, $96, ` 8१९२, dharmas of, set forth in Smpti- kaumudi, p. 384; duties of, p. 1201 ; illegitimate son of, gets share in father’s property, pp. 125, 260: inviting of ascetic, at dinner for 496 gods and manes, fined, p. 102; not fit for sacrifice, p.7; was not to be appointed judge, p. 151; woman, marrige of, with a dvijati, ए. 107, 148. Stdricdracintamani, p. 401. Sidrakamalakara, p. 435. Sugatisopfina, of GaneSvaramisra, pp. 365, 371, 397n, 401n, 4187. Sukadevamisra, ४८००८ of a Smrti- candrikd, p. 34”. Sukla-Yajurveda, quoted, p. 1. Sukra, author on politics, p. 100; abridged raja-Sastra, p. 111. Sukranitisara, p. 116, Sukriya, Aranyaka, mentioned by Yaj. smrti, p. 179. Sulka, succossion to, p. 251. Sulapaini, pp. 279. 284, 294, 320, 373, 393-396. Sumantu, pp. 129-131 ; siitra-writer on dharma, pp. 129-130; a pupil of Jaimini, p. 130. Sumati Bhargava, p. 137. Sunahgepa, story of, pp. 6, 50, Suresvara, pp. 43, 261; identified with Visvaripa by Madhava, pp. 43, 261. Surety, kinds of, pp. 237, 246, 125; liability of sons of, when he goes abroad or dies, pp. 214, 334-335. Stiryapandita, guru of Dalapati, p, 407; father of Ekandtha, 7, 407. Stiryasiddhanta, pp. 69, 341n. Stiryasiddhantaviveka, pala, p. 387. SuSruta, pp. 65, 103, 341n. Stta, caste of, p. 103. Sutherland, translated Dattakami- mamsa, pp. 428, 429. Suvarna, same as din&ra, p. value of, p. 237. Suydtra, samo as Nala, ए. 102. of Madana- 205 ; Svairinis, four kinds of, ए. 202, History of Dharmasistra Svalpa-Sarhvarta, p. 244. Svalpa-Yama, p. 235. Svapaka, p. 45. Svayambhuva, Manu, p. 97. Svetaketu, named by Apastamba, pp. 39, 45. Tagore, frasannakumar, translated Vivaidacintamani, pp. 400, 404. Tailapa, p. 279. Taitala, p. 102. Taittiriya-Aranyaka, pp. 13n, 132, 160, 191. Taittiriya-Brahmana, p, 186. Taittiriya-Samhita, pp. 5, 40, 51, 136 Taittiriya-Upanisad, p. 2. Tajika-Nilakanthi, p. 422. Taka, kings, pedigree of, p. 386. Tandyamahabrahmana, pp. 7, 111, 136, 153. Tantrakbyiyikd, p. 87. Tantravartika, pp. 3, 11, 26, 27, 42, 43, 58, 82, 145, 224n, 304; refers to 18 dharmasalbhitas, p. 133; refers to Puranas, p. 161. Tattvamuktdvali, of Nandapandita, p. 425. Tattvas, of Raghunandana, pp. 278,297, 300, 316. Tattvaprakasa, of Bhoja, on Saiva igama, p. 276. Tattvarthakaumudi, com. on Pra@yas- cittaviveka, p. 415. Tattvasamasa, p. 121. Tautatitamata-tilaka, p. 303. Teacher, as heir to pupil, p. 251. Temples, of various deities, p. 109 wealth of, does not go to king, p.122. Theft, p. 282; of joint property, whether possible, pp. 284, 297, of Bhavadeva, General Index Thomas, Dr., p. 196. Tirthacintamani of pp. 400, 418n. Tirthatattva, p. 417. Tirthendusekhara of N&goji, p. 453. Tithindugekhara of N&goji, p. 453. Tithinirnaya, of Vacaspati, ए. 401. Tithinirnayasara, of Madanap§la,p.883. Tithi-nirpaya-sarva-samuccaya, Pp. 263, 274. Tithitattva, pp. 278, 41°. Title, and possession, p. 245, Titles, of law, 18, p. 96; treatment of, in Kautilya, p. 96 ; 22, of which king took cognisance suo motu, p. 227. Togaramalla, Raja, pp. 421, 423. Todar&nanda, pp. 2150, 306, 318, 421- 423. Togardnanda-sathhita-saukhya, pp.300, 341. Trikandamandana, pp. 251, 281; quot- ed by Hem&dri and quotes Gargya Narayana, p. 281. TrithSat-éloki, 7. 299 ; commentary on, p. 292, Vacaspati, Tripuskaraé&nti-tattva, 7. 417. Tristhalisetu, p. 420. Trivedi, Mr., p. 455. Trivikrama, Pp. 48118. Tulasi, use of, to be avoided in 6८६११४९, p. 387. Turugkas, p, $80, Udayakara, a commentator of Manu, PP. 157, 369), 401n, Udgrahamalla, Mentioned in Daya- bhaga, p. 328, Udioya, meaning of, pp. 44, 351. Udvahatattva, Pp. 264, 278. Ujjvalavrtti, of Haradatta, on Apas- ‘ambadharmasttra, pp. 45, 78, 347. Uktalabhakraya, p. 131. H. 2, 63. 497 Umbeka, p. 263. Untouchability, none, on certain occa- sions, p. 109. Upadhyaya, a writer named by Medha- tithi, p- 271, Upak&tydyana, p. 218. Upakrtitattva of Balambhatta, p. 460. Upanayana, proper year for, p. 68. Upanisgads, p. 179, Upapatakas, pp. 128, 129. Upapuranas, eighteen, ए. 163. Upasmrtis, eighteen, pp. 118, 120,133. Upavarga, commented on mimamsa, 7. 281. Piirva- Usages, authoritativeness of, p.17;when in conflic: with dharmas&tra, p. 203 ; of various peoples, mentioned by Brhaspati, p. 211; peculiar to the south, according to Baudhayana,p.270. Usanas, pp. 110-116 ; and Manu, pp. 81, 113; work of, on politics, p. 110 ; pu- rohita of Asuras, p. 111; composed Sastra based on dharmas of Manu Svayambhuva, p. 137. Usury, condemned by Apastamba and Baudhayana, pp. 45, 72; not con- demned by Gautama, p. 45. Utathya, on politios, named by Maha- bharata, p. 100 Utathya, son of, mentioned by Manu- smrti, p. 143. Utpala, p. 421in. Uttara (defendant’s reply), of six kinds, p. 129; uttara of four kinds according ४० Prajapati, p. 230; of four kinds according to Vy§sa, p. 237. Uttara-Garga, p. 390. Uvata, author of bhasya on Vajasaneya Samhita, p. 299. Vacanmala, commentary on Bala- krid&, ए. 262, 498 Vaonspatimiégra, p. 285 ; date of pp.262, 275, 405; commentary of, on Yoga- sutrabhasya, p. 188; his Bh&mat), p. 262. Vacaspatimiéra, the jurist, pp. 399-495, 4181 ; to be distinguished from V&- caspati, the philosopher, p. 405. Vadibhayankara, admirer of Vijiiana- yogin pp. 290,408, 4421. Vadhila, Srauta siitra of, p. 105. Vagbhata, p. 609. Vagbhata-smpti-samgraha, p. 329. Vaidya, Mr. C. V., p. 159. Vaidyanatha Tatsat, composed several commentaries on Alamk&ra works, pp. 461-462. Vaidyandtha, Padyagunda, pp. 381, 459-461 ; composed several coinmen- taries on grammatical works,p.46l. Vaijavapa, p. $41n. Vaijayanti, of Nandapandita,-vide Ke- Sava-Vaijayanti, pp. 281, 302, 425. Vaijayanti, commentary by Mahadeva on Satydsddha-Srauta, p. 105. Vaijayanti, a lexicon, p. ३44. Vaikhanasadharmaprasna. pp. 105-107. Vaikhanasa-sdstra, pp. 16, 57, 105; mentioned by Manusnti, pp. 132, 143; mentioned by Baudhdyana, pp. 25, 105 ; mentioned by Gautam, p. 105. Vaisampayana and Y ajfiavalkya,p. 163. Vaisesikustitra, its definition of dharma, p. 3. Vajasaneyins, p. 363. Vaijis, tribe of, p. 101, Vajra, name of a prayascitta, p. 221. Vajrastici, of ASvaghosga, p. 147. Vakovakya, p. 179. Vékyapradipa, p. 271. Valabhi, kings of, inscriptions 91.145. | History of Dharmaédsira Vamadeva, on politics, named by Mahf&bhiarata, p. 100; sage, hankered for dog's flesh, p. 152. Vamadevabhat{aoarya, author of a Smrticandriké, p. 348. Vamana, author of Kaéika, p. $61. Vathsabrahmaga, p. 377. Vanaprastha, varieties of, p. 105. Vaniayu, p. 102. Varahamihira, pp. 69, 186, 320, 341n, 422. Varahapurapa, ए. 338. Vardhamiana, author of Dandaviveka and other works, pp. 362, 401n; Va~ cuspati was his guru, p. 404. Varsadipik&, p. 369n. Varsa-kiiya-kaumudi or Vargakai- mudi, pp. 563, 278, 303, 320, 414. Varsa-krtya of Rudradhars, p. 397. Vargyfyani, author named by Apas- tamba, p. 39. Varta, p. 81. Vartika, p. 9. Vasantar&ja, pp. 341n, 369n. Vasistha, oath of, pp. 152, 153 ; united to Aksamala, p. 152, Vasisthadharmasttra, pp. 4, 5, dot 50, 60, 194; commented on, by Yajfia- svimin, p. 60.; contents of, pp.51-52; date of, p. 59; has many sUtras 10 common with Baudh&yana, p. 9; home of, pp. 57-58; many sUtras of, identical with Gautama's, 2. 18 refersto views of Gautama, 7. 18; relation of, to Manusmrti, pp. 55-5% 58, 82: relationof, to Vignudharma- siltra, p. 57 ; some views Of, ancient, pp. 58-59; studied by Revedins, pp. 11, 50; style of, p. ०४; whether refers to Romans, p. 59. Vasigtha-smrti, diferent from the Vasisthadharmasttra, p. 60. Visistha RamByaye, p. 376. Vasudeva, named by Harihara, 2" 348. General Index Vasudeva, worship of, pp. 67-68. Vasudeva S&rvabhauma, teacher of OCaitanya, p. 417. Vasuboma, on politios, Mah&bhfrata, p. 100. Vatapi, p. 102. Vatavyadhi, named by Kautilya, p. 99. Vatesvarasiddhanta, ए. 376. Vatsa, a smytikdra, 7. 133; undergo- ing ordeal, p. 152. Vatsyfyana, author of K&masitra, p. 100. Vavarasa, son of Keéavandyaka, patron of Nandapangita, p. 425. Vayupurana, mentioned by Mahdbha- rata, and Baya, p. 161, 311. ९०६०६४९, pp. 223, 803, 340. Vedangas, pp. 67, 143, 179. Vadaingajyotisa, p. 101. Vedantakalpataru, p. 384. Vedaintastitra, vide Brahmasitra. Vedérthasamgraha, p. 264. Vedas, as sources of dharma, pp. 4-7; contain no vidhis on dharma but incidental references, pp. 4, 7; calumny of, p. 148, Vena, p. 152, Venisambhara, pp. 800-301. VidhSnap&rijata, p. 308. Vidhipugpamals, p. 364. Vidhirasiyanadtsana, bhatta, p. 438, Vidvanmanohar&é of Nandapandita, p. 428, Vidyidhana, meaning of, p. 210; not liable to partition, p. 210. Vidyts, number of, for kings, ए. 81. fourteen, what are, pp. 112, 179 ; only two, for kings, according to Brhaspati, p, 124; only three ac- cording ४० Manavas, p. 139, named by of Sankara- 499 VidyZpati, p. 418n. Vidy@ranya, p. 377 ; founded Vijaya- nagara, p. 377. VidyStirbha, teacher of Madhavacarya | p. 377. Vijayanagara, date of foundation of p. 377 ; dynasty of kings of,pp.377-78. Vijfiineévara, pp. 287-293; author of Aéaucadaégaks, p. 291. Vikhanas, stra of, pp. 57, 106. Vikramarka or Vikramadityadeva of Kalyana, pp. 288, 290. Vikramorvaslya, p. 204. Vinayaka, worship of, found in M&na- vagrhya and Baudhayana, pp. 31, 181; and Manusnrti, p. 139 ; found in Yaj., pp. 176, 180-181. Vindhyavasa, pp. 271, 341n. Viramitrodaya, pp. 46, 77n, 78, 211n, 290, 295, 318, 325, 440-446. Virasimha, patron of Mitramiéra,pp.445. Virasimhadevaoarita, p. 445. Vireévara, father of Candesvara, p. 370. प 18818158, abridged work of Brahmi on dharma, 8९४18 and k&ma, p. 137; mentioned by Kaititilya and others, pp. 99, 100, 412; mentioned by Viéva- rupa, p. 254. Viéarada, p. 415n. Visistadvaita teachers before एण. nuja, pp. 264-265. Visnu, twelve names of, p. 31 ; one hundred names of, p. 68, Vignucitta, commentator of Visnu- puraina, p. 162. Visnudharmasttra, pp. 60-70; and Bha- ruci, p. 70; borrows from Y&jfiaval- kya, p. 65 ; character pp. 64-65 ; com- mentary of, Vaijayanti, pp. 60, 70, 425 ; contents of, pp. 61-62; date of pp. 68-69; later than Y&jiavalkya, p. 65; relation to Kathakagrhya, 500 pp. 60, 68; relation to Manusnrti pp. 60, 63-64; relation to Vasistha p. 57; style of, p. 63; verses in, later additions, pp. 66-67; views of, differ from those of Kathakagrhya, p. 68. Visnudharmottara, pp. 161, 195. Visnugupta, vide under Kautilya, pp. 87, 88, 341n. Visnupurana, pp. 88, 161, 168 ; contain much dharmaéastra matter, p. 261; extent of, p. 162. Visnurahasyapurana, p. 340. Visnusvamin, p. 271. Visvadaréa, pp. 291, 344. Vigvaksena, king of Bengal, ए. 324. Viévamitra, smrti of, pp. 133, 236; sage, took dog’s leg from Candala, p 152. ViSvartfpa, a lexicographer, p. 361. Viévartipa, pp. 7, 18, 27, 42, 43, 53, 57, 58, 73, 82, 85, 109, 117, 195, 197-98, 910&c., 252-264; and text of Yajiia- valkya pp. 169-170; identified with Suresvara, pp. 43, 261-262 ; points of difference between, and Mitaksara, pp. 259-260. ViévarUpanibandha, pp. 263-261. Viévarlpasamuccaya, p. 264. 16९66818, temple of,at Benares,p.419. Visvesvara, commentator ofMitaksara, pp. 290, 350, 381-389; personal history of, p. 385. Viévesévara-Sarasvati, p. 274. Vithoba, shrine of, at Pandharpur, pp. 463-464. Vitthala-pnmantrasfrabhasya, pp. 380, 451n. Vivadabhangarnava, pp. 465-466. Vivadacandra, pp. 284, 302, 305, 373. Vivaidacintamani, pp. 77, 285, 297, 307, 399, 400, 4187. Vivadanirnaya, p. 402. Vivadaratnakara pp. 72, 77, 157, 309, 210, 214n, 249, 294, 296, 341, 369. Vivad&rnavasotu, p. 465. Vivadasagara, of Kulltka, p. 361. Vivadasararnava, p. 465. Vivida-tandava, pp. 276, 325, 433, 435. Vivahapatala, p. 481. Vivahavrndavana, p. 421n. Vopadeva, a friend and protegee of Hemadri, p. 358. Vratakamalakara, p. 433. Vratapaddhati of Rudradhara,p.397. Vratasagara, p. 3697. Vrddha-Brhaspati, p. 212. Vrddha-Garga, ए. 341n. Vrddha-Gargya, pp. 119, 134, Vyddha-Gautama, p. 19; dharmasastras, ए. 133. Vrddha-Katyf&yana, p. 218. Vyddha-Manu, pp. 134. 150, 158. Vrddha-ParaSara, p. 196. Vrddha-Pracetas, p. 229. Vrddha-Satatapa, p. 129; bh&syakara of, p. 129. Vrddha-Vasigtha, pp. 59, 134. Vrddha-Visnu, pp. 69, 135. Vrddha-Vy&sa, p. 238. Vrddha-Y&jfiavalkya, pp. 119, 133, 134 188 ; work of, p. 188. Vyjika, p. 101. Vyignis, sangha of, p. 10). Vyabrtis, p. 18. Vy&brtisaiman, p. 13. Vyanhgyirthakaumudi, of drama, p. 446. Vyasa, 81061 of, pp. 236-238. Vyavahara, compared to Yajiia, 0. 211; has four p&das, pp. 213, 245 ; defined, p. 244, Vyavaha&racintémani pp. 400, 4182. Vyavahairamatrka, pp. 129, 204, 210n, 218, 258, 282 ; 321-322, names 57 Ananta- of Vaoaspati, 2081, General Index Vyavaharamayttkha, pp. 185, 2117, 235, 339; relation of, to Mitaksara’ p. 439, Vyavaharapadas, p. 96. Vyavahararatnakara, pp. 294, 367, 371, Vyavaharasiromani, p. 292. Vyavahiratattva. pp. 72, 284, 301, 322, 394, 438, 442n. Vyavaharatilaka, 9 pp. 301-302, 442n. Vyavah@roccaya, p. 421n. Bhavadeva, Wealth, three kinds of, according to Narada, p. 198; ancestral, conceal- ment of, p. 214; lost-and regained by one co-sharer, p. 228, Weber, Prof. p. 80. Week-days, names of, pp. 67, 69; whether first established by Greeks, p. 185; earliest mention of, in Indian inscriptions, p. 185. Weights, to be made ofiron or stones from Magadha, p. 102; units of, given by Manu, p. 146. West and Bubler, digest of, pp. 428° 4: 457. Westropp, Sir Michael, p. 458. Widow, of sonless man, according to Pirijita,was tc submit to Niyoga,and give wealth to son so born, p. 309; erring, allowed bare maintence by Hiarita, p. 246; even in undivided family, succeeded ४१9 husband's pro- petty, according to Jitendriya and Dayabhéga, pp. 282, 323; of sep2- rated coparcener allowed to inherit, p. 237, if she submitted to niyoga, pp. 241, 296 : of predeceased 800 pre- ferred to daughter as heir, by Nan- dapandita, p. 428; adoption by, p.448; of predeceased son or grandson, right of, p. 259; succeeded to husband's estate, if small, according to Srikara, 7. 266; remarriage of, allowed by 501 Vasistha, p. 58; remarriage of, allow- ed by Kautilya, p. 96; rcmarriage of, allowed by Narada, p. 202; re- marriage of, condemned by Manu, pp. 96, 202: right to inherit to husband, pp. 150-151, 180, 209, according to Apastamba and Gau- tama, p. 349; not recognised by Narada, ए. 203; recognised by रह). and Brhaspati, p. 209; right of, to succeed, view of Sarhgraha, as to, p. 257 ; right of, to succeed, view of Visvaripa, p. 258; right of, to suc- ceed, view of Haradatta, p. 349 succeeded to her sonless husband and was bound to offer éraddhas, p. 230; to get 2000 karsipanay from hus- band's estate, p. 237. Wifo, adoption by, p. 448; even adulter- ous, not to be cast adrift by hus- band. ए, 246; duties of, p. 121; whon desertion of husband ty, condoned, ए. 96, 130n. Winternitz, Dr., pp. 32, 86, 89, 205, 347, Witnesses, even minors and defective men could be, in certain cases, p. 116; of two kinds, krta and akrta, p. 230. Women, twokinds of, brahmavadinis and sadyovadhis, according to Ha- rita, p. 73; claims of, to succession not favoured by Apastamba and Sankha, p. 78; bought, are not patnis, p. 117; duties of, p. 122; wealth of, should not be appropriated by king, p.122;pass on marriage into hus- band’s gotra, p. 332; not allowed to resort to 88717६88, p 235; tutelage of, as to their husband’s wealth, p. 246. Writing, importance of, tions, 7, 245. in transac- Yadavabhtisana-bhattaoarya, p. 374. Yidavas, genealogy of, p. 307. Yajias, five, p- 7, Y&jiasv&min, commentator of | Vasis- tha, p. 60. Y&jfiatantra-sudhSnidhi, of Sa&yana, p. 377. Ya@jfiavalkya, p. 168; dialogues of, with Janaka, p. 168; works ascrib- ed to, p. 188; rupture of, with Vai- 8870798 8०8, p. 168. Ya@jfiavalkyasmrti, pp. 4, 168-190 ; and Agnipurana, pp. 170-173; and Ga- ruda-purana, pp. 173-175; and Greek astrology, pp. 185-187; and white Yajurveda, pp. 168, 181-82 ; and Ma- navagrhya, pp. 180-81; and Manu, pp. 176-177, 180 ; and 227588८8, p.182; borrows passages of Brhadaranya- kopanisad, pp. 181-182; com. of Mitramiéra on, pp. 443-144; con- tents of, pp. 177-179 ; date of, pp.183- 187; earlier and later strata in, pp. 175-176; enumerates 19 58707४1 - karas, p. 132; editions of, pp. 169- 170 ; literature known to, p. 179; philosophy of, p. 187; various read- ings in, pp. 163-170; verses of, bor- rowed by Visnudhbarmasitra, p. 64. Yajiavalkya Bra&bmana, reviling of, if called modern, p. 349. Yajurveda, Black, Srautasiitras of p. 105; White, promulgated by Y4j- fiavalkya, p. 168. Yajvan, an author named by Medha- tithi, p. 271. History of Dharmasastra Yama, referred to by Vasigtha, pp. 55, 132, 231 ; smrti of, pp. 231-235. Y&munamuni, p. 264. Yasastilaka, p. 124, 127, 224n. Y&ska, p. 8. Yati, p. 121 ; six duties of, p. 274. Yatidharmasanmgraha, p, 274. Yatindramatadipik@, p. 264. Yautaka, meaning of, p. 280. Yavana, a mixed caste, mentioned by Gautama, p. 19, 45; mentioned by Manusnpfti, ए. 151. Yavanesvara, p. 341n. Year, of five kinds, p. 443. Yoga, pp. 121, 329;eight angas of, p. 106. Yoga-ksema, defined, p. 236. Yogasttra, Bhoja’s commentary on, called Rajamfrtanda, p. 276. Y ogasttrabhagya, p. 188. Yoga-Yajfiavalkya, p. 188; than 800 A. D., p. 188. Yogiévara, means ए ह]. and is different from Yoga-Y&j., ए. 188; Yogisvara is different from ए ह}. and is a niband- bakara, pp. 278, 320. Yogloka, pp. 286-287, 320n, 322, 418n. Yuddhajayarnava, ए, 413n. Yuga, which smrtis authoritative in which, p. 192. Zodiacal signs, not known to Y4&j. smrti, p. 186- earlier APPENDIX A. ओ क "क कपो LEP PUL GRACENT OS List of Works on Dharmasastra It is necessary to say.a few words about the methods followed in preparing this list of the works on dharmaésastra. Purely Srauta works have generally been excluded, except where they have been profusely quoted or relied upon by dharmaégastra writers. Works of the Tantra class and the Puranas have been passed over, inas- much as they form in themselves independent and_ extensive branches of Sanskrit literature requiring an exhaustive and detailed treatment, which from considerations of space had to be abandoned here. All individual prayogas, mahatmyas, vidhis, vratas, Santis, stotras have been omitted, except where the names of the authors are well-known or there is some importance or peculiarity attaching to them. Purely astrological works on jataka, and tajika have not been included, but works of the muharta class that are closely con- nected with everyday religious practices have been included. Though the grhyasitras and their commentaries were not dwelt upon in the body of the present work, they have been included in this list as their subject-matter is closely allied to dharma- sastra. Only works up to about 1820 A. 0. have been entered here. Works on politics (arthasistra)) have also been in- cluded. I am afraid that all the restrictions set out above have not been rigorously observed in the following and crave the indulgence of scholars in this respect. I must gratefully acknow- ledge, as everyone engaged in preparing a similar list on any branch of post-Vedic literature must do, my indebtedness to the monumental Catalogus Catalogorum of Dr. Aufrecht. But even that catalogue leaves many things doubtful and necessarily gives meagre information. For removing such doubtsI was compelled to read and compare the original catalogues of Sanskrit mss. such as that of the India Office, the Notices of Sanskrit mss. by Dr. Mitra and and M. M. Haraprasada. Besides the third part of Aufrecht’s Catalogue was published in 1903. Since then several other catalogues, such as the Descriptive Catalogues and Triennial Catalogues of the Madras Govt. mss. Library, Notices of mss. ( new 504 History of Dharmatastra series, part III) by M. M. Haraprasad Sastri, Catalogue of Palmleaf and Paper mss. of Nepal Durbar Library by M. M. Haraprasad Sastri, Hultzsch’s Report ( part III), Catalogue of Central Provinces Sanskrit mss. by Rai Bahadur Hiralal and Catalogue of the mss. collected by the Bihar and Orissa Govt. ( vol. 1), have been published, Moreover I have consulted hundreds of mss. from collections like those at the Deccan College (now in the Bhandarkar 0. R. Institute at Poona), at the Anandasrama Institution ( Poona ), the Bhadkamkar memorial collection started by Prof. H. D. Velankar in Bombay at the Wilson College and the vast collection of the Baroda Oriental Institute. In preparing this list I give wherever possible and desirable the names of the authors and of their anccstors, the names of the works quoted by them or of the works that quote them, the age of the work ( or of the mss. ) their contents &c. In most cases the very name of the work indicates its subject-matter. In spite of all this many doubt- ful points are still left. Various circumstances tend to create confusion in preparing such lists as are offered here. The same work appears under two, three oreven more names in the mss. and the cata- logues. Sometimes the names of the authors and even their fathers’ names are the same as in the case of Divakara, son of Mahadeva and Sankara, son of Nilakantha. Very often portions of a large work appear separately as distinct works in the Catalogues. The same author appears under several forms, as Narasithha and Nrsithha, Nagesa and Nagoji. I have made great efforts to remove such doubts as far as I could and hope that I have been able to make my own humble contributions to the work so ably done by Aufrecht and others. I do. not give references to catalogues in the case of each work, nor do I give all possible references to catalogues against each entry. Only in imporant cases have I given references to catalogues. It has been my endeavour to give earlier references to works and authors wherever I could than those given by Aufrecht and to find out the age of a work or author by resort to various devicés. Only a detailed comparison with Aufrecht can show this, which task I must in all humility leave to the readers who will use this list. One more feature of this list to which 1 wish to draw the attention of the reader is that I have pointed out what works have been printed. In doing this I generally refer only to well-known series and editions like the Bombay Sanskrit serics, List of Works on Dharmaédstra 505 the Benares Sanskrit series and have not set out editions to which very few can have access. For those who want exhaustive informa- tion on this point, the catalogues of printed works in the British Museum Library which have now been brought up to 1928 will be found helpful. Besides the abbreviations given at the beginning of this work, the following abbreviations have been employed in this list and the next. a= author of. ~Anan. sm. = The collection of smrtis published by the Anandasrama Press, Poona. Anan. P. = Anandasrama Press ( Series of books ). Ano. = Anonymous. Aufrecht’s Oxf. Cat. = Catalogue of Sanskrit mss. in the Bodleian Library at Oxford by Dr. Aufrecht (1864). Baroda O. 1. = Colletion of Mss. at the Baroda Oriental Institute. Ben. S. Series = Benares Sanskrit Series. Bhad. col. = Bhadkamkar Memorial Collection made by Prof. H.D. ; Velankar of Wilson College, Bombay. Bik. Cat. = Catalogue of Sanskrit mss. in the Library of H. H. the Maharaja of Bikaner by Rajendralal Mitra ( 1880 ). B. O. cat. = Cat. of mss. collected for the Bihar and Orissa Government, vol. I. Burnell’s Tanj. Cat. = Classified Index to the Sanskrit mss. in the palace at Tanjore by Dr. A. C. Burnell (1880). C = commentary (of a work under which this letter occurs ). CC = commentary on a commentary. Ch. S. Series. = Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series. com. = commentary or commentator, according to context. C. P. cat. = Catalogue of Sanskrit and Prakrit mss, in the Central Provinces and Berar, by Rai Bahadur Hiralal ( 1926, Nagpur ). र 2, 64. 506 _ _History of Dharmatasiva G.O. Series = Gaikwad’s Oriental Series, Baroda. Govt. O. Series. = Government Oriental Series, Poona. Hultzsch’s R. = Reports on Sanskrit mss. in Southern India by Dr. Hultzsch, parts I-III. Jivananda sm. = collection of smrtis edited by Jivananda in two parts. m. = mentioned ( by or in ). Mysore G. O. L. = Mysore Government Oriental Library Series. N. = Notices of Sanskrit mss. in Bengal vol. I-XI (vol. I-IX by Dr. R. Mitra and X-XI by M. M. Haraprasad Sastri ) N. ( new series ) = Notices of Sanskrit mss., new series, vol. [ना by M. M. Haraprasad Sastri. Nir. P. = Nirnayasagara Press, Bombay. pr. = printed. q. = quotes. Stein’s cat. or Stein =Catalogue of the Sanskrit mss. in the Raghunath temple Library of H. H. the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir, by Dr. M. A. Stein ( 1894 ). Ulwar cat. = Catalogue of mss. in the Library of the Maharaja of Ulwar, by Dr. Peterson. Venk. ए. = Venkatesvara Press, Bombay. W. and K. = Catalogue of Sanskrit mss, in the Bodleian Library, vol. II (1905) by Dr. Winternitz and Prof..A. B. Keith. List of Works on Dharmasastra arate gives propitiatory rites (Santi) for any particular athéa of a man’s rasi. भकालमास्कर by हाम्डनाथ. सिद्धाम्त- बागी ; composed in Sake 1636 ( अङ्गाग्निरसक्षोणी ) on intercalary months, how to calculate them and on the special duties per- formed in them. अक्षमालाघतिष्ठा. acerca by अखण्ड (7?) m. in स्थृति- रत्नाकर of &geara. Divided into kandas on dharma and vyava- hara, अगस्त्य OF अगस्तिसंहिता-171. 111 कालविषेक of starred, in अपराकं. अग्मिका्ं. भनक्ति अग्निनिणंय by कमलाकर. अग्निसंधानबन ON ceremonies per- formed to make up for omission in the daily performance of aupasana. अग्निस्थाषन. अग्निहोधकमंन्‌. भग्निहोधरमन्तराथष्यन्द्रिका by रेगनाथ, son of qeraex, son of विदल. About 1683 a. D. अग्निहोजिदाहविधि. भघदौषिका भघनिर्णंय by वेङकटेहा, son of रङ्गनाथ and grandson of सरस्वतीवह्युभ hames विज्ञानेश्वर, अखण्ड, स्यृत्यथं सार, षरद्राज. C. by author. ^. called बीषिकाः by crempsreey. C. by वेदिक सादभोम (this is probably the same as the author’s own com. ) | अधानिर्णय by वीरराघव of बसिष्ठगोत्र, अधपथ्चावेषेचन by मथुरानाथ, अघपश्चषष्ि by मथुरानाथ (in 65 verses), अधपश्चपाष्टे by वीथि (-षि- or -जि -माथ of the कोशिकमोच्र ) C. स्यृतिसिखान्त्धा by रामचन्द्र इष. अचप्रकारिका (in rr khandas ). अधप्रदीप. अचप्रवीपिका ascribed to याज्ञवल्कय , अधघवाडवब or दानसार by विण्वेभ्वरभटु ( Baroda 0. I. No. 7129 Cw) अधषिभोचन. अधिवेक by नीटकण्ठवीश्षि्त, son of अप्पयदीक्षित अद्वैताचायं of भारद्वाज गोत्र (in 6 प्रकरणःऽ ) अघषिवेचन by रामचन्द्र, son of अनन्त of भारद्वाजकुल, in two परिष्डेद्ऽ. C. refers to इक्ताफल. C. by रुचिदन्त, AANA. WUE: ATA TAM ATT: ATTIC: अचसंग्रहदीपिका ( Hultzsch २. I. No. 270 ). अङ्करापणप्रयोग (from भ्रयोगरत्न of नारा- पणमद ) AKITA (from पाञ्चराश्रागम) ॥ (from श्ारदातिलक) 508 अङ्गिरस Vide sec. 39. C. by छृलमणि aw. अखलनिबन्ध. अणछलारीथ by gerard. अप्णादीक्षितीय by अण्णादीक्षित. अतिक्राम्तप्रायभ्ित्त. अतिरुद्रहान्ति. अतीच्ारनिणणय by महेशा ( 3. O. cat. vol. I, p. 2, No. 3 ). अतीखारनिणय by शुजबलभीम ( 3. 0. cat. vol. I, p.3, No. 4 ). aif Vide sec. 19. C. by ष्णनाथ. C. by तकनलाल. Later than 1686 A. D. (~. by हरिराम. अद्भुतदषपेण 07 aggre by माधव- area of the ज्ुधबाण family, son of रधुनाथ and elder brother गोविन्द. Based on the अद्धुतसागर of बह्लाल- सेन, On दिष्य, नाभस and भोम phenomena. Quotes मर्राचिन्र. N ( new series ) vol. I. pp. 2--4. अद्धुतविषेक by महीधर. अद्भुतसांगर by agra son of बिजय- सेन ( printed in 1905 by Prabha- kari and co, Calcutta); m: by ¢g- ATA, कमलाकर, नीलकण्ठ, अनन्देषः begun in 1090 sake (1068 4.9.) and finished by लक्ष्मणसेन. अद्भूतसागरसार by wae. » 0 sftefe. argafaeg ; quoted by नारायण in arrfeereresraar. on उत्वात्तऽ of three kinds, दिव्य, आन्तरिक्ष, ate. अद्धुतोत्पातकान्ति of शोनक. History of Dharmasastra अधिकमासप्रकरण अधिकमासनि्णंय- vide मलमासनिणय अधिकमासफल. अधोष्ठखजननशान्ति gras. अध्यायोपाक्भ्रयोग. अनन्तभाष्य- 111. 111 PHT: अनन्वव्रतपरूजापद्ति (from the ware of arg ) अनन्तत्रतोयापन. अनन्तमद्धी 0" स्मातालुष्ठानपखति of अन- न्तमटुदीक्षित son of विश्वनाथ, sur- named यज्ञोपवीत, Vide under प्रयोगरत्न. अनन्ताङ्धिक. अनाकुला, com. of हरदत्त on आपस्तम्ब- गृह्य. Vide sec. 86. attributed ATAU AT - अनादृष्टशान्ति of ह्ोनक. अल्भोगकल्पतरु by जगन्नाथ. अलुमरणघदीषप by गोरीहभदर. अजुणरणविवेक (quoted by cyarqa in gear ) अदुयागपद्ति by आनन्दतीथ, son of जनादन. . अछयागपखीति by छष्णानन्वसरस्वती, C. by आ्यांध्वरीन्द्र (Baroda O. I. No. 12537 ). अचुष्ठानपद्धति. C. by रघुनाथ. अबूषविलास 01 waredhy written under Andpasithha Rathor by मणिराम दीक्षित, son of गङ्गाराम, 507 of freee, divided into six parts, WAT, AAT, सस्काररत्न, बत्स- List of Works on Dhar magastra TMH, BTavet, छदिरत्न. Refers to Alamgir, emperor of Delhi. agate was contemporary of Shah Jehan. About 1660 A. 9. aqafawe attributed to अदुपसिहदेष of Bikaner. Treats of the ज्ञाल- रामपरीक्षण in five ullasas. अनूपदेव ruled in 1673, son of क्णसिह (1634). Vide D.C. ms. 22 of 1902-1907 copied in Sake 1691. Vide under दानरत्नाकर. अन्तरिक्षवायुबीयं्रकाश. अन्त्यकर्मदीपिका by afters दीक्षित. अन्त्यकमरपदति. अन्त्यक्रियाविधि by मणिराम. Quotes ह्यावेमयख. Later than 1640 ^. D. अन्त्योष्टे. अन्त्येटिक्रियापद्धति. अन्त्येिपषद्ठति. अन्तयेष्टिषद्धति by अनन्तहेव, son अपदेष. Vide sec. 109. अन्त्यो्िपद्धति by Sera, son of अनन्त- wg of पुण्यस्तम्भ (Puntambe on the Godavari). Later than 1450 A. D. अन्तयेष्टिपद्धति by महिभ्वरभटु अन्त्यो्पडति by रामाया अन्त्येष्टिषद्धनि by हरिहर on of भास्कर alias waz, follof ing भारद्वाजस्‌ and the भाष्य theron; says there area hundred qafas following भारव्राज, but his is quite different. भन्तयष्टिपद्धति or ओध्वंवोदिकपद्वति by भटुनारायण, son of waear; vide SEC. 103 weitere or ओंष्पोहिकषदडति by gary, son of avers of --- ——- 509 अन्त्येष्ठिघकाश्ष by दिवाकर, of the भर arsenite. N (new series) vol. III. p. 3. ararasrany (आपस्तम्बीय ). अन्त्येष्टिप्रयोग (हिरण्यके्ी) by केशबभदु from his syaysrerftr. उन्त्येष्टिप्रयोग by नारायणम. Vide sec. 103. अन्त्येष्टिप्रयोग by विभ्वनाथ, based on आश्वलायन. अन्त्येष्टिविधि by जिकन, quoted by रषु नन्दन in हदधितत्व, अन्त्येष्डिप्रायश्रित्त. अन्त्ये्टिसामयी- aeatarer printed in Bombay in 1890 A. D. अन्नदान. AAA. AAI TATA अन्वष्टका. अन्व्टकानवमीभ्ादषपदति. अपसृत्युजयद्ान्ति ascribed to होनक अपिपालपद्धति ( or शयुद्रपद्धति ) of अषि- पाल 111. in saa of शचुनन्दन, भ्द्धक्ियाकोश्ठदी of गोषिन्दानन्द्‌ Earlier than 1500 A. ए. अपिपालकारिका of रघुनन्दन. अपेक्षिताथयोतिनी, com. by नारा्थणः; 171. in मदनरत्न (शान्त्युदयोत) अब्दूर्तिप्रयग Or Tees. RETA AGT. afar by केदार (?); quoted by भधर 111 स्वरत्य्सार जजमक्थभक्ष्यप्र करण, 11. 11 eater Histcry of Dharmasistra आभिनवप्रारश्ित्त, अभिनवमाधकीय by माधवाचायं. अभिनवकषडङीति (on अशोच ) by छज- groq, son of ayeer of arefteer (printed in Telugu script, Madras 1874 ). Vide Hultzsch’s R. vol. II p. 113 and preface p. VI. (^. wdadifrer by the author himself; refers to चन्द्रिका, माधवीय and षडशीति of कोशिकादित्य. Later than 1400 A. D. ` अभिलषिताथाचिन्तामाणि, alias arrearage by argea king सोमेश्वर (vol. 117 G. O. 9. and also in Mysore G.O.L); composed in 1051 Sake (i. €. 1129 A. 7. ); has roo chapters divided into five fearfes on ^ means of acquiring rajya, ' ‘means of the stability of the kingdom, ° ‘ royal enjoyments, ’ ‘vinoda or recreations and ‘krida ( games and sports ) अभ्युदयश्रादद. अषृतव्याख्या m. in श्युद्धिचन्द्रिका of नन्द्पण्डित. Earlier than 1575 a.p. अम्बिकाचनचन्व्रिका 111. in अहल्याकाम- धेच. अयननिणैय by नारायणभटु. अयाचितकालनि्णय. अयुतहोमलक्षहाभकोटेहोमाः by रम, a 77016066 of अनुषर्सिंह of Bikaner. About [650 A. D. अयुतहोमविधि by नारायणभदर. Vide Sec. 103. aera m. in दानचन्दरिका, निणेय- सिन्धु. Vide Ulwar cat. No. 1253 and extract 285, which show that there are 149 verses on accep- tance of gifts and syrafiaws con- nected therewith. अकषिबाहपद्धति by शोनक. अकोविबाह (on marriage with the Arka plant before marrying a third wife on the death of the first two ). BBRAS. cat. p. 240. अष्यदान. अध्यप्रदानकारिका. अष्याचुष्ठान. अज्ञनाचनकल्पलता by रामचन्त्र (on wor- ship of great ) अङ्जनार्चापारिजात by wearer. aderadt of मोविन्दानन्व्‌, ४ com. on afaattrer. Vide sec. 101. ardetrer of कोषटिल्य ; vide sec. 14. C. प्रतिपदपाश्च फा of भटरस्वाभिन्‌ (ms. on chap. 8-36 of 2nd अधिकरण). C. नयचन्द्रिका of माधवयज्वभिभ. C. भीभूल by गणपतिहाजिन्‌ ( 111. 5. 5.). अर्थ॑घरदीप 11. in राजनीतिरत्नाकर of चण्डेभ्वर. अर्धोदयपर्षपूजन (Baroda 0. I. No. 3742). ॥ agattte of हेमाचार्य; 1088-1172 A.D. (printed at Ahmedabad, 1906). AGENT TBACSTA TET - अल्पयम m. in स्शतिसार of हरिनाथः अबपूताभ्रम-- Ano. Gives denom- nations of ten classes of sarinyé- sins and their duties. N (new List of Works on Dharmasiastra series) vol III preface p. IX and p. 8. अवसानकालघायभ्रित्त. अशुडिखन्दरिका (or rather शुद्धिचन्दिका) by नन्दपाण्डित. Vide sec. 105. अहोचनि्णय by उमानाथ ( B. 0. cat. No. 10 p. 7 ). aarasreray-vide under आहोचपरका. Many works on अहौ indis- criminately use the words agra and आक्ञोच. अहोचसार by सत्पण्डितश्ीबलभद्र; men- tions Saratoga, भीभोपाध्याय, भव- qwag and स्यृतिसष्ठश्चय. अश्वत्थपूजा,. अश्वत्थप्रतिष्ठा wader ( from शौनकस्मृति ) BBRAS cat. vol. II. p. 240. अभ्वन्थोपनयनपद्धति-( acc. to हौनक ) BBRAS cat. vol. II. p. 240. अभ्ववान अष्टकाक्मन्‌. ASSENT. अष्टकालोचभाष्य ४५५ मूतकनिर्णय. अष्टमहाद्वादहीनि्णंय by रघुनाथ, son of माधष (Baroda O. I. No. 12586 A). About 1550-1625 ^. D. अष्टमहामन्धपद्धति quoted in स्मृत्य सागर. अष्टविंहातिष्ठनिमत (Baroda 0. I. No. 12743). अष्टभ्ाखकिधाननिधि. अष्टावशगोश्र (Baroda O. I. 3854). जष्टादशाजातिनिणंय (Stein p. 82); No. 611 अष्टादह्ाविवादसेक्षिष (Stein p. 82). अष्टादरहात्स्काराः by wager. अष्टादहास्ृतिसार, अष्टादशस्मतिसारसंग्रहः (Baroda 0. I. No. 10214). असगो्रपएत्रपरिग्रहपरीक्षा by अहोबल. N (new series) vol. III. p. 11. असपिण्डासगोन्रपरीक्षा- probably the same as असमो. . पर॑ क्षा above. असविण्डासगोजपत्रपरिग्र्ाभेधि by agy- TOMA. आश्यप्क्षष ( from चन्द्रपकाहा Baroda 0. I. No. 5478). अस्थिष्याचि. अस्थिष्धबिप्रयोग. ARTA. aerate. अहल्याकामेधनु (Ms. in Benares ऽ. college) by केकशषबदास, called after अहल्या, wife of quezra, son of agritera ; seems to refer to Ahilyabai, the famous ruler of Indore in the latter half of the 18th century). afegerratear (Pr. at Adyar by Schrader). ateatitr by हेमाच्वार्य, दायभाग portion, pr. at Lucknow in 1891 araaorrate by free दीक्षित- Part of यज्ञवह्यभा (१. ए.) आङ्किरसस्शृति on प्रायश्चित्त in 12 chap- ters. (I. 0. Cat. vol. III. 0. 380 No. 1304 ). आचारकाण्ड ararataat by गोपाल ( Baroda 0 I. No. 11133 ) 512 srercetaé by गंजाराम son of aa- भ्वर (Vaisnavite treatise on good conduct and devotion to Visnu) ms. (N. vol. शा. 191 ) dated wae 1782 (1725-26 A.D. ). ararcavg (Baroda O. I. No. 12796 ). अव्वारष्वन्द्रिका by चिविक्रमसूरि. अच्वारखन्विका by पश्मताभदत्त. In 1367 A.D. he composed his gqq grammar and his पर्षोदरादिश्रत्ति in 1375 A.D. ararcaterer by रत्नेश्वरभिभ. srarcaterer by रमापति. आच्वारचन्िका by श्रीनाथाचार्यचूडा- मणि, son of श्रीकराचायं (on duties of gprs and fas), ms. copied in Sake 1410 (1488-89 A.D.); m. by रघुनन्दन ; flourished about 1475 A.D.; vide I. O. cat. p. 524 for date Sake 1410 of the ms. आचारच्यन्द्रोदय 21125 मधषप्रकाक्ञ by महे- हा, son of सारस्वतदुमं and pupil of विदल परुषोत्तम कविवर of भिथला ; divided into 8 meses in relation to the duties of the eight parts of the day for Vajasaneyas, com- posed under माधव, youngest of the three sons of a chief named arg, king of लाबपुर on the banks of इरावती on the Western coast of India. Later than 1500 A. ए. Vide Mitra’s Notices V. p. 97 and I. O. cat. p. 506. आ्ारण्डन्द्रदिय by सवाराम. मावारचिन्ताम्राणि by बाचस्पतिभिश्र ; m. by cyarqa, site. Vide sec. 98. History of Dharmaéistra आचारतरद्धिणी by रविनाथमिभ. आचारतक्त्व by हरिषसाद्‌ son of मकरन्द ( Stein’s cat. pp. 83 and 301). आचारतिलक quoted 1 व्रष्यष्खिवीपिका and निर्णण्दीपक; earlier than 1500 A. D. आखारतिलक by गङ्काधर 1) 108 verses. Vide D. C. Ms. No. 135 of 1886-92 for a fragment. आचारद्पण by sftey-same as आचारा- wel; vide sec. 89. आचखारव्पंण of बोपदेष, m. in पूरतदिनक- Tere आचारवर्हान. आचारदीभिति part of the स्सृतिकोस्तुभ of अनन्तदेव. आचचारदीप -07 प्रदीप by कमलाकर resi- dent of दृषंरग्रानम (Kopargaon) on the Godavari. आचारवीए by नागवदेष 011 ahnika in 8 अष्यायऽ; quoted by नीलकण्ठ in his आच्ारमयख and by अश्निहोति- हरिहर on कात्णाणनःऽ स्नानविधिम्‌्ः ms. ( 3. 0, cat. No. 22) dated 1436 A.D. आच्ारवीपक of starfrey, patroniesed by भिविक्रम; ms. copied 1752 A.D. आचारदीषिका, आखारदीपिका by कमलाकर. आचारदीपिका, a.com. by efter on the strarerger of भीवस. ararcdifrer-from arcaged ( Baro- da O. I. No. 10910). आ चारदधेतविषेक by विभाकर, composed under king रममद्र of मिथिला; solves doubts on wr. About 1500 A. D. List of works on Dharmasastra 513 आचारनवनीतं by sear दीक्षित, a | आचाररतन by लक्ष्मणमभट, son of राम- native of at haraz; composed in कृष्णमदु, son of नारायणभदु. He the time of Shahaji (1684-1711 was younger brother of कमला. A.D.); divided into four kandas on exag and so flourished 1580- आचरश्राद्धव्रव्यद्युदि and कालनिणय. 1640 A.D. Pr. at Nir. 0. आचारनिर्णय by गोपाल. आच्वाररत्न by चन्द्रमोलि. आचाररत्नाकर quoted by रघुनन्दन in आहिकतच्व. आवचारवाक्यखधा. आचारवारिधि by रमापति उवाध्यायस- न्मिश्र. He wrote विवावषारिधि also. आचारविधि. आचारविषेक by मानसिंह. आचारषिरेक by मदनर्सिह ( part of आचारनिर्णय-- in 66 verses on duties of ब्राह्मणऽ, origin of a@rzegs &c. आचारपश्चाशिका by महाशमन. आच्ारपद्धति by agate. » 0 fara. ‘5 by श्रीधरसरि. आचारपरकाक by भास्कर, son of आप्पाज्ी ( Baroda O. I. No. 12789) आचरप्कशिका quoted in अहत्याकाम- ome ee ne ee Ya: मदनरत्न ). आचारघ्दीप by केषशाब्र मदु, quoted in आचारव्रतादिरहस्य. भ्राद्धतकव of रघुनन्दन. | आच्वारसय्रह by रत्नपाणिहाभरी, son of आचारघदीप by नागदेव. He wrote | गंगोली संजीवेभ्वरषशा्मा. निणयतक्व also. आच्वारसंग्रह by हरिहरपण्डित, son of आचारप्रदीप by wand. ARTA. आचारप्डासा आचारसागर of बह्लालसेन quoted in आचरिशूषण of saae राम ओक (11 | the agaaftera (p. 58), स्खृति- 1741 Sake) in 9 [किश्णऽ ; pr. in रत्नाकर of Farad, and in author’s Anan. P own work दानसाम ( composed aaa by मथुरानाथ, about 1168 A. D.). आचारमयख of नीलकण्ड (ed. by J.R. | avaran—m. by हेमाद्रि (11. 2. Gharpure, Bombay and by | 9०0.) Gujarati 0 ० Bombay). Vide sec. ATATTATT by लक्ष्मणभटु, son of रशभ- 107. sen, son 01 नारायण ; seems to be आचारमाधीय of माधवाचायं, the first the same work as आचाररतन part of his com. on वराहारस्मुति, above. आचारमालछा by are. ararcerhratenet by सवाशिष, son of आचाररत्न 111. in आलिकतसव of रघुनन्दन, गदाधर ara by afar (first. part of | आचारा, by street (मैथिल). About waste ) ध 1300 A.D. (pr. at Benares, sathvat H, 9, 65. 514 1920 and by Ven, P.); m. in the हाखिविषेक of शद्रधरं and mentions कामधेनु, कल्पतरु and हरिहर ; vide sec. 89. ८. by गौरीपति. son of दामोदर, composed in Benares in 1696 सवत्‌ (1640 a.p.). Pr. by Ven. P. C. आचारदीपिका by हरिलाल. आचचाराद्िक।, abridgment of the STAT: आचाराकं- a part of धर्म॑हाल्ञधानिधि by दिवाकर, son of ब्रहादेष, son of बालकृष्ण; refers 10 नीलकण्ड author of मयूखऽ who was his maternal grandfather ; composed in qq 1743 (i. €. 1686-87 A. D.). C. by तकनलाल. arate (अहक्रमाणिका of आचाराकं) by the author's son वैयनाथ who wrote अदक्रमणिका to दानहीराषाटि and sraafexet also. आष्वाराकं by मथुरानाथ. आचारा by रामचन्द्रभद् आचररेन्वु of sures, son of नारायण, surnamed ar. Composed in Sake 1760 ( 1838 ^.9. ) at सप्तर्षि (modern Satara). Pr. in Anan.P. आचचारेन्दुशेखर by नागेशभदरु, son of शिषभदरु and सती, Vide sec. 110. आच्वारोदयोत by sreqraey. » एः of मवनरल्नप्रदपि by भदनरसि्वेव. जथारोह्यास first part of the परह्राम- प्रकाहा by खण्डेराय, son of नारायण विदधत चमोधिको रिच at Benares at | History of Dharmasisira Was a हाकद्वीपीयन्राह्मण and son of etiee (र) निभ, who was given the title ब्राणीरसालराय by the Emperor. The 25th ager speaks of the origin of srreetdty- ब्राह्मणऽ. N (new series) vol. II. pp. 10-12:). आचारोल्लास by मथुरानाथ we. आचाय यणावङ, of बेङ्कटाचायं son of हातक्रहताताचायं (Madras ms. con- tains only the chap. called पचकालक्रमन dealing with rites and worships performed by वैष्णवः during the day divided into five parts ). आचाय॑चूडामणि. C. on gears आखषिवेक, quot- ed by wgaeqa and in ज्ूदकमलाकर. आतिथ्येष्ि. आतरसन्यास- Vide 8. 8. २. ^. 9. Cat. Vol. II. p. 241. आतुरसन्यासकारिका. आहुरसन्यासपद्धति (Baroda O. I. No. 5803 ). MATH UTA. आतुरसंन्यासाविधि by आङ्गिरस. आतुरसन्यासबिधि by कात्यायन. आतुरादिषखति- 7. ¢. Ms. No. 138 of 18886-92. saree in 9 अध्यायऽ (1. ¬). Cat. vol. III. p. 380 No. 1305 ). There is another in 6 chapters (1. 0. Cat. vol. IIL. p. 381, No- 1308 ) the bidding of परष्यराममिभ, Who भान्रयेधमर rer m. by विश्वरूप, हैमान. Liat of works on Dharmatastra anregta (in 369 verses). I. O. Cat. vol. III. p. 381. आथर्वणग्रह्यस् (ms. in Bom. Univer- sity, Library ) in 14 adhyayas and 141 khandikas ; ends with anadhyaya (school holidays ) ; 111. in नीतिमयूख. आथर्वणप्राभिताक्षरा by वादेव, son of श्रीपति. (Baroda 0. I. No.7603). Mentions हेमाद्रि and तेविक्रमीपद्धति. आदिधमंसारसंग्रह attributed to Tulaji- raja (1765-88 A, D.). आदिस्थत्यर्थसार- Vide egarsfare. आनन्दकरनिबन्ध- 11. in ep rantare of विश्वम्भर. आपस्तम्बपायश्नित्तहातद्वयी- vide पाय- श्रित्तरातद्वयी. AUT RATT STANT आपस्तम्बसुत्रध्वानिताथेकारिका 01 जिकाण्ड- मण्डन by भास्करमिश्च, son of कुभार- स्वामिन्‌. It contains four काण्डः on अधिकार, प्रतिनिधि, पुनराधान, आधान (pr. B. I. serics ) C. Vide Stein ( Cag. p. 12 ). (^. qawarfirer or Rretesavea- विवरण ano. (Is it same as above?) आपस्तम्बग्रह्यस्र (ed. by Winternitz and tr. in S. ए. E. vol. 30) C. अनाकुला by हरदत्त (pr. in Mysore G. O. L. Series ). by ककं कपर्दिकारिका (pr. at Kumbha- konam, 1916 ). weaadasia by aqstarardt ( pr. Kashi S. series ) sara by aragenrtaniay (pr. at Kumbhakonam, 1902) eo G 2G 515 आपस्तम्बग्हयप्रदीपिका, आपस्तम्बगृ्यप्रयोग. आपस्तम्बगह्यभाष्याथसग्रह quoted by हेमाद्रि. आपस्तम्ब्रह्यसार by महामहोपाध्याय -यो- पनभडु ( आन्ध ). आपस्तम्बण््यस्रकारिका by eR, son of वाग्विजय. आपस्तम्बगरह्यसन्रकारिकाषतति by aie (exposition of arrange in 969 verses composed in Sake 1536, 1614-15 A. D.; pr. 111 1922 with Telugu tr. ) आपस्तम्बजातकम by बापण्णमभटरः आपस्तम्बधर्मसूज्र Vide sec. 7. (^. उज्ज्वला by हरदत्त (pr. in B. S. Series and at Kumbha- konam). आपस्तम्बपद्धति. आपस्तम्बपद्धति by विश्वेश्वरभटु आपस्तम्बपरिभाषाखन्न (edited with two com. in Mysore G. O. L. series 1894 andin Anand. series No. 93 ) C. by कप्दिस्बामिव्‌. C. by हरदत्त, आपरस्तम्बपूर्वघयोग by शिक्गाभहु ( प्रपात R. 1. No. 87 ) आपस्तम्बप्रयोगरत्न by नारायणयज्बन्‌ आपस्तम्बप्रयोगसार, आपस्तम्बप्रयोगसार by गङ्गाम. OT TAFT Sa ANAT C. by बेङ्कटबाजपेपिल्‌ 516 आपस्तम्बभ्ादखपयोग . आपस्तम्बदच्रकारिका. आभपस्तम्बसूज्रसग्रह. आपरतम्बस्मुति (in verse in 10 chap- ters ) pr. by Jivananda. आपस्तम्बस्थृति, quoted by विज्ञानेश्वर, हेमाद्रि, माधव, हरदत्त. आपस्तम्बाह्धिक आपस्तम्बाहधिक by काशीनाथभदु. आपस्तम्बाह्धिक by गोवधन फकचिमण्डन. आपस्तम्बादधिक by स्ग्रदेव तोरो. अपस्तम्बीयद्वादशसस्काराः. आपस्तम्बीयमन्बपाह cd. by Dr. Win- ternitz. आपस्तम्बीयसस्कारप्रयोग. आष्दिकनिणेय. आभ्युदयिकश्ाद्ध. आभ्युदयिकश्राद्धपद्धति. आरामादिष्रतिष्ठापद्धति by महाडकर आरामोत्सर्मपद्धति-566 जलाश्चयारामोत्स- पद्धति, आरामोत्सगगपद्धति by भदुनारायण. आरामोत्सर्गपद्धति by शिवराम. आरामोत्सर्गपरयोग ( Baroda O. I. No. 5424 ). आर्घ्वन्दरिका. आर्धचन्द्रिका by वैयनाथ. आष्टिषेणस्सृति m. by निणयसिन्धु- आवसथ्याधानपद्धति of afta. आशोच by वेङ्कटेश. आशोचकाण्ड, part of fata. गङ्खारामे आशोचकाण्ड by वेयनाथ वीक्षित (a part | of स्यतिष्ठक्ताफल ). History of Dharmasastra STS TETNET.: आरोचगङ्गाधरी by गङ्गाधर. आहोचचन्ध्रिका. आज्ञोचचन्द्रिका by बेदान्नराय, son of त्यगलाभट्र 01 तिगलाभट, 501) of रलन- भद्रु ( Stein’s cat. p. 83 ) आन्ञौचचन्द्रिका by राजकष्णतकंवामीक्ष- भटराचायं. आह्ञोचतत्व- vide श्द्धितत्छ. aratraaea by महदिव, son of विभ्व- नाथ of the अगस्वयगोच, 11) 48 verses. Hultzsch R. 11. p. 143 ८. by शिवस्रि ( महाजन ), son of उयम्बके . आ्ञोचतस्वविच्वार. आज्ञोच्रिशच्छीकी -5०८ faeregiat ; pr at Aligarh. C. दीष by राचवमदु, whose guru Was WRIT; quotes UTA: frorarec . C. by भाराय ( Baroda O. I. No. 3883 is dated सवत्‌ 1579, 1522-23 A.D. ). C. by watt. anetraaere alias दशश्लोकी by विज्ञाने- saz; vide under दृहञश्चोकी also. C. विवरण by warts. C. by रघुनाथ, son of area, son of रामिश्वर; composed in A.D. 1578: C. ( विदृति ) by विष्वेभ्वर, son of लक्ष्मीधर ; mentions विज्ञानेश्वर and वाचस्पति, भट्रोःज (Stein’s cat. p.302 for extract); later than 1650 A.D» C. by वेङ्कटाचाय. C. by भीधर. List of works on Dharmasistra 517 C. by हरिहर ( 1, O. msdated सवत्‌ आह्ौचनिणथ by stata, son of आप- 1589 1. €, 1532 A.D.; vide cat. 0. 565 ) आह्ोचदीधिति, part of the water by अनन्तदेव. आरोचदीपक by a prince 0किटिलिङ्ग- पुरी ( Cranganore ) C. by author. आशोचदीपिका by अधोरशिवाचार्य. आजोचदीपिका विभ्वेभ्वरभद्रु alias गागामङ. N. VI. p. 136. Portion of दिनिकरोदयोत On आश्षोच. आन्नोचष्रीपिका by इयामखन्द्र-भट्रावाय. आशङाचष्धीपिका by कम्भादूर afre, who consulted Pants, anata, teatifa, पारिजात. स, ¢ € आशवनिणय or बडदीति. Aufrecht II. p.11 identifies कडङ्ञीति with अभि- | aia ` आकश्शोच by रामचन्द्र. तप्रषटडस्ीति. आङोचनिणय $ आदित्याचार्य or | ोदिकादित्य । C. दिष्वन्द्रिका by नन्दपाण्डत (pr. Ch. 9. series ), between 1590-1625 A. D. आशोचनिणय oof फौरिकाचायं (in Bhadkamkar collection); contains 1.46 verses, refers to 86 verses of कोशिकादित्य and adds certain texts of गोभिल. आशोचनि्णय by गोपाल, composed in शके 1535 (1613 ^.9.); quoted by him in शुद्धिनिणय. N. 13 p. 267. आरोचनिणैय by गोषिन्द्‌, son of ag- याचार्य who is styled ararag also by गोविन्द. --—. — देव; born on the Godavari ; pro- bably brother of अनन्तदेव. आरोचनिणय by उयम्बक पण्डित, son of रघुनाथ, son of नारायण of the आङ्कि- रसगोत्र (divided into अश्ाऽ ). ( pr. at Nir. P. ). Quotes निणय- सिन्धु and नागोजिभटरीय ; about 1760 A. D. आशोचनिर्णय by नागोजि, son of शिव- भु. ओंश(चनिणय by wate ( 1560-1620 A.D. ). आहो चनिणय by माधव son of रामेश्वर; about 1515-15704. 0. आकषोचनिणय by रघुनन्दन. आदहोचनिणय by रघुनाथपण्डित ; vide under निंशच्छरोकीः आश्छोचनिणय by वरद्‌, son of श्रीनिवास. Refers to आह्ोचदशक and आज्ञोच- State as his authorities. आजोचनिर्णय by diteaz. आहोचनिणय by वेङकृटाचार्य ; see ay- निर्णय. आरोचनि्णय by वेदाम्तरामाञ्चजत।तदास, son of चङ्क८राचरद्ताताचाय. आहोचनिर्णय by वेदिकसार््भोम (Is it same aS आरोचक्ञातक ? ). C. by जठकोपदास ( Baroda O. L. No. 6380 b. ) आक्ञोचनिर्णय by श्रीनिवासतकंवामीक. आह्ौोचनिर्णय by सोमव्यास. आज्ोचनिर्णय by हरि. | आह्ोचनिर्णंय or स्शृतिकोस्तुभ by रायस वेङ्कटाद्रि" 518 History of Dharmasistra आरहोग्वनिर्णय or eaferasre. आशौचसंग्रहविष्ठति by भदाचायं, आशोचनिर्णय 01 स्थृतिसार, ४ com. on आदौचसग्रह by रामवन्द्ररोखर, son of some work 0 विङ्कृटेड्य. आश्लौचनिर्णयसंग्ह (Baroda 0. I. No. 12600 ). अशोचनिर्णयटीका by ayers. आश्ौचपरिष्छेद. आङशोचकारा by चतु्ैज wgrard; pro- bably the same as that m. in saa Of रघुनन्दन and so be- fore 1500 A. D. आह्ोचपकाश (from धर्मतत्वकलानिधि) by पएथ्वीचन्द्र. आरदोचमसरी, आशशोचमाला by गोपालसिदधान्त. ATTA. आशोचन्यवस्था by राधानायशार्मन्‌, आशौचरहातक. आशोघशतक by रामेभ्वर. आकोचरशतक by वेङ्कटाचा्यं 01 बेङ्कटनाथ, son of रङ्गनाथ of the हारीतमोत्र; with his own com. Vide apq- निर्णय above. Hultzsch R. II. No. 1499. C. arathafrota by रामालुजदीक्षित. आशोचशातक by नीलकण्ठ, menage by वेदिकसार्वभोम ( pro- bably same as बेङ्कटाखायं above ) आहौचषडकषीति- see above आहौच- निर्णय. आदहोचसंक्षेप by मटस्रवनवाश्वस्यति, आशौगखसंग्रह by सत्याधीशाशिष्य (Baroda O. I. 5862 ). wrenerdie by चतुर्थं भद्राय. ५ङ<नारायण. आरोचसंग्रह by वेङ्कटेश; quotes आचार- नवनीत, अधनिर्णय, अविवेक, अभिनव- षडहीति. आशोचसंग्हधरिदा्छरोकी- Vide under Freregret. आशौचसागर of eye m. in his syra- सागर. आदहोचसार by wera. आङोचसिद्धान्त. आहोचस्यृतिचन्द्रिका. आशोचस्मृतिचन्द्रिका by सदाशिव sur- named दृद्ापुज्र, son of गदाधर; com- piled for prince wave (of जय- नगर ). The author 2150 wrote लिङ्गनवंनचन्त्रिका. आशोचाद्शं quoted in सारसं्रह. आशोचाष्टक by वररुचि ( pr. in Tri. S. series ) C. anonymous. Names नि्णयकार, मस्करिन 011 गोतमधमसूत्र and सहस्र- स्वामिन्‌. आशोचादिनिणेय by रामवेवज्ञ. आहौ्वीयदशश्छोकीषिष्टति by विभ्वेभ्वर, son of लक्ष्मीधर ; scc आशाोंचव शाक alias वृह्ञश्चोकी above. आकौचेन्दुशेखर by water. arenraageret by artifinrg: spaarcraeras (pr. Nir. P. and B. I. series and translated in 5 BE, vol. 29 ) C. अनाविह्ा by हरदत्त (pr. 111 9, series ) ' List of works on Dharmasistra C. by आनन्वरायवाजपेययञ्वन्‌, mi- nister of Tanjore king Shahji and Sarfoji I. C. by गदाधर. C. विमलोदयमाला by जयन्तस्वामिन, father अभिनन्द्‌ and son of कान्त, son of कल्याणस्वामिच्‌. N. vol. X. p. 163. About end of 8th century. C. by देवस्वामिन्‌; m. by नारायण. About 1000-1050 A. ». C. by नारायणः, son of दिवाकर of नेधवमोतर (pr. B. I. series and Nir. P. ); refers to bhasya of q- स्वामी. Doubtful whether he is identical with नारायण, son of नर- सिह, commentator of आण्वलायन- sta. Vide BBRAS. cat. vol. 1. p. 202. C. by विष्छगूटस्वामिन्‌. Follows देव- etry, नारायण and others. सश्वलायनणष्टाकारिका in 22 adhyayas and 1296 verses. C. विषरण by a pupil of get or TITHE. C. by नारायण. आश्वलायनण्ह्यकारिका by कुमारिल- स्वाभिन ( ? कुमारस्वामिन्‌). Refers to नरायणवृत्ति on aaa and to जयन्तस्वाभिम्‌. B.B.R.A.S. cat. vol. Il. p. 203 ; pr. in Bombay, 1894. जाश्वलायनण्द्यकारिका by रषटनाथदीक्षित. जआश्वलायनश्रह्यकारिकावली by Maw. मभ्बलायनग्ह्यपरिशिष्ट (pr. Nir. P. and 8. I. series at end of गह्य सूत्र ). 519 आभ्वलायनग्ह्यपरिभाषा. आश्वलायनश्ह्यप्रयोग, आण्वलायनयद्योक्तवास्तुक्ान्ति by राम- कृष्णभदटु. आभ्बलायनधर्मज्ञाज्न 111 22 अध्याथऽ on duties of fasts and on srg, प्राय- शित्त, जातिनिर्णय &c. ( Baroda O. I. No. 8708 ). आश्वलायनपूर्बप्रयोग ( Hultzsch R. I. No. 431 ). आश्वलायनप्रयोग. C. af by fase. आभ्वलायनप्रयोगदीपिका by तिरुमल सोम- याजिन्‌, son of तिरुमलयज्वन्‌. आभ्वलायनयािकपद्धति आण्वलायनशाखश्राद्धप्रयोग LY कम लाकर, son of Test. आभ्वलायनश्रपद्धति by नारायण. आभ्वलायनसतप्रयोग by बेविदब््ध. आग्वलायनसप्रयोगदीपिका by भश्चना- savaag ( pr. 36112765 9. series ). आण्वलायनस्घ॒ति (ms. in Bombay University Library) in eleven adhyayas and about 2000 verses; refers to आश्वलायनण्ह्यसून्न and gi thereon and afer also. Quoted by हेमाद्रि and माधवाचार्य. आहिताग्निमरणे दाहादि (आश्वलायनीय ). आदहिताग्निमरण दाहादि by warren, son of रामेभ्वरभटु. Vide sec. 102. आहिताग्नेदांहादिनिर्णय by रामभद्र, son of विश्वनाथ होसिग. आहिताग्न्यन्त्येटिप्रयोग. आहततीथकस्नानप्रयोग. आद्विक- numerous works are so styl- ed. Only some are noted below. 520 History of Dharmatistra आदिक by आनन्द, son of प्रभाकर, of आद्िकचन्द्रिका by गोपीनाथ. the qargage. आद्धिक by आषदेव. आद्धिक by कमलाकर son of रामद्म्ण. Sec. 106; same as apatar: आद्धिक by गङ्गाधर. आविक by गोपाल्देशिकाचायं. आद्धिक by छलारि afte for followers of मध्वाचायं. आधिक by ज्ञानभास्कर. आ्िकसक्षेष 21150. : आधिक by दिवाकरभटु. आद्धिक by बलभद्र. आदिक by wari (from चतुधिति- मतटीका ). आद्धिक by रघनाथ, son of armen. आधिक by fagarar. आधिक ( बोधायनीयः) by विभ्वपतिभदु. anes by वेयनाथ दीक्षित. आहिक by asa (for followers of वल्लभाचार्य). आद्धिककारिका. आधिक्य of frarez; 111. 11) मलमास- तत्त॒ of रघुनन्दन and so before I §00 A.D. आद्धिककोतुक (from gander ). आ्धिककोरतुभ by श्रीनिवास pupil of याद्बाचा्यं (Baroda O. I. No. 8809). This isa com. on सदा- तारस्ति of आनन्दतीर्थ. आह्धिकचान्द्रका by काङीनाथ | आद्िकचन्द्रिका by कुटमाणि gay (Is it चन्द्रिका or afererater ? ). aifgeaser by request of NEG TAT. He wrote आद्निकचन््रिका by दिषाकर, son of महा- देव ze, son of wag; men- tions भद्रोजीय (pr. at. Nir. 0. with extracts from सायण on Vedic mantras). Same as सक्षे- arhaaraterer. sfaeatexer by tame. आह्िकचिन्तासणि quoted by रघुनन्दन in आह्धिकतत्व (and so 0411167 than 1500 A. D.). आद्धिकतच्व 01 आद्धिकाचारतत्छ by wz- नन्दन ; pr. by Jivananda. C. by ayaa. आहिकदर्षण of रामरृष्ण (pr. with Ma- rathi tr. in Bombay, 1876 ). आह्धिकदीपकः. आ्िकदीपक by अचल residing, at आनन्दषुर, son of बत्सराज, son ot गोविन्द्‌, son of लक्ष्मीधर,5011 of अनन्त surnamed agtg. About 1518..0, Vide U]war cat. extract No. 291. आष्िकपद्धति by शिवराभ. Sec ange WA. aneereta by रघनाथ सम्नादस्थपति, son of माधव, son of qasqz; he was younger brother of विश्वनाथ and प्रभाकर, आद्विकपद्ति by विषहटलदीक्षित. Vide यज्ञ- agar below. आद्धिकषारिजात by अनन्तभदट्रु. आह्िकप्रकाश्च- from the वीरामिद्रो दय. ' आद्धिकप्रदीप-- quoted by कमलाकर | 1 | | । आह्धिकप्रयोग by कमलाकर of कृषरय्ाम ( Kopargaon on the गोदावरी ) There is confusion of author- ship in Baroda O, I. No. 277. List of works on Dharmaéasira amgenaty by areata, son of सदाशिवदीक्षित ; quoted by अनन्त in his TREC. आद्धिकपरयोग by गोवर्धन कविमण्डन (for आपस्तम्बीयऽ ). आह्िकमप्रयोग by मनोहरभटु, son of महा- gag ( for हिरण्यकेङीयऽ ). आद्धिकप्रयोग by रघुनाथ, son of माधव, son of wear; his younger brother प्रभाकर composed vasrérq in 1583 A. D. at the age of 19. आद्धिकप्रयोगरत्नमाला by वेश्वम्भरदीश्चित fae, son of agate resident of rst ( modern Wai in Satara District). Mentions सद्धोजि्दक्षितः आचाराकं. आह्धिकप्रायश्रित्त-- mentions कमलाकर (1. 0. cat. II. p. 555 ). आ्िकभास्कर by इन्द्रगण्ट सयनारायण. आद्धिकमसखरीटीका by वीरेभ्वर, son of हरिपण्डिति, son of शिवपाण्डित at पुण्यस्वम्भ (modern Puntambe ) on the Godavari); composed in Sake बियन्नरदारेन्दुामिते 1. ५. 1598 | A.D. आद्धिकरत्न (on daily duties ). आह्ञिकरत्न by anton शिरोमाणिभद्. In three प्रकाहाऽ. आद्विकरत्नचकषक by गङ्गमधरखत (Baroda O. I. No. 12306-7 ). आद्धिकाविथि by कमलाकर, आद्धिकाविधि by नारायणमदु. आ्िकसंसतेष of कोथुमिराशथा. आह्षिकसंक्षेष of ज्ञानभास्कर. आहिकसंक्षेप by वामदेव, written for Lala Thakkura. प्र, D. 66, §21 आ्धिकसक्षेप by शिवराम, an abridg- ment of बैवनाथःऽ आहिक. आ्निकसंयह Of अनन्तमटु, son of नागेक्ष- wg, son of यज्ञभदु, for हह्यजरवेदिऽ. आद्धिकसार by दलपतिराज (2nd chap. of arrears ). angeate by araatz ( probably same as author of आद्धिकसार- wad below ) आद्धिकसार by खदशंनाचाय॑. आद्धिकसार by afta. सआ्निकसारमशरी by arerrg, son of विभ्वनाथमभटु दातार. aera of गोतम 111 1 7 खण्डऽ on duties of arerots ; vide BBRAS. cat. p. 204 No. 651. आ्धिकस्मुतिसग्रह. आद्धिकाचारराज by रामानन्द वाचस्यति, ereat-great-grandson of पुष्कराक्ष of the family of सर्वानन्द, compil- ed under राजा acoraata of Na- dia about 1750 A. D. आद्धिकासूत of वाखदेवभद्राचार्य, son of रङ्गनाथ, on duties and ritual of the वैखानस school of eurgs. आह्विको दार quoted by रघुनन्दन in आद्िकतच्व. ATMS इष्टिकाल by वामोदर. ईशानसंहिता 111, in सभयमदूख. ईभ्वरसहिता quoted by ware in तिथितस्व. उज्ज्वला by sera, ८0111. on आपस्तम्ब धर्मस्त. C. कालासतटीका by agave. 522 sucererad by कालिदास (on marri- age, विरुखसबन्ध &c. ) उत्तरक्रियाप्दति by याक्जिकदेव. उत्तरीयकर्मन्‌ ( काण्वीय ). उत्पावहान्ति attributed 6 ब्ग. उत्सगंकमलाकर Of कमलाकरभटु. ऽत्सगकमन्‌. उत्सर्गकोस्तुभ, part of स्थृतिकोस्त॒भ of अनन्तेदब. उत्सर्मनिर्णय by छष्णराम, उत्सर्गपद्धति by अनन्तदेव. उत्स्गपरिशिष्ट. उत्सगंप्रयोग by नारायणभदु. उत्सगंमयूख by नीलकण्ठ (pr. by J. 1२. Gharpure in Bombay ) उत्सर्गोपाकमप्रयोग by wesw, son of नारायणम उत्सजेनपद्धति. उत्सजनोपाकर्मप्रयोग by argaz, son of | aa yaaa महादेव. उत्सवनिणय by त॒कजाराम. उत्सबनिणय by पुरुषोत्तम. स्वनिर्णयमसरी by गङ्गाधर, compos- ed in Sake 1554 i. €. 1632 ^. 7. ( Baroda O. I. 2375 ) SCUTANPIAY- उत्सवप्रतान by पुरुषोत्तम. ॐ दद्म्मदान seer area by ज्वालानाथमिश. उदयाकरपद्धति (तन्त) quoted in माला- सस्कार. उदीष्यपघरकाश ( Baroda O. I. No. 8016 ), SUAIAAsy. History of Dharmaégastra उथापनकालनिर्णय TASS PUTT SNA उद्वाह्वन्द्रिका by seta उपाध्याय. उद्वाहतस्व-- see विवाहतरूव . C. by काशीराम-वाचस्पति-भटराचाय (printed in 1877 at Calcutta in Bengali characters and in 1916). उद्वाहानर्णयं by atrareraracantat उद्राहलक्षण. उद्वाहविवेक by गणेष्ाभटु. उद्वाहव्यवस्था N. vol. 11. p. 77. उद्वाहव्यवस्था-,106 संबन्धन्यवस्थाविकाश, उद्वाहन्यवस्थासक्षेप. उद्वाहादिकालनिणंय by गोपीनाथ (Baroda 0. 1. No. 10226). उषकार्यपस्यति. | उषन्ारषोडक्ारतनमाला ( महादेषपरिच्व्या- सबव्याख्या ) by इरेभ्वरस्वाभिस, pu- pil of स्ुरामती्थं ) उपनयनकारिका anonymous. उपनयनचिन्तामणि by शिवानन्द. उपनयनतन्र by afte. उपनयनतन्त्र by रामवस. उपनयनतन्त्र by लोगाक्षि. उपनयनपद्धति by रामवुक्त (for वाजसनेयि followers ) उपनयनपदति by बिभ्बनाथदीक्षित. उपस्थान. उपाकमनिणंय, उपाकर्मकारिका ( Stein’s cat. p. 12). उपाक्मषद्धति ( कात्यायनी ) by tan: उषाकमेषमाण by बालदीक्षित. street (आपस्तम्बीय). List of works on Dharmasastra उषाकर्मघयोग (आभ्वलायनीय). उपाक्र्मप्रयोग by व्ारकानाथ, son of टीकाभद्रु- उपाकर्मविभि. उषाठतित्व by बालम्भदु alias बालकृष्ण पायगुण्ड ; ms. dated संवत्‌ 1848 (1792 A.D.) in Stein’s cat. p. 302. उपाकमविधि by दयारङ्कर. उपाङ्गिरःस्सृति. HATTA. ऊरध्वंएण्डूनिणंय by परुषोत्तम (ms. No. 3862 in Baroda O. I. is dated संवत्‌ 1764 ). Haas. क्वेदाहिक by काह्ीनाध. Also called कग्वेदाह्धिकचन्द्रिका. कर्वेदाह्धिक by शिरोमणि. कग्बेदाहिकचन्वरिका by काशीनाथ. कजुपरयोग by weer, son of िभ्वनाथ होसिंग ( following atetadur ). Ba- roda O. I. No. 8515 ms. dated 1676 (Sake). ऋजमिताक्षरा- same as मिताक्षरा. कणमोक्षण. RATA. eT Mee. कविग्बरणनिर्णय by अनन्तदेव. कषितर्पण. कषितर्पणकारिका. ऋषिभी ; see सं स्वरभास्कर, 523 कष्यष्ाङ्गविधान ( 1116 for inducing rainfall), Baroda 0. I. 11047 A and C, ष्यदाङ्गम्स्सृति- vide sec. 40. एकदण्डिसंन्यासविधि by etree. एकनक्ष्रजननशान्ति by mr ( Baroda O. I. No. 566r ). एकवस्रस्नानबिधि by waz, son of frees, son of हाङ्करभद्र. About 1640-1680 A. D. ठकाश्चिकाण्ड ( यज्ञुबंदीय ) 2150 known 25 HANTS, मन्त्रप्रपाठक and मन्त्रपरश्च. (pr. in Mysore ©. 0. L. series, 1902 ). Vide आपस्तम्बीयमन्ञषाड. एकाश्चिकाण्डमन्धव्याख्या by हरदत्त. एकाश्चिदानषद्धति of श्रीदत्तमिश्र ; ms. copied under केवसिंह of मिथिला in ल. स. 299 1. €. 1118 A, D. एक द ज्लाहदत्य, एकादरिनीप्रयोग (chanting of gareqra eleven times ). एकाद्षीतत्व by रघुनन्दन, C. by कारीराम वाचस्पति. C. दीप by राधामोहन गोस्वामी, a friend of Colebrooke, residing at Santipura. He was a des- cendant of aga, associate of एकादक्षीनिणेय (several works are so called and are ano. in the catalogues ) एकादश्ीनिणंय or निणेयसार by धरणीधर, son of gerte ; composed in Sake 1408 ( 1486 a. D.); refers to महाराजाधिराज बीसलदेव ; mentions अनन्तभदु, बोपदेवपण्डित, विभ्वरूप 524 History of Dharmafaetra ( verses on varieties of agr and बिद्धा एकावरी ), विज्ञानेभ्वर ( three wry verses on एकादशी ). Baroda O. I. ms. No. 12052 is dated Waa 1620. एकादहीनिणेय of हरि, son of ane, th sega family, at विराटनगर ( Wai ) on the Krsna. एकादक्षीनिर्णय by हाङ्कर, son of नीलकण्ठ ( part of सदाचारसय्ह ). एकादक्षीनिणयव्याख्या of अच्युतानन्द्‌ (a pupil of आनन्दशिरि ). एकादवशीषिषेक by छलपाणि- sec. 95. एकादशीत्रतनिर्णय by देवकीनन्दन. एकावृष्णीध ताचापनपद्छात. एकावह्ीहोमनिणय (Baroda 0. I. 8332 ). एकावशीहोमनिणय ए रामनवरत्न ( Baroda 0. I. 8656 ) एकोद्िष्टभाद्ध, ५कोद्ि्ट५। द्ुपद्धात. प र परकाण्दरश्राद्धक्याोग. एकोदिष्टसारिणी by रतनपाणिभिश्च, son of गगोलीसशीवेभ्वर, composed for securing the favour of the king of मिथिला. एेन्दवमासानिणैय by गणेरदादत्त. ओदीष्यप्रकाहा by बेणीदत्त. भओपासनप्रायभ्रित्त (from संस्कारदीभिति . of अनन्तदेव ). ओध्वदोहिककल्पबह्ली by विभ्वनाथ. ओध्वदोहिकक्रियापद्धति' by Regan, son of ज्योतिर्विद्‌ strars ( accord- ing to g@aRagaz माध्यन्दिनहाख। ). He was stadtaremntia. «=: ओध्ववेहिकनिणैय by argyarsta. ओष्वदेहिकपयति of कमलाकरभटु, son of wreresut ; sec. 106. ` areatrergia 01 -प्रयोग by कष्ण दीक्षित, son of यज्ञेश्वर (according to सामषेद ). ज्वदोहिकपद्धति by दयाराङ्कर. जध्वदेहिकपद्धति or अन्त्ये्िपद्धति by | नारायणभदटु, son of रामेभ्वर ' ओ्वदेहिकप्रकरण. | ओष्वोिकाधिकारनिर्णय- | कटपरिहिष्ट quoted by हेमाद्रि in परि- | हेषखण्ड. कटसूत्र quoted by हेमाद्वि in परिरोष- खण्ड and सस्कारमयूख. कण्ठशुषण by वेदिकसार्षभोम, 711. in प्रयोगचन्द्रिका. It is a com. on गृह्यरत्न. कण्वस्सुति- 111. by हरदत्त 01 गो. ध. सू, आचारम, ABATE: कवलीत्रतोयापन. कन्यागततीथैषिधि. कन्यादानपदति. फन्यादानप्रयोग. कन्याबिबाह. कन्यासस्कर, कयपर्विकारिका m. by नि. सि. संस्कार मयूख of सि द्धभ्वर. कषादनाच्नन्नाद्छ' कपिलगोदान. कपिलसंहिता m. in सस्छारमग्ख. कपिदलस्सूति in 10 अध्यायऽ, each with 100 verses, on degeneration o ब्राह्मणऽ in Kali, भद्ध, purifying ceremonies, adopted son, विवाहः gifts, penances, List of works on Dharmaéastra कपिलादान. कपिलावानपद्ति. कणेवेधबिधान (from प्रयोगपारेजात ). कममकाण्डपद्ति. कर्मकाण्डसारसष्ठख्चय (Baroda O. I. 9506 dated संवत्‌ 1618, i.e. 1561- 62 A. D.). कमेकालप्रकाहा by छष्णराम. कमेकेष्ठवी by serge, son of आवस यिक ब्रह्मद. कर्मकोघठदी by मिभविष्छशमेन्‌, क्मक्रिवाकाण्ड (हष ) composed by सोमरशषम्बु 1111073 A.D.; ms. copied in 1206 A. D.; vide Hp. p. 95. कमेतस्वपदीपिका alias ografe by ठृष्णभटु, son of पुरुषोत्तम, son of Tara, On कलिवज्य, आदिक, सस्कार, भद्ध ; quotcs माधवीय, वामनमभाष्य, चन्द्रिका, जयन्त, कालाव, भदन- पारिजात. About 1400-1550 ^. D. (Stein’s cat. p. 304, extract ). | sade quoted in त्रिकाण्डमण्डन. | कमदीपिका of रघ्रामतीर्थ. Incomplete ; ms. in BBRAS. cat. p. 211- 213; a vast work; over 73 adhya- Yas On बणोश्रमधभे, व्यवहार, प्राय- haw. Names विज्ञानिभ्वर. कम॑दीपिका of हरिदत्त, son of quar (Baroda O. I. No. 6892) on hy वेदि, मधुपक, कन्यादान, चतुर्थी mutate by आनन्दतीर्थ. C. by जयतीर्थ. CC. by qragez. ee ee = ~ 525 eatiay m. in अहत्याकामधेजु. कर्मपरकाहा by कलायखश. sues Mm. by रघुनन्दन in ज्योतिस्तत्छ, प मपकािका of qarat गुरुनाथ (on पाकयज्ञ, sarsera, पएरस्वीकार- विधि, चलगत्र ). कप्रदीप attributed to कात्यायन or गोभिल. Also called, छन्वोगपरि- शिष्ट ; quoted by शलपाणि, माधवः रघुनन्दन, कमलाकर, C. by आक्षादित्य or aver, son of चक्रधर. C. qfeSresarer by नारायणोपाध्याय, son of गोण ( 2. I. series 1909 ) C. by rave, son of विश्राम. कर्म॑प्रदीपिका, 2 पद्धति tO पारस्करण्ह्य सूज, by कामदेव, कमप्रायश्चित्त by वेटङ्कविजधिन्‌. | कर्ममरी ( Ulwar cat. No. 1277 ) | कर्मटोचन 108 stanzas on duties of householders. कर्मविपाक. कमविपाक by ब्रह्मदेव who is said to have instructed नारद्‌ on the fruits of eq in 12 अध्यायऽ ( Ul- War cat. extract 293 ). कर्मविपाक by भरत who is instructed by भृश. कर्मविपाक by wa who is instructed by वसिष्ठ. | कर्मविपाक by भाधवाचायं. कर्मविपाक by मान्धात- see महा्णंवकम- विपाक. कर्मविपाक by मौटगिभूपति m. in कम विपाकसारग्राह and सर्सिहश्रसाद्‌ ; earlier than 1380 A, D, Fitstory of Dharmaéastra कभंषिपाक by रषि to अरूण (Ulwar cat. कर्मविपाकसार by दिनकर, son of शम- No. 1278 and extract No. 293). कर्मविपाक by रामरूष्णाचा्थ. कर्मविपाक by विष्वेभ्वरभदु- see महा्णंव- कर्मविपाक ; 111. in छुद्धितत्त्व 7. 242. कमविपाक by हाङ्करभदु, son of नीलकण्ठ wz (I. O. cat. vol. Ill. p. 575 ). कमविषाक by the eldest son of arge- देष, son of पद्मनाभ, Vide under सारग्राहकमेविपाकः. कमैविपाक from the ज्ञानभास्कर. कमेविपाक from ज्ातातपस्यृति (pr. Jivananda II. p. 435 ff) कर्मविपाक from the qaretz. कमविपाकचिकित्सासृतसागर by पण्डित देवीदास. कमेषिपाकपरिपाटी, कर्मविपाकप्रायश्रित्त. कमेविपाकमहार्णव; Vide महार्णवकर्मषिपाक, कमविपाकरत्न by कमलाकर, son of गम- कृष्ण, क्मविपाकसंहिता ( 71. ४६ Venk. P.), a part of बह्मपुराण, watery from महार्णवकर्मविषाक, quoted by erg in कमविपाक and In water. कसषिपाकसष्ठश्चय 11. in महार्णव of मान्धातु, son of अवृनपाल and in नित्याचारप्रदीप, Earlier than 1350 A. D. कमेविपाकसार quoted by हाङकर in करम॑- विपाक and in नित्याचारघदीप pp. 140and 207, _ ` कमेविपाकसार by दलपतिराज ( about 15104. D. ). कृष्ण, son of नारायणमभदु CI, 0. ms, dated सवत्‌ 1696; vide cat. p. 573). About 1585-1640. 9. कमविपाकसार by wae. कमविपाकसारग्राह by eldest son of कान्हड 01" Stes, son of पदनाभ ; vide under सारग्राहकभविपाक and कर्मविपाक, कर्मविपाकाकं by शङ्कर. See कर्मविपाक, कमंविपाकसारोद्धार. Bude 111. in अहल्याकामधेन- कर्मसराणि by विल दीक्षित : vide under यज्ञुवहलुभा. Said to have been born about 1519 A. D. कर्मसिद्धिसिद्धान्त by पुरुषोत्तम (Baroda O. I, 8361) on भद्ध, स्वप्राध्याय &c. कमांसुष्ठानपद्धति by wate (vide sec, 73). C. ससारपद्धतिरहस्य. कमोंपवेहिनी of अनिरूद्ध्‌ (sec, 82); quoted by vyarqa and कमलाकर. कमौपवेशिनी of हलायुध (sec. 72). कलानिधि 111. in स्यृतिसारोद्धार of बिभ्व- म्भर. कलिका- vide दीपकलिका ; quoted by ` कमलाकर. कलिधन्रौनिणय. कठिधरमप्रकरण by कमलाकरभद्ु. कलिधमेसारसेग्रह by विभ्वभ्वरसरस्वती फलियुगधभमेसार of विभ्बेभ्वरसरस्वती 1" two parts, first on worship of विष्णु and 2nd on feragst, गमाः स्नानफट ८०, List of works on Dharmatistra कलिदुगधमीधमं. कलिवज्यनिणय by दामोदर, eldest brother of नीलकण्ठ ; quoted in arataaad. About 1610 A. D. Mentions afaatratar of नारायण- wg, शासलदीपिकाटीका of his father, रामच्न्द्राचायं, भराद्धदीपकालिका ete. ( Baroda 0. I. No. 10793 ). कल्पतरु by लक्ष्मीधर ; vide sec. 77. कल्यद्र quoted in मद्नपारिजाते and by देवदास. कल्पतव्रम- See दानकल्पत्रून, रामकतल्पव्रूम and भ्रा्धकल्यत्रम ; quoted by चण्डे- भ्वर and मदनपारिजात ( who both mean कल्पतरु of लक्ष्मीधर ). केत्पलता-ऽ1५6 छत्यकल्पलता. कल्पलता by eree (2) ; quoted by vt, भ्राद्धसंग्रह रामकृष्ण, by WITT 17 बटमासतत्व. कल्पदक्षदान. कर्वषस्सृति quoted in पराहारस्थृति- व्याख्या and मस्करिभाष्य on गो.ध.स. कविरहस्य by छृष्णभटु. कविराजकोतुक by कविराजगिरि. कर्यपस्शृति quoted in हेमाद्रि, माधव, विज्ञानेश्वर and मदनपारिजात. कदयपोत्तरसहिता. Seater or स्डृतिशखर कस्तूरि- कास्यपान्रदान. फकण्डेभ्बरी. Teer quoted by हेमाद्रि, शघु० in मटलमासतच्व, नाद्मय्ख. TSH TTY Ray, रदकश्ह्यपरिशिष्ट m. .03.- केकि 2५ | , षध 527 काठक by लोगाकषि (ed. by Dr, Caland in D, A. V. College series, Lahore 1925, with extracts from three com, ). C. ( भाष्य ) by देवपाल, son of हरिपालभद्ु- C, विषरण by आदित्यदहोन. C पद्धति of ाह्यणबल, son of माधवाध्वयु. काठटकाह्िक by गङ्गाधर. काण्व quoted in आप. ध. सू. 1. 19. 7. कातीयग्रह्य- see पारस्करणग्रह्य ; 111, in सस्कारमधख. कात्यायनण्हयकारिका, कात्यायनगृह्यपरिशिष्ट. कात्यायनस्यृति 111. by याज्ञवल्क्य, विज्ञाने- mat, देम्राद्रि, माधव, See बृद्धकात्यायनः m, by रघूनन्दनः; pr. Jivananda Sm. part I pp. 603-644. This is also called कर्मप्रदीष and गोभिल- स्मृति in Anan, Sm. pp. 49-71. कादम्बरी, a com. on the दवेतनिणय by गोकुटनाथ, कामधे of stare ; vide sec, 71. क्रामधेज्ञु of यती, son of 2eaey, on wa, अर्थ, काम्र and मोक्ष. Compiled under विजयपाल son of atgqaqre in four स्तनऽ (on qe, अर्थं, काम, मोक्ष ) ; ms. in Stein’s cat, pp. 84 and 303 contains 283 verses on we and breaks off after 206 on अथ, कामधेनुदीपिका by नारायणः, commen- tator of aaeata ( vide wa V, 56, 80, 104 ) कामन्दकीयनीतिसार (pr. in B, 1. series by and Tri, ऽ, series) m, in बहाभारत, 828 area's काष्यालंकार, In 19 afs and 1087 verses. Some mss have 20 Wits. (^, by आत्माराम. C. उपाध्यायनिरपेक्षा (vide Ulwar cat. extract 295 which begins work with the first verse of erearest and derives कौटिल्य 25 कुटिध॑ट seat त लान्ति arated... awe... ङु Ret: ..., कुटिलानामपत्य कौटिल्यः विष्णगुप्तः ). C, by जयराम, (. जयमङ्गला by ergead (pr. in Tri. S. series ), C, aaserat by वरदराज. कामरूपनिबन्ध quoted by रघुनन्दन in मलमासतचव and by कमलाकर. कामरूपयाग्रापद्धति by ह्िरामष्ामन्‌ in ten qa@qgs, कामिक m. by हेमाद्रि, कालमाधष, aee- प्रसाद, नि. सि. काम्यकमकमला. काम्यसामान्यप्रयागरत्न. कायस्थक्षचियत्वद्रमदलनङुटार by लक्मी- नारायणपण्डित. कायस्यतच्त्व. कायस्थधर्मदीष or -प्रकाश by विभ्बेभ्बर alias गागाभद्र ( composed about 1674 A. D, ). कायस्थनिणंय. 7यस्थपद्धति by विश्वेश्वर, Printed at Bombay in 1873. Same as कायस्थ- धर्मदीष, Baroda ©, 1, ms, No. 9670 is dated स्वत्‌ 1727 (1670 71 A. D. ), errr Pare. History of Dharmatistra कायस्थोत्पत्ति by गङ्गाधर. BOTTA ae कारिका by अनन्तदेव. कारिकाटीका (ay) by माधव, कारिकामसरी by कनकसभापति, son of वैयनाथ, of aires. C, प्रयोगादौ by author himself. कारिकासद्चच्चय. कातैवीयौज्चैनदीपदान by कमलाकर, son of रामरूष्ण. कातैदी्याञ्जनदीपदानपद्धति $ रघनाथ, son of विश्वामित्र. ` कातैवीयाज्जैनदीपदानपषद्धति by लक््मण- वैशिक, son of छष्ण. ` करा्निर्णयसंक्षेप on srg. BTU ATTA 111. by Vara, माधव, जीमूतवाहनः भिता०. कालकौष्ठदी mM. 10 दुर्गोत्सवषिवेक. कालकोश्ठदी by गोपालभद्रु, son of aft werag, who was a yng. M. by रधनन्दन, MAIGHS, कमलाकर ; Cal- lier than 1400 A, D, कालकौष्ठदी by नीलाम्बर, son of गदाधर, author of कासार ; 11. in gf कोष्ठवी of गोविन्दानन्द्‌. कालशुणोलतर 111. in हाग्तिभशख, कालचन्तरिका by serrate, कालचखन्दरिका by पाण्डुरङ्ग AAT कालचिन्तामणि m, in छद्धिकौषदी of भोकिन्वानन्द्‌ (so earlier than 1500 A. D. ), कातस्वविवेचन by eyarang styled सज्राद्स्थपति, son of मटमाधव ( an ललिता), son of agaaeat. His _ brother was \@>aaid. Compose in संवत्‌ 1677 1.6. 1620 A.D. deat, ‘with 1@s, मास, अधिकमास List of works on Dharmasastra कालतस्वगिषेचनसारसंग्रह 01 -सारद्धार । (based on विवेचन ) by srequz, son of बालकृष्ण and pupil of परीमांसक खण्डदेष, About 1700 A.D. काटतच्वार्णव. (. शामप्रकाहा by रामदेव. कालर्तरङ्ग first part of स्यृत्य्थसामर by छलारिशर्सिह. कालदानपखति कालविवाकर by चन्द्रचूडदीक्षित. कालदीप 111. in संस्कारमयूख and चा्सिह- ware ( सस्कारसार ). Earlier than 1500 A. D, C, m. in प्रयोगपारिजात of ante. areare of ante wera. कालनिरूयण by वेयनाथ. कालनिणेय by आदित्यभट erage. कालनिर्णय by गोषपालन्यायपथ्वानन. कालनिर्णय by तोटकाचा्य. फालनिणैय (wy) by दामोदर. कालनिणय by नारायणम ( ? probably Same as कालनि्णंयसंयहणश्लोकािषरण). फालनिणंय (संक्षिप्त) by wari ( Baroda 0.1. No, 5373). कालनिणय by माधव (called काल- माधषीय ). Pr. in 2. L series and Ch. S. series, ^ by मिभमोहनतकःतिलक, son of RNS ; written 10 संबत्‌ 1670 ( सष्निरसेन्दुमितेब्दे ) ie 1614 A.D. (D. ¢. No, 264 of 1886-92), ^. कालनिणेयसग्रहश्लेकथिवरण — by नारायणमभद्रु, son of राननेश्वर, ^. कारमापबच्यान्दकि by मथुरानाथ श्रू, H, D, 67. §29 C, atfrat-vide कालनिणयदीपिका of रामनचन्द्राचायं below. C. by धरणीधर. C. लक्ष्मी by टक्ष्मीदेवी, wife of da- नाथ पायगुण्ड. कालनिर्णय from परिहोषखण्ड of हेमाद्रि. कालनिणयकारिका (130 कारिकाऽ of माधवाचायै taken from कालमाधष). C. ano. (N. vol. X. pp. 239- 240 ), C. by वेयनाथ ( Stein’s cat. p.85), son of रम्वन्द्र. कालनिर्णयकोतुक, 2 part of हारिवहा- बिलास of नः५।०उत, कालनिचयचन्द्रप.ा by aE, son of महादे; surnamed ete. About 1660, He was daughters’s son of ween, father of कमलाकर. (2) by सीतारामचन्द्र of कोण्डिन्यगोत्र, son of श्रीधमभद् and grea and grandson of aig. BIBANTaa by कारनाथमट also called श्ित्रानन्दनाथ, son of जयराम- We and grandson of शिवराममभदटु and pupil of अनन्त, काठनिणेयदीपिक। by छष्णमभदु. कालनिणेयदौपिका ४ ८०. on माधवीय. कालनिणय by रामचन्द्राचाये, son of ङष्णाचा्ं and great-grandson of अनन्ताचायं and pupil of qarge- गोपाल, About 1400 A.D. He WIOtE Wise Bal C. विवरण by his son ae; ms. dated 1548 .7.; m. in बूर्सिहप्रसाद्‌, This gives a detailed pedigree of the हेष family ( Baroda ©, I, 530 Ms. No, 10410, which says if Was composed in Sake 1331 शाङ्ककालानलविभ्वसंमिते विरोधिवपे).. ८. रामप्रकाहा by राघवेन्द्र, compos- ed by order of छृषारामचपति, C, by सय॑पण्डित. काटनिणैयपरकाष्ठा by weraer, son of विल and grandson of ब्ालकृष्ण- तत्सत्‌. His mother was daughter of twaraae, author of कलतच्व- विवेचन, So about 1670 a,D. Baroda O. I, No. 8455 is dated Sake 1603 माघ ( February 1682 A. D. ). क(लनिरणवसंकषिप by waif, son of लक्ष्मीधर ; based on हेमाद्रिऽ work, काठनिणयसार by दल्पतिराज ( part of afiresara ); sec. 99. क{लनिभयसिद्धान्त in 118 verses by महदेवविद्‌ son of erara; based on prose materials collected by wu, son of जयराम, in वेलावटयुर near modern Sihor ; composed in 1709 Waa, 1. ९, 1652-53 ^. D, in the city of Bhuja ( modern Bhuj ), Vide 70. C, Ms, No. 275 of 1887-91, C. by same ; composed in xa 1710, ` कालनिणयसौल्य 0 समयनिणैयसोख्य ( part of टोडरानन्व्‌ ). ाटनिणयावबोध by अनन्तदेषज्ञ, काठप्रदीप m. in प्रयोगपारिजात of दसि. छालप्रदीप by विव्यं. कालमाष्यनिणेय by गोरीनाथं चक्रवतिनं ( Baroda 0. 1, 10260}. History of Dharmaéistra कालमास्कर by शाभ्चनाथमि9 ( Baroda 0.1. 10155 ). कालभेद. कालमयूख of समयमगख of नीलकण्ठ ; sec, 107. काटमाधब ( pr. Kashi 5, series and ए, I. series). Vide कालनिणेय above. काटमाधवकारिका OF SYRIA: C, by वैयनाथसूरि, son of रामचन्द्र- तत्सत्‌, son of विल. Ulwar cat. No. 1293. काटमार्तण्ड by ऊष्णमित्राचायै, son of रामसेवक and grandson of देवीद्त- We. फाटविधान "1. नन्दपण्डित कालविधानं of भीधर. काटविधानपखति of श्रीधर. काटविषेक by जीमतवाहन (B. 1. series). Vide sec. 78; m. by चरसि, रघुनन्दन and कमलाकर ° कालषिवेचनसारसग्रह by हाम्धमदरु. काठसर्षस्व of छृष्णभिभ्र of the grr गोजर. कालसार of गधाधर, son of नीलाम्बर and जानकी and nephew of हल- धर who was guru of the quecn of हरे्ष्णदूपति ; pr. in B. I. series. Between 1450-1500 A. D. Men- tions कालमाधवीय, कालाव, OAT कालसिद्धान्त or सिद्धान्तनिणय by चन्र wg, son of उमापति or उमणमद्रः son of qarag, surnamed Later than 1550 A. D. rarest 0 कारछनिणय by आविव्यः कविबह्धम of गर्गगो्र, pupil of fart in आद्धकल्यलता of Last of works on Dharmatastra श्वराचायं ; ms. dated संवत्‌ 1581, quoted by efig, orgreara, रघु- arya, कालमाधद, वुर्गोत्सिषविवेक ; composed between 1200-1325 A.D., 25 it mentions tafa- वन्दरिका, स्छृतिम्टाणव, विश्वाक्ष, erarga Cand (^. उज्ज्वला ) by वेङ्कट - थज्वन्‌, one of whose four bro- thers was यहुयज्वन्‌,. (1) (pr. at Madras in Telugu and Grantha characters) Hultzsch R. I. p. 72. (2) by घ॒रूभद्रुलक्ष्मीनरसिंह and com. by author; pr. at Madras in 1880. कालावलि 11. 10 अद्धुतसागर. कालिकार्चनषद्धति. कालिकाचैनघदीष m. in अहल्याकामधेनु. काटिकाचैनसंहिता 7. in अहल्याकामपेसु. कालिकाचोदीपिका. कालोत्तर 171. in हेमादि, भलभासतसरव of रप्र ०; seeins to be the Tantric work of that name. काल्ययेनवन्तिका by नीलकमल लाहाष्टी; pr. at Murshidabad, 1877-79, in Bengali characters. कारीखण्डकथाकिलि by wares. कारीतत्व by cgartaraveart. कारीतततदीषिका by प्रभाकर ( 15 it the Same as oafe above ? ). फारीततत्वप्रकाहिका or कारीसारोद्धार by रछनाथेन््रहिषयोगिन्र॒ ( Stein’s cat. pp. 86, 303 ), Divided into seras. Probably the same as Breer above. काशीपकरण ( from the जिस्थलीसेतु ). 531 काहीष्रकाहा by नन्दषण्डित. See 104, का्ञीमरणद्धक्तिवि्ार by नारायणमटु. कारीमाहात्म्यकोष्ठवा by रष्टनाथदास, काहीक्तिप्रकाशिका | काशीखतिमोक्षानेणय OF कोरोमेोक्षनिणय by geararz. ereiraaarenaore by विश्वनाथाचय. कारीरहस्यप्रकाङा, by भदूनारायण, son of राम, son of नारायण, composed at राजनगर by order of कामदब. काहयपधमशाख-४1५९ sec. 19 ( Vide I. O, cat. vol. IIT. p. 384 No.1317), कीतिचन्द्रोदय by दामोदग्पण्डित under the patronage of egeag in the reign of Akbar ( latter half of 16th century ). AAA वातत . erasers Of तिष्णहामन्‌ ; vide under समयप्रकाहा (1. O. cat. p. 538 No. 1682 ). gusecran of माधवष्ह्क, son of क्रक, son of व्यासनाशरयण ; composed in 1577 Sake (1655-56 A. D. ). BBRAS cat. p. 138. He was Sareqararny of the कादयपगोच्र, mentions कुण्डतत्तवप्रदीप, कुण्ड- शिरोमणि, कुण्ड सिद्दि, विश्वनाथ ; pr. at Benares in 1879 ^. ४. C. by author. कुण्डकल्पलता by givers, son of पुरु- era, son of शमद्कष्ण, He was pupil of रमपण्डित, father of नन्द्‌- पण्डित. About 1600 A. D. करुण्डकारिका by भदुलक्ष्मीधर. कुण्डकोषदी OF कुण्डमण्डपकोष्ठदी in 103 verses of fasqara, 501 of greg. 592 ~ He is different from विश्वनाथ, a. of कछुषण्डरत्नाकर ; between 1520- 1600 A. D., as m. in मण्डपङुण्ड- fate and as he mentions मरदमरत्न and रूपनारायण. ( by author. कुण्डकाशचक्षा by शिषसूरि son of square ( महाजन ). (~. guerare by same. Vide Hultzsch’s Report No. III. p. V. and p.80; mentions कास्तुभ, नपर, फुण्डसिद्धि and weary. Later than 1680 A. D. कुण्डगणपात. कुण्ड चमत्छति. C. by वासुदेव of the महाजन family, son of fSrrafx, son of Sarde. छुण्डतत्तपरकाहा 01 -प्रकादिका by tear. नन्दी. कुण्डतच्छप्रदीप by बलभद्रसुरि se, son of स्थावर of वत्सगोत्र ; compos- ed at स्तम्भती्थ ( Khambayat ) in 1623 A.D. Has 164 verses. C. by author composed in 1632 a. pv. Vide D. C. Ms. No. 204 of 1884-87, कुण्ड दिक्पाल by बाबाजी षाद्धे. C. by author Eve निमाणश्छोक by रामवाज्ञपेय, an in- habitant of नभिषारण्य ; composed In संवत्‌ 1506 1. €. 1449-50 A. 7 C. by author कुण्डनिमाणश्चोकदीपिका by मणिराम- दीक्षित कुण्डपद्धति of नागोजिभदु. History of Dharmattstra फुण्डपरिमाण ano. ( BBRAS aat, p. 138 ). कुण्डपरकादा by sexta, son of नारायण of ert family (from the प्रतापनारसिह ). Vide Ulwar cat. ` extract 299. About 170 A. D, guend in 21 verses by agree राजगुरु, son of काहजिद्ाडव. C. by same ; quotes कामिक करण्डयप्रदीप by महादेव राजगुरु, son of काटह्जित्‌ and teacher of हेवतराज (Haibatrao ) in 20 fine verses in grgeramited, स्रग्धरा and AIGTE C, by author कुण्डधबन्ध by कालिदास, son of बलभद्र in 73 verses. Composed in gake 1544 (1632 ^. 0.) D,C. Ms. No, 42 of 1882-83. कुण्ड मास्कर vide कुण्डोदयोतदशन. ुण्डमण्डप by वचस्पति. कुण्डमण्डपकाशदी vide कण्डकाष्ठदी by दिवसरि. छुण्डमण्डपचन्द्रिका by agate, son of विश्वनाथ. छुण्डमण्डपदपण by नारायण, son of अनन्त ; composed in sake 1500 1578 ^. 7, ; in 49 शोकः written at ararata, while his प्रपितामह dwelt at मणोरग्राम. C. मनोरमा by agraz, son of author. कुण्डंमण्डपनिर्णय from परहरामपद्धति कुण्डमण्डपनिर्णंय by नीलकण्ठ, son of हाङ्करभहु ( 91610) p 86 ) List of works on Dharmatastra कुण्डमण्डपषद्धति, कुण्डमण्डपमण्डनप्रकारिका by नरहरिभटु surnamed सप्तर्षि, 26161501 ( Ul- war cat. extract No. 300) wrong- ly says that the work is called ware. C. by author. कण्डमण्डपलक्षण (same as कण्डनिमाण- श्लोक above) of रामबाजयेयी, son of सर्थवास ; composed in संवत्‌ 1506 ( 1449-50 A. D. ) at the order of the king of रतनपुर, In 74 श्ोकऽ, C. by same. कण्डमण्डपविधान by अनन्तभदु. छण्डमण्डपविधान by नीलकण्ठ, कुण्डमण्डपविधि by केश्ाश्रभटु, son of गोपालदीकषित. इुण्डमण्डपविधि by agit जडे. ुण्डमण्डपविधि by रामवाजपेयी ( 710- bably same as कुण्डमण्डपलश्चण above), कुण्डमण्डपविधि by लक्ष्मण देरिकेन्द्र. छण्डमण्डपसग्रह by maser. ुण्डमण्डषसिदि by नीलकण्ठ. छण्डमण्डपसिदि or कुण्डसिदि by विले दीक्षित, son of ब्बहममैन्‌ of San- gamner (in Ahmednagar Dis- trict) of the एृष्णाजिगोज्च ; com- posed in Sake 1541 ( शशियुगतिथि- mea ) 7. ९, 1619-20 ^. 2. Vide BBRAS cat. p. 141. C. by same; pr. at Bombay in 1892. ^. by राम. $ ण्डमण्ड़पहोमविधि, 658 कुण्डमरीखिमाला by विष्णु, Based on the gueresfer of राभ, कुण्डमार्तण्ड of गोबिन्ददैवज्ञ, son of गवाधर of भाध्यन्दिनिश्ाखा-11५ गोतध- atx; composed at Junnar in 1691-92 A. D. in 71 verses, C. प्रभा by अनन्त, son of सिद्धेश्वरः residing at ograwa (Pali iu Bhor State ), D.C. Ms, No. 43 of A 1882-83. Composed in 1693 A. D, कुण्डमातेण्ड of राम्रवाजपेयी, Probably SAMC 25 कुण्डमण्डषलक्षण, कुण्डस्दङ्गः by गोपाल ( Ulwar cat. No. 1303 and extract 301 ) करण्डरन््रना, C. कुण्डरचनारीति by areafe son of हेष- wz. कुण्डरत्नाकर of विश्वनाथं द्विवेदिन्‌, son of श्रीपति, son of जगन्नाथ } quotes कुण्डारुति of रामाजपेयी and is quoted in क्ण्डमण्डपसिद्धि of बिह; flourished between 1450-1635 A.D. In 84 verses. C. by विश्वनाथ (the author ). कण्डरत्नावलि by रामचन्द्र जडे, son of geor alias Baba ; composed in Sake 1790. Pr. at Nir. P. कृण्डलक्षण by राम नेमिषारण्यवासिन्‌. Probably same as कुष्डनिमाण- श्लोक above. कुण्डलक्ष्मविषृति of राम, son of सरयवास ( श्वेव in Stein’s cat. p. 186 ) ; same as कुण्डनिमोणश्चोकटीका and above; m. in आचारमपूख. About 1449 A. D, Svetware from qeqarc. कुण्डविधान by विश्वनाथ . कश्डशिरोमणि 7. in छुण्डकल्यद्रम, ‘Earlier than 1640 A. D. कुण्डभ्सोकदीपिका of रामचन्द्र ; m. in भरतापनारर्सिह ( getsrerer ): कण्डभ्छोकथकाशिका by रामचरण. हण्ड साधनविधि, कुष्डसिद्धि vide कुण्डमण्डपसिद्धि above, कुण्डसिचि by विन्विभ्वरभदु. कृष्डसिचि by रामभदु. कुण्डारूति by रामवाजपेयिन्‌ नेमिषस्थ, son of gaara; in 1449 A. D. (at bidding of prince werqex of रत्नपुर ). Probably same as कुण्डनिमाणभ्लोकविन्रति above. C. by author. gvere by छष्णाचार्य. Gree by ाङ्करभदु son of नीलकण्ठ of the qqyz family ; pr. at Rat- nagiri in 1873, C. मरीचिमाला by रघुबीर, son of विष्ठल who was author of gu¢g- मण्डवसिद्धि ; pr. at Bombay in 1902. He wrote ggtater in 1635-36 A. D. कृष्डाकंमणिदीपिका by बरूभद्रवरि. C. by author. हृण्डाणव by भधर eitagtirs, son of sfrqq, son of नागेहां ; ms, copied in Sake 1661 ( 1739 A. D. ). हृण्डोदभि in 9 are verses by रामचन्द्र, हृण्डेदयोत by नीलकण्टर, son of शङ्कर- हु, Hidory of Dharmasistra C. guearest by शङ्कर, son of the author, छुण्डोदयोतददीन by अनम्तदेष. कुण्डोदयोतव्हांन alias करण्ड भास्कर of हाङ्करभदु, son of नीलकण्ठ ; same as com. on कुष्डोद्योत , composed in 1671 A. D. gytreatt 171. in अपराकं, कालबिषेक of जीशतवाहन, Gert. कुमारतन्ध, of the son of qrquy; m. in मदनरत्न ( शान्त्युदयोत ). कुमारस्य॒ति m. in निताक्षरा, eae, MUG [कव तत्त्व ुरुक्षेव्रती्थनिणय by रामचन्द्र. कुरुक्षे्प्रदीप by वनमालिमिभ्, alias scorers, son Of मरहेहामिश्र and disciple of भङ्धोजिदीक्षित ; about 1650 A. D. $ुरुशषेत्रपदीप 0" क्षे्रमाहात्म्य by भाधवा- चायं. कुरु्ेश्ररत्नाकर by शङ्कर. कुरुकेजालुकमणिका of हरिगिरि. कुशकण्डिका by बंहीधर. हूपपति्ा. दष्माण्डहोम, हष्माण्ड्टोमप्योग. कृचुद्धग्वान्त्रायणलक्षण छ च्छ९द्ण. रुणश।विद्धप्रबोधिनीपखति by शमचन्दरः son of बिष्छु (Baroda O. I. 10629 ). छृतिवत्सर by भणिरामदीक्षित. ऊतिसारसष्ठच्चयं by अदृतनाथमिध्र. छत्यकल्पतरु alias कल्यतर by ठक्मीधर ; vide sec, 77. List of worka @ Dharn-adasira कत्यकत्पदरम by गदाधरः m. by arererfy- भिश्च. Earlier than rsoo ^. p. हत्यकल्यलता Of बाचखस्यति ; m. by रघु- नन्दन In मलमासतस्व. छत्यकालविनिर्णय of भीनाथ, son of भ्रीकराचार्य; vide under छत्यत्ार्णव. हत्यकोशुवी vide sec. ror on गोषिन्दा- नन्व्‌. It is this that is m. in मल- भासतत्त्व Of Tye. छृत्यकोौषठदी by गोपीनाथमिभ. रत्यकोष्ठदी by जगदानन्द. He men- tions ह्ुचिदीपिका. छत्यकोष्ठवी by trarerantertgrart (Baroda O. I. No. rors2 on एकोद्िभ्रादध portion of it ). रत्यचन्द्रिका by रामचन्द्र चक्रवर्तिन्‌. erate by रुद्रधर महामहोपाध्याय, pupil of चण्डेन्वर (a calendar of fasts and feasts enjoined in the eqias and the rites appropriate to them ). About 1360-1400 A. ४. छत्याचेन्तामाणि by चण्डेभ्र ; 111. in his ग्रहस्थरत्नाकर } vide sec. 90, Deals with anntefe, गोचर, वेधष्ठदधि, VIA, करण, TAIT, wea, अधि- भासः, Tabata and other UES, भृलरान्ति, षषठिकापूजा, शनैश्नरचार, सकरान्ति, TTS. Saree of बाचस्पति ; sec. 98. छेत्यचेन्तामाणि by rem era, son of fare. In five प्रकाहाऽ for सामवेद followers, Based on गोमिरयुद्य, deals with परिभाषा, बृदिभाखः, गणेशप्रजा,पश्चमहायज्ञ,भष्टका, संस्कारः, Stein’s cat. (Intro. p. XV and p. 86) gives the date of composition 888 as Sake 1562 (1640-41 ^. D. ); but B. O. cat. vol. I, No. 72 and JBORS. for 1927 parts I-IV 2. IX give 1500 ake (1578-79 ^. 9. ) as the date. छृत्यततत्व of tye. छृत्यतत्तव 21125 प्रयोगसार of ऊष्णदेव TTA TET. छत्यतत्वाणव alias छत्यकालविनिर्णय of भरीनाथ, son of sfteqrard ; 111. in gihgerer and प्रायभ्रित्ततत्त्व, नि. सि, रामप्रकाहा and quotes महार्णव, About 1475-1525 ^. ४. छृत्यदुर्पण of आनन्दहार्मा, son of रानन- रामौ ; 11. in his व्यवस्थादुर्पण. छृत्यदीप m. in देवदासघकाडश. ठत्यपर्तिमखरी by रामचन्द्र ८ pr. at Bombay in 1855.). Samay of छष्णभिच्राचा्य. छृत्यप्रदीप of serra (this is pro- bably the कत्यप्रवीप quoted in Viagra, wreaw, and other areas ) कत्यमरी by wgag, son of महादेव ewer; composed in sake 1640 पोषेमास 0" नित्य, नैमत्तिक, काम्य rites and observances in the 12 months of the year, on संक्रान्ति, eclipses &c. at wafy ( modern Satara ). N. vol, X. pp. 217-219, wares of बाचस्पतिभिश्र under हरिनारायणवेब of Mer. Deals with feasts and fasts on impor- tant days of the twelve months of the year; m. in आचारमरूखः; vide sec. 98. कत्यष्चक्तावली vide सत्छत्वह्वक्तावली, 536 छृत्यरत्न in. in नि. सि. भ्राद्धमग्रख. छृत्यरत्न of खण्डेराय, son of हरिभद्ु, son of नारायणभदु who was ho- noured by the king of विदर्भ. In 8 परकाहाऽ. Mentions हेमाद्रि, माध- बीय and his own सस्काररत्न. Baroda O, I. No. 1953. कृत्यरत्नाकर of चण्डेश्वर ; vide sec. 90 (pr. 8. I. series, 1921 ). ृत्यरत्नाकर of छवाकरस्‌रि. कृत्यरत्नावली of रामचन्द्र, son of free and grandson 01 बालकृष्ण तत्सत्‌, He was daughter's son of रच नाथ, author of कालतत्वनिवेखन. Composed in संवत्‌ 1705 ( 1648- 49 ^. D.). Deals with religious observances of तिथिऽ from प्रति- पवू and of months from Sst to फाल्गुन ; quotes हेमात्रि, मद्नरत्न, नारापणनहदु. ृत्यरत्नाकर of लक्ष्मीधर. त्यरत्नाकर of लोकनाथ. कृत्यराज्ञ a manual of ceremonial ob- servances for different months of the year compiled under prince gcorpex of aefiq about 1750 A. D. waltataradt. ecraaua of que 111. in ऊत्यरत्ना- कर 7. 499. Garant m. in वधमान and स्शृति- श््नाकर of Qarard. Earlier than 1400 A. D. हत्यसार by मधुरानाथं शुङ्क. छृत्यसारसष्ठ्चय of अश्तनाय sire ( pr. at Bombay ). History of Dharmatastra कृत्यसारसष्ठखय of बाथस्यति. करत्यापट्यषदीषिका, vide शान्तिकस्वचदीप Susy 111. in देवदासप्रकाहा. कृष्णपद्धति by radar. कष्णभक्तिकत्पबहली alias भक्तेमसरी or हरिभक्तिमसरी-- 2 work on sor worship in four parts ( क्खरीऽ ). कृष्णभद्वीय the same 25 कमैतस्वप्रदी- पिका ; 171. in प्रयोगरत्न of नारायणभद्‌ and in आद्धिकचन्दरिका, Earlier than 1500 A. D. कृष्णाखंनचन्द्रिका of रल्नपाणि, son of wattage. wSeuracregria by आनन्दतीर्थ, N. ( new series) vol. III. preface VI. केकावाणेव by sare. कोटचक्त on eight kinds of forts. कोटिषोभप्रयोग by शमङ्ष्ण, son of नारायणभदु. कोतुकचिन्तामणि by प्रतापरुद्रदेव. In three किऽ on magic charms and expedients for protecting the king’s person and for various other purposes, and on various startling, interesting experiments on women, plants, food. N. IX. pp. 189-190 and 7. C. Ms. No. 981 of 1887-91 and 1031 of 1884-87. About 1520 A. D. कोष्ठदीनिर्णय. कौरिकयद्ययभच in 14 अध्याय (ed. by Bloomfield, 1889 ). (^. by wgrfrag. C. by arfte. ©. by बाषदेव. List of works on Dharmasastra कोशिकण्ह्यस्‌ बपद्धति of केशव, son of सोमेश्वर, 501 of अनन्त ; com- posed at भोजपुर (Stein’s cat. p. 248 ). कोहिकचञजप्रयोगदीपिकाह्रत्ति. कोधिकस्शति 70. in निणेयदीपक, भस्क- रिभाष्य on गोतम, हेमाव्रि, माधव. कोषीतकिग्ह्यकारिका, फोषीतकियह्यसज्न (pr. in Ben. 9, series ), Vide under शाल्घायन- wads: maeata m. by the मिताक्षरा. क्रमदीपिका 1. in atearetact (p. 727 ) and देवप्रतिष्ठातत्तव ; before 1500 A. D. क्रमदीपिका (on worship of es) | by केङवाचायं in 8qzees. About 1500 A. D. C. by केडावभटुगोस्वामी. C. by गोविन्दभडु ( pr. in Ch. ऽ, series ), क्रमदीपिका by नित्यानन्द. क्रियाकाण्डशेखर 111. in gare. क्रियकेरवचान्द्रका. Rearend of भोविन्दानन्द्‌ (pr. in 8. I. series). Vide sec. ror. क्रियाकोष्ठदी of मथुरानाथ. क्रियानिबन्ध m. in ज्द्रकमलाकर. फ्रियापद्धति by विश्वनाथ. Describes ritcs from the day of death to सपिण्डीकरण for माध्यन्दिनीयऽ. D. C. Ms, No, 207 of 1884-87, क्रियापद्ति or कडश्वपरारश्ित्तादिपिखति N. X. p. 237. arate. प्र, ०. 68, | | । 537 क्रियाश्रय ( astrological work in re- lation to dharma) पा, by अपरा. क्रिथासार m, in नि. सि. and gue- मण्डपसिदधि, earlier than 1600 AD. TTA EAT. क्षयमासङृत्यनिणेय, क्षयमासनिणंय, क्षयमासससपंकार्याकायनिर्णय by परशुराम ( Stein’s cat, p. 87 ), क्षयमाससंसर्पकायांकायंनिणयखण्डन by परडाराम ( Steins’s cat, p, 87 ), क्षयमासादिविवेक of teramntrerat,son of गंगो टीसजीवेभ्वर ; composed dur- ing the reign of छजरसिंह of मिथिला. Gives a long list of authorities, such as वाचस्पति, वधमान, अनन्त- पण्डित, wea, स्यृतिविधेक &c. Vide N. vol. भण p. 44. क्षयाधिकमासविदति by गणेशदत्त. Sawer by क्षेमवर्भ॑न्‌ ; composed in Vikrama 1568 (1512 A. D.) at व्रीरसिहषुर, where he was go- vernor. 07 आचार, विष्णुपूजा, शिष- पुजा, दान, उत्स, Aa ; ms. copied in सवत्‌ 1582 (1526 ^. D.) when वीरसिहदे was ruler ( Stein’s cat. 9. 305, extract ). क्षौरनिणय or -द्पण by son of गङ्गाधर. wagterate ( Baroda O. I. 1142. ) खादिरगह्य ( pr. in Mysore ©. O. L. series and translated in S. B. E. vol. 29 ). Agrees closely with गोभिलग्रह्य C. of श्द्रस्कन्द्‌, son of नारायण re- siding at मखवाट (pr. in above.). aracaaranteet by बामन. 538 खेटपीठमाला by आपदेष. गङ्गगरत्यविवेक by बधमान for king राम- भत्रवेवं of मिथिला. 1450-1500 A. D. गङ्गगधरपद्छति by गङ्गाधर (Stein’s cat. p- 87) m. in wypeqaa (vide BBRAS cat. vol. II. p. 226). गङ्गगभक्तितरङ्गिणी by गणपति, son of धारेभ्वर, in 3 chapters. He says that king नान्य of मिथिला gave त्ति 70 his grandfather. N. vol. V. p. 183; ms. dated 1766 सवत्‌ ( I7IOA. D. ). गङ्गाभक्तितरङ्गिग्णी by agasrars. गङ्गमभक्तेपकारा by हरिनन्दन ; compos- ed in संवत्‌ 1852 ( 1795-96 ^. 7.). गङ्गगभक्तिरसोदय by हिवदत्तशमा. गङ्गनसत 72. in रघुनन्दन and ayara in TATE, गङ्गवाक्यावलि by बियापति, under the patronage of महादेवी विश्वासदेवी, wife of qarftre of fafarar, son of हिषरसिंह, son of देवसिह, son of भवसिंह; m. by गोविन्दनन्द and रघुनन्दन ( 111 प्रायश्ित्ततसतर ). About 1400-1450 A.D. Speaks of the advantage of visiting and wor- shipping the Ganges and _bath- ing therein. गणपदितत्यविवेक. गणेहापद्ति by सोमेश्वरपत्र ( Ulwar _ cat. No. 1309 ). गणेहाविमरदिनी m. in कुण्डमण्डपसिदि. गणेहाशान्ते. गदाधरपद्धति ( आचारसार ) pr. in B. 1. serics, History of Dharmasdastra Tages m. in प्रायश्ित्तमयूख. गयविष्छु 111. in नि. सि. गयव्यासं 1. by कालविवेक of जीमूल- वाहन. गन्धवपरयोग ( 5161115 cat. p. 87 ). गभस्तिस्यति m. by अपराकं, स्सृतिच ०, हेमाद्रि. गयावासनिबन्ध 11. by भदोजि. Earlier than 1600 ^. D. TaraeTarata- part of चिस्थलीसेतु of नारायणमदु. गयाचुष्ठानपद्धति alias गयापद्धति by रघन नाथ. Vide गयापद्धति. गयापद्धति by अनन्तदेव. गयापद्धति by रघुनाथ, son of माधव, son of paz; flourished between 1550-1625 A. D. गयापद्धतिदीपिका by प्रभाकर. गयाप्रकरण from the fede by नारायण. गयापकाह्ञ N. (1९५५ series) vol. I. p. 84. गयाप्रयोग by वाचस्पतिमिभ. गययान्नाप्रयोग by मणिरामदीक्षित. गयाक्राराणसीपद्धति. गयाश्राचपषद्धति. गयाभाद्धपद्धति by अनन्तदेव, son of उद्धवद्ठिषेदिन्‌ ( for वाजसनेयके ). गयाभादखपखति by रघनन्दन. Vide p. 417 above. NATATSELETN M. in मलमासततत्व. गग्राभरा्धविपि by aitgate (Baroda O. 1, 8688 ). Torararerate of वाचस्पति, The first verse specially mentions List of works on Dharmaégisira STEIN, गरुडदुराण and कत्पद्रक्ष (1. €. कल्पतरु ) as its authorities. गमैपद्धति OF Werqafe, manual of do- mestic rites ( for पारस्करगृह्य ) by स्थपतिगगं on स्थालीपाकषहोम, बलिदान, पिण्डपिह्यज्ञ, भवणाकम, शूलगव, Haq, मासभाद्ध, चूडाकरण, उपनयन, जह्मयारिव्रतानि, सीतायज्ञ, शालाकर्म; expressly states that it follows waged ; m.in गदाधरभाष्य on aneetger and in srgasq. I. O. ms, dated सवत्‌ 1575 i.e. 1519 A.D. (Vide I. 0. cat. p. 515 No. 1633 } गगंस्छति m. in स्टृतिचन्द्रिका, नित्याचार- प्रदीप, गभोधानादिवशसंस्कारपद्धति by रामदत्त, son of गणेभ्वर ; completed by स्वाभिटाञ्कर. About first half of 14th century. गभौधानादिषिवाहषोडरशाकर्मपद्धति attri- buted to ज्ञौनक ; mentions जयन्त. गागामहुषद्धति by गागाभदु. गाय्रीपद्धति of सूचणभदु. गायत्रीपुरभ्वरण or -पद्धति by राङ्कर, son of बहला, surnamed arr. He Wrote metrarrrersér in हके 1675 (1753 A.D. ). mraatersrcer by शिवराम. by areqatz. गायत्रीपर्वरणयन्द्रिका by काशिनाथ, son of and वाराणसी, sur- named wy. His guru was अनन्त. Ulwar cat. extract 618, by exurtz, son of नारायणमहु ; composed i 1757, A. D, ee a ee ~~ ~ 839 गायत्री पुरश्चरणाधिधि by अनन्तदेव, गायच्रीपुरश्चरणविधि by गीरवाणेन्द्रसरस्वती. गायच्रीपुरश्चरणधिधि from the गायत्री एरश्चरणचन्द्रिका ( vide Ulwar cat. extract 302 ) गायत्रीपुरश्चरणत्रिधि from हारदातिटक, गायतीभाष्यनिणय ( Ulwar cat. No. 1312 and extract 304 ). गार्गयिपद्धति 1. in श्राद्धतक्व (vol. I, p. 213). meat m. by विश्वरूप, frre, अप- राक, रसूतिच ०. गाहस्थ्यदीपिका by अयम्बक, pupil of THT. गाटवस्मृति 11. in स्मृतिच ०, काटमाधव. sora by चरिषारटिबालर्ष्ण, son of eraiteta of the महारङ्ग family. On प्रायश्ित्त. खणिसर्वस्व 111. 111 श्राद्धविवेक of रुद्रधर and in Rrra and aware. Farlier than 1.400 A. D. गूढदीपिका of श्रीनाथ आचाय m. in his HATA. गूढार्थदीपिका by वामदेव. Vide wa- -दीपिका; on doubtful points of rites and ceremonies. गहपतिधमे by विश्वेश्वर. गृहप्रतिष्ठातत्व. weateg by wares ( portion of संस्कारनिणंय ). गरहस्यषक्ताफल गृहस्थरत्नाकर by चण्डेभ्वर a large work in 589 pages (pr. in B. I, series, 1928) ; sec. 90, 540 CASAS. गह्यकारिका. (1) आश्वलायनीय by जयन्त. (2) बोधायनीय by कनकसभापति. (3) साम्रबेदीय by ware, son of विशाखमभदु. गद्यकारिका by ककं. गद्यकारिका by रेणुकः, composed in 1266 A. D. गृह्यकोस्दी m. in गोविन्दार्णव. गह्यतात्ययैदशन com. on आपस्तम्बग्रह्य- aa by gaatarara. WAIaAlgHA, summary of matters connected with domestic rites, according to मे्नायणीयगह्यसूञ. गष्यपद्ति. गृह्यपद्धति (यज्जःशाखीय) by भास्करदीक्षित Ulwar cat. extract 54. waren by रामेभ्वर. गु्यपद्धति by वाडदेवदीक्षि्, in three kandas on fears, अष्टका &c.; ms. copied in ज्ञके 1720. युह्यपरिशिष्ट- vide under बहूचग्हयपरि- दिष्ट, छन्दोगग््यपरिशिष्ट. गृ्यपरिशिष्ट by sarang. गुद्यपरिशिष्ट by वेकुण्ठनाथाचा्य. गृह्यप्रदीपकमाष्य, 2 00770. on हाद्घायन- waras, by नारापण. शृह्यभयोग ( आपस्तम्बीय ) by ब्ह्मषिया- तीथ. He quotes gastarary. Ul- war cat. extract 14. WTA बोधायनीय. वाजसनेय. History of Dharmasistra गह्यप्रायभ्रिित्तसन्न ( Hultzsch R. I. No. 637 ). गृद्यभाष्यसंग्रह 0 गह्यभाष्यार्थसंग्रह m. by हेमाद्रि. wera by वेविकिसावैमोम (1. ९. pro- bably बेङ्कृटेश् ) in 21 khandas ; deals with बाह्यसस्कारऽ like गभा- धान, पुंसवन, सीमन्तोक्नयन, sae, नामकरण, अन्ञप्राकनः, WETS, उप- नयन, चत्वारि षेवव्रतानि and देष- सस्कारऽ like qreagr. C. विदुधकण्ठश्षण or surge by वेङ्कटनाथ वेदिकसार्वेभौम, son of रङ्गनाथ of हारीतगोच्र. Hultzsch R. I. No. 603 and extract, p. 88. Refers to his पितृमेधसार and its टीका and आरहौचक्ातक and its व्याख्या. ग्रह्यसंग्रह 71. by जयराम in his भाष्य on पारस्करग्रह्य 111. 1. 1. ग्रह्यसूत्रपद्धति. गृह्यसूजप्रकाशिका (on पारस्करगर्य ) by विभ्वनाथ, son of afte. About 1600 A. D. गृ्याभ्रिसागर 21145 प्रयोगसार by नारा- यणभदु, son of लक्ष्मीधरभदु, sur- named sree ( ae); quotes रामाण्डारव्याख्या 011 yeearelt’s भाष्य On आपस्तम्ब, प्रयोगपारिजात, भ्रयोग- रत्न, निणयसिन्धु, भद्रोजिदीक्षितः परद्य- रामप्रताष and राचवाजवेयी and his own आद्धसागर, Later than 1650 A. D. गृह्यासंग्रह by गोभिलुश्र ( 77. in B. ।. series as appendix to mraz) ; m. in छत्यचिन्ता्रणि of शिवराम and in the छन्दोगकृषोत्सर्तस्व 2nd भठपतिष्ठातस्व. List of works on Dharmasastra C. by ererear, son of aretraz. एृह्यासंग्रहपरिशिष्ट m. in छन्दोगङ़षोत्सम- ava and edited by Bloomfield in ZDMG. vol. 35 pp. 537-548 in 209 verses and two प्रपाठकऽ. Begins अथातः सप्रवक्ष्यामि यदुक्तं पद्म योनिना | बाह्मणानां हिताथाय संस्कारा ठ भाषितम्‌ ।. Text same as in B. I. series. गृष्योक्तकमेपद्धति, गोच्निर्णय by केशवदेवज्ञ of नन्दिपुर in 21 श्लोक. (^. बाक्यष्यमाला by प्रभाकर Sas; mentions प्रषरम्रजयी of आओरीधर. गोत्रनिणंय by बालम्मदटु. atatauia by महादेव दैवज्ञ. गोत्रप्रवरं ( Bik. cat. p. 391 ) C. भास्कर. गोत्रधवर by sarex दैवज्ञ (probably same aS बाक्यष्पमाला, 2 com. on गोध्रप्रवरनिर्णय of Farz). गोतप्रवरकारिका. गोत्रपरबरखण्ड (taken from आपस्तम्ब- सूत्र ). गोप्रवरखण्ड ( taken from धम॑सिन्धु ). गाच्रपवरद्पण. गोघप्रवरदीप by विष्णपण्डित- गोघपरवरनिणीय by अनन्तदेव ( in संस्कार- कोस्तुभ, which is taken from his brother’s work ). गोतरभवरनिणय by आपदेव ( probably a mistake, as sftqq was a son of आषदेब ). Vide Baroda 0.1. No. 1870. ` गोश्रपवरनिर्णय by कमलाकर son of राभरष्ण (also styled भोजपवरदर्पण) 541 (pr. by Chentsalrao, Mysore 1900 ). First half of 17 century. गोन्नप्रवरनिणय by फेशाबदेवनज्ञ of नन्दि- ata ( ms. in Baroda 0. I. 8131 dated sy 1600 ). Each verse ends with the words करर्बन्तु वो मङ्गलम्‌. C. वाक्युष्पमाला by प्रभाकर देवज्ञ. गोत्रप्रवरनिणय by गोपीनाथ (Baroda (0.1. 11047}. गोच्रप्रवरानिणय by जीवदेव, son of आपष- देव and younger brother of अनन्तवेव, author of संस्कारकोस्तुभ ; quotes प्रवरमथरी, आश्वलायनस्- वृत्तिकार, arrange. About 1660- 1680 ; says मातुगोच्र is to be avoi- ded in marriage by माध्यन्दिनीयऽ alone as सत्याषाह says andas the farararz is to the same effect. िप्रवरानैर्णय by नागेहाभदु. Taree by नारायणम m. in गोत्रप्रवरनिणेय by भदोजि. गोप्रवरनिर्णय by पद्मनाभ ( Baroda 0). I. 8789 ). गो्रप्रवरनिणय by भदोजिदीक्षित \ first half of 17th century (also sty- led भोचप्रबरभास्कर ). गोच्रपवरनिणंय by ( अभिनव ) माधवा- चार्य. C. by नारायणाय, son of भण्ड्ूरि- wgarara ( 71. by Chentsalrao, Mysore, 1900 ). गोच्रपरवरनिणय by रघनाथ, son of माधव, son of श्मेश्वर्‌. 1550-1625 ^. D. गोच्रप्रवरनिणंय by विभ्वनाथदेव or विभ्वे- sqz, son of हाम्भुदेवर and younger brother of शमदेवं; finished at 542 Benares (J. 0. cat. vol. IIL p. 580), Composed in Sake 1506 ( Baroda O. I. 11055 ). In verse and prose. ateractrota by सदाराम. गोध्रप्रवरनिणयवाक्यदधाणैव by विभ्वनाथ- aq ( Baroda O. I. 9375 ). Different from मो्परघरनिणय, गोच्रप्रवरभास्कर by भटरोजि ; same as गोज्प्रवरनिणणय. गोत्रपरवरमसरसी by era, who also wrote घ्हूतंतत््व. ¢. by रामर ; quotes स्सृत्यथसार, प्रयोगपारिजात. गोत्रप्रवरमसरी 21125 परवरमशरी by पुरु- षोत्तमपण्डित (standard work on this subject ). Pr. by Chentsal- rao, Mysore, 1900. Under each of the eight original gotras quotes passages from आपस्तम्ब, आश्वला- यन, कात्यायन, बोधायन, मत्स्यपुराण, लोगाक्षि, सत्याषाढ ; mentions ya- स्वामी, कपदिंस्वामी, and शहदेवस्वामी aS भाष्यकारऽ ON BTA; 111. in नि. सि. afaerare, दत्तकर्मीमांसा. Earlier than 14404. D. गोत्रघ्रवरमशरी by aerate ; gives exhaustive enumeration of divi- sions and sub-divisions of go- tras; mentions ज्योतिर्निबन्ध, war- दीपिका, व्याख्याकार of बोधायन. ( Baroda O. I. No. 7657 ). गोव्रपरवरमणरीसारोद्धार by रकुःरदवल्ञः son of हिब. MATT by लक्ष्मणभदु, 501 शम कृष्णभदु and younger brother of कमलाकरभडु. About 1585-1630 A.D, History of Dharmasasira गोच्रधवरषिवेक ( from the धर्मप्रदीष by धनखय ). Trarareara vide पषराध्याय. गोघ्रपवरोश्चार (from the ओदीच्य- प्रकाहा ). गोत्राशत by रर्सिहपण्डित. गोदानविधिसग्रह by मधसदनगोस्वाभिन, son of watz. ararsetiver ( बोधायनीय ) 420 verses On various matters connected with religious observances, such as the measurement and con- struction of altars. गोपालपखति He is m. even by नारा- थण. विल than 1000 A. D. BBRAS. cat. vol. IL. p. 183. गोपालप्ूजाषद्धति by दिनकर, son of afirg belonging to zeny coun- try (on worship of ger ). I. 0. ms. (cat. p. 587) dated सदत्‌ 1664. गोपालरत्नाकर by गोपाल. मोपाटसिखान्त 11. 1) आचाररत्न. गोपालाचंनवन्दिका. गोपालाच॑नखन्दरिका by लक्ष्मीनाथ. मोमिलण्ह्यसूत्र (pr. in 2. I. 56110 and by Dr. Knauer and tr. in ऽ. B. E. vol. 30. ) C. ( भाष्य ) by भदरुनारायण son of महाबल; M. in भाद्धुत्व of रघुनन्दनः ms. copied in छ. @ 431 ( 1549-50 A. D. ). C. ( भाष्य ) by योधर, m. in दान- Prareredt of गोषिन्दानन्व and in भखतच्व. Earlier than 1500 A. 7. C, सरला m. in farfirerer and राद्धः avy. Earlier than 1500 A. D. List of works on Dharmasastra C. by सायण. C. gatftretraae by हिषराम, son of fasta (different from the author's कारिकार्थोधिनी ), About 1640 A. D. ( Stein’s cat. p. 86 ). C. पद्धति by अग्चिषहोचधिषिष्णु, of _ AQT. C. कारिका्थबोधिनी by शिवराम, son of frstrer ( Stein’s cat. p. r5 and p. 250 ) गोभिलपरिशिष्ट ( pr. in B. I. series with com. ) on सन्ध्यासुन्न, स्नान- wa and syrareeq. C. धकाङडा by नारायण ; m. by xy- नन्दन. गोभिलभाद्धद्ध्भाष्य 111. by रघ्ुनल्दन in तिथितश्व and भद्धतस्व. Probably same 25 भाष्य of महायशस्‌. गोभिलसध्यासत्र. TATRA me as कमप्रदीप of कोत्या- यन. Anan. Sm. pp. 49-71. मोमिलीपरिशिष्ट (on rites for propi- tiating the planets in their evil positions, on agate etc.) पि. vol. X. pp. 201-202. गोभिली यभा कल्प. | ^. ( भाष्य ) by महायहाम्‌, 11). in area of रषनन्दन. erase 15 probably sa:ne as astraz above. ^. by wearer 71. in srapeer of भवदेव ऽ enter. गोषधपायश्ितत. 543 mMaeqaTaaterae 11). in एकादक्षीतरव and मलमासतच्छ, So earlier than 1500 A. D. गोविन्दार्चनचन्दरिका (pr. at Bombay ), गोविन्दार्णव 21125 स्युतिसागर or qa तच्वावलोक by होषनृसिंह son of रामर चन्द्र ; compiled under the orders of महाराजाधिराज गोविन्दचन्द्र of Kasi, divided into six बीचिऽ ( waves) on संस्कार, आहिक, भद्ध, ate, काल and प्रायश्चित्त ; quotes कल्पतरु, ANG, माधवाचार्य, विभ्वेभ्वर- we and is quoted in the निर्णय- सिन्धु, आचाररत्न of लक्ष्मणभटु ; com- piled between 1400 and 1440 ५. 0. Vide Ulwar cat. extract, 304 for a long description of a town aroafaer near Benares, which is said to have surpassed Delhi and Kalpiand of the s§- वास्तक family of kings, of which गोविन्दच्चन्द्र was a scion and of the केष family. The Ulwar ms, ( verse 85 ) speaks of only five वीचिऽ (omitting प्रायश्चित्त ). It appears that हेषरृष्ण in his eyat- sxrefarerertor claims the मोबिन्दाणैव as his work. Vide Ind. Ant. for 1912 p. 248. गोडनिबन्ध m. in the पितृभक्ति of श्रीदत्त. गोडनिबन्धस्रागर 171. in नि. सि. ( 010- bably the श्राद्धसागर of कुलृकमट ) नौडभाद्धकोदी m. in निषीयसिन्द(90- bably the आद्धकौखदी of atfreqr- नन्द ). नोडसवत्सरप्रदीप 11. in the कालसारं of मदाधर. 844 गोडधीयाचिन्तामाण m. in कालसार of गदाधर. गोतमधर्मसूज्न- vide scc. $ ; pr. in B.S. series and Jivananda Sm. part II. 77. 403-434. C. by कुलमणि ope. C. ( भाष्य ) by weprta (pr. in Mysore G. O. L. series ). C. मिताक्षरा by हरदत्त ( 01. in Anan. ए.) गोतमस्मुति. अन्थराज 01 स्सृतिग्यन्थराज. ग्न्थविधानधमकुखम by agra. ग्रहणक्रियाक्रम. अहणनिर्णय (from the प्रयोगरत्न of नारायणमड ). THAT AAT. ग्रहदानप्रयोग ; refers to माधव. ग्रहम्खतिकक by माधव, son of कृष्णा- cara, of भारद्वाजगोन्र, Peterson’s sth Report p. 176. ग्रहमखपयोग (N. X. p. 200 ) ग्रहयज्ञकारिके! ग्हयज्ञतच्छ by रघुनन्दन. Mentions दीपिका. गहयज्ञदीपिका by सदाशिव दीक्षित. ग्रहयज्ञनिरूपण from संस्कारकोस्तुम of अनन्तदेव. गहयज्ञपद्ति. रहयज्ञप्रयोग. ग्रहयज्ञविधान by watery, son of नागदेषभदटु. गरहयागकोष्ठवी by रामरृष्णमट्ाचार्य, ग्रहयागप्रयोगतस्व 07 अहयागतचव by रघु- aeqa, son of इरिभदु ; pr. in Ben- History of Dharmasastra gali type by Sanskrit Sahitya- parishad, Calcutta (No. 10), This is over and ‘above his 28 तच्वऽ. ग्रहयोगरान्ति. ग्रहशान्ति according to हाङ्भायन and गोभिल. अहद्यान्तिपद्धति or बासिष्ठीहान्ति by गणपति रावल, son of हरिशङ्कर About 1686 ^. ग्रहहान्तिपद्धति by योद्ध्राज. ग्रहस्थापनपद्धति ( Peterson’s sth Re- port p. 98). ग्रामनि्णय or पातित्यग्रामनिणंय (from the सदयाप्रिखण्ड of the स्कन्दपुराण). घृतप्रदानरत्न by प्रेमनिधि. चक्रनारायणीय m. in बु्गौत्सवविवेक of शृलपाणि. So earlier than 1400. प्वक्रनारायणीयनिबन्ध 07 स्शृतिसारोद्धार by विश्वस्भरचितेदिन्‌ in 12 उद्धारः on सामान्यनिर्णय, एकमभक्तादिनिणेय, तिथिसामान्यनिर्णय, प्रतिपदादितिथिः निर्णय, चत, सक्रान्ति, भद्ध, आशोच, गभाधानादिकालनिणय, आधिक, व्यव हार, प्रायश्ित्त, under orders ol prince arrauag, son of भीमम ; Mentions प्रतापमा्तण्ड, होरिटस्थरति, रूपनारायणीय, अनन्तभदीय. 11181 half of r7th century; pr. in Ch. , S. series ण्डिकार्वनदीपिक्रा by eraltaranrg, 0 of जयरामभद, son of हिवरामभद्रः of the ag family ( Ulwar cat extract 620 ) quéfrerarn by कमलाकर, son of राम- ष्ण, List of works on Dharmaéastra खण्डीप्रयोग by नागोजिभटु. चण्डूकाभेबन्ध OF स्मारतकर्मालुष्टानक्रमविव- श्ण by महामात्य भीसन्राद aves. On daily duties, आख, मलमास, gateehfirta &c. ( Baroda O. 1. No. 296 dated सवत्‌ 1593 ). waratagiasrener by सदाशिव. agufeeaa (on the ceremonies to be performed on the fourth night after marriage ). aqaagret by water ( Baroda O. I. 1488 ). In fourteen verses on ATE: C. by महेश्वर, चतु्ब्गचिन्तामणि of Fare. Vide sec. 87 (pr. in B. I. series). Hultzsch R. I. No. 658 contains प्रायन्रित and erage, but they are most probably by a different author. wataartter or स्यति. Vide sec. 42. C, by waft ( 860. S. series pu- blishes on सस्कार and sz ). The I. O. cat. ms. p. 475 (on सस्कार- काण्ड only) ascribes it in the colophons to zara, son of नारायणमभदु. Mss. of ane, आचार and srafaweteg are known. (^. by रामचन्त्र, son of नारायण. चतुिहातिष्ठनिमतसार ( Baroda O. 1. 2247 and 10540 ). खतुषिदातिस्वृतिधर्मसारसष्ठद्यय. अतु्यत्वारिंशात्संस्काराः चन्द्नधेशुवानधमाण oF तत्य by वाचस्पति. Rites on the occasion of the first éraddha of a woman dying H. D. 69. 545 before her husband and son. Based on रत्नाकर. N. (new series) I. p. 100. ` चन्दनधेनूत्सर्गपद्धति by रत्ननाथ wera of wary. N. (new serics) I. p. 101 ; ms, dated 1765 A. D. चन्द्रकमलाकर, चन्द्रकालका. चन्द्रनिबन्ध quoted in निर्णयदीपक-. चन्द्रप्रकाश् 111. by नि. सि. नन्द्पण्डित'ऽ भ्राद्धकल्पटता, wetiet. Earlier than 1570 A. D. qrxera m. in निर्ण॑यदीपक. खन्द्रोदय m. in नि. सि. (probably प्रथ्वीचन्द्रोदय OF आचारव्वन्द्रोदय). चमत्काराचेन्तामणि by नारायणभद (pr. at Benarcs, 1870); m. in आचारः TUM, समयमगूख. C. भिताक्चरा C. अन्वयार्थदीपिका by धर्मभ्वर (pr. at Benares, 1870 ) C. by नारायण. चमत्काराचन्ताभाणि by राजर्षिभदु ; (5 probably the work so m. by नि, सि. ). It ison astrology. Earlier than 1550 A. D. C. (ms. dated संवत्‌ 1657 1. €. 1600-1601 A. D.). चमत्कारच्चिन्तामाणि by वेयनाथ. On सस्कछारऽ of two kinds, ब्राह्म ( arat- ara and others ) and वेष (such 25 पाकयज्ञ) on gees for गभौधान and other सस्कारऽ and on ap- arapeareer ; 2. C. No. 112 of 1895-1902 copied in संबह्‌ 1719. 546 चलाचलमार्तिप्रतिष्ा. warat (acc. to बोधायन ); vide B.B.R.A.S. cat. vol. II. p. 243. चलाग्वापद्धति by अनन्तदेष. खलटार्चापद्धति of नारायण based on शृ्य- परिशिष्ट, चिषिक्रमपद्धति, कालाद, एरुषार्थप्रबोध, दारदातिलक and बोप- aq. Later than 1450 A. 7, चाणक्यनीति (ed. by Kressler ) ध्वाणक्यनीति OF चाणक्यराजनीति OF चा- णक्यरातक. 10616 15 a बृद्धचाणक्य in 660 verses. There is a ay चाणक्यं also. खाणक्यनीतिदषण of गजानन. चाणक्यनीतिसारसंग्रह in 108 stanzas. It begins ‘aeragst प्रव्यामि चाणक्येन यथोदितम्‌ |’. aroreatrsta tiara ( pr. in Calcutta O. series No. 2, 1921 ). चाणक्यसत्तति. वाणक्यसारसग्रह. चाणक्यसू्र (pr. at end.of the कौटि- लीव in Dr. Sham Sastri’s edition). चातुराभम्यधमं by भीकण्डायन, चातुमास्यकरिका by गोपाल. SPREE COOLS ्ातुवण्यविचार by गङ्गादत्त. श्ातुषेण्वषिवरण by गङ्गाधर. चातुरवण्यंषिवेचन by धरणीधर. चातुर्वण्य्यवस्था by धरणीधर. व्यारायणीयगह्यपरिशिष्ट m. by हेमाद्रि. earequt by क्षेमेन्द्र (pr. in Kavya- 4 mala series ) eqreaay by भोजराज. भूडाकरणकेशान्तो. History of Dharmasastra चूडाकमं by quaften. चूडाकर्मप्रयोग.. खौलोपनयन from the विश्वप्रकाशहापद्धति of विभ्वनाथ. चोलोपनयनप्रयोग. छन्दोगकमोलष्ठानपद्धति by भषदेषभदु. Vide छन्दोगपसखति. छन्दोगण्ह्य. Vide गोभिलयगृह्य, C. (भाष्य ) 71. by हरदत्त in his अनाषिला. छन्दोगपद्धति by भवदेषभटु ; vide sec. 73- (~. सस्कारपदखधतिरहस्य of wary, composed in Sake 1544 (1622 A.D. ). छन्वोगपरिशिष्ट- same as करमप्रदीप. ( 11 is in verse ), छन्दोगपरिरिष्ट m. by हेमाद्रि. (^. 111. in विवेक of शव्रधर. C. प्रकाश by महामहोपाध्याय नारा- यण, son of गोण and grandson of उमापति, who was a great प्राभाकर and patronised by king जयपाल. Vide under कर्मप्रदीप. CC. arent by भ्रीनाथ, son of भ्राकराचाय. CC. by हरिराम. CC. by हरिहर ¢. by आक्षाधर or siraré, son of TRU. छन्दोगप्रायश्ि्त. DAMA: छन्दोगभाद्धतश्व by रघुनन्दन. C. by eraftera, son of राधाषहभः son Of शन्नृष्ण, Last of works on Dharmatisira उन्दोमभाखदीपिका by श्रीनाथ, son of after. उन्वोगा्वारषत्य 771. by रघुनन्दन. छन्दोगानीयाह्धिक by शिवराम, son of feara. (1. 0. cat. I. p. 95 ms. dated waa 1810 1. €. 1753-4 A. D. ). Composed about 1640. छन्दोगाह्धिक by गोबधंनदीश्षित, son of weftara (Baroda O. I. No. 1026). Ms. dated संवत्‌ 1860. छन्दोगाह्धिक by stat, m. by रघुनन्दन in आह्िकतच्व. छन्दोगादहिक by सदानन्द. छन्दोगाह्धिकपद्धति by रामरृष्ण न्निपाटिन्‌. उन्दोगाह्िकोद्धार of शाङ्कराभिभ, son of भवनाथभिभ. Vide under प्रायश्ित्त- प्रदीप. छन्दोपहारावाछि. छागलेयस्खृति 10. in मिताक्षरा, हेमाद्रिः माधवाचाय. जगद्रहलमा by भरीषह्लभाचायै of the भार- arity (in more than 24 THOS ). जगन्नाथकारिका 111. in गदाधर'ऽ भाष्य on पारस्करणग्ह्य. जगन्नाथप्रकारा by सूरमिश्र, composed under orders of ज्मन्नाथ, of 4. mboja family. Vide Mitra’s Notices vol. V p. rog for con- tents (the ms. was copied in सव्रत्‌ 1838 i.e. 1782-3 A.D. ) in ten प्रभाऽ Weaglrare by श्रीधर compiled under the patronage of prince 5847 ( महाठक्कर ) जटमल, younger bro- ther of raz, whowas son of बालचन्द्र, son of ge who was sole minister of the king of Delhi. The family was Man- dira from Kosala country and their capital was स्वणपरी. Deals With आचार, काल), भद्ध, संक्रान्ति, मलमास, संस्कार, आलोच and gfe. The date 11 theI.O. ms. is cor- rupt ानान्नबाणस्षिति (? रत्नाक्षबाण- क्षिति 1559) of the विक्रम era. About 1500 ^. D. Names काल- निर्णय, कालाद, प्ासाददीपिका- जनिदोषप्रतिकार-15. ( Baroda 0, I. No. 2365) dated 1565 संवत्‌ ( 1508-9 A. D. ). जन्मदिनर्‌त्यपद्धति. जन्मदिवसपूजापद्धति, जन्ममरणविवेक by बाचस्पति ( Baroda 0.1. No. 12774). On arate and श्रद्ध. जन्मा्टमीतर्व or जन्माष्टमीव्रततसव by रघुनन्दन. जन्भाष्टमीनिणय by विद्धलेभ्वर. saa 111. in निणंयसिन्धु. जयन्तकारिका जयन्तीनिणैय (on छष्णजन्माष्टमी ) by आनन्दतीर्थ जयन्तीनिणय by गोपालदेरिकः, pupil of गमाज्ुजयोगीन्द्र and son of आधेय SO. ज्ञयमाधवमानसोह्ास by जयसिहदेष of. गोरश्चपुर (modern Gorakhpur ) He was a devotee of नारायण ; deals with all religious acts 548 ( nitya, naimittika, and kamya ) about araxaq. The प्रशस्ति at the end of D.C. ms. No. 241 of A 1881-82 is by gare राजपण्डित ; ms, copied संब 1827 (177! A. D. ), जयरसिंहकल्पद्रम by रत्नाकर of the शाण्डिल्यो, son of षपण्डितभ्रीदेव- wz of Benares (extensive work in 900 pages pr. by Laksmivenka- teSvara Pressat Kalyan in 1925). A digest in 79 aes On काल, ma, भद्ध, शान etc. the first being on काल, compiled under the patronage of जयसिंह who per- formed ज्योतिष्टोम in उज्पिनी and 2150 पौण्डरीक. His city अम्बिका (Amber ) is also referred to. Composed in Vikrama 1770 - (713 A. D.). Gives genealogy as जयसिंह ( who brought Shivaji to Dell. )- शमरसिह-रुष्णसिह-विष्णु- सिह -जयसिह. Sometimes called श्रमोदयोत ( Ulwar cat. extract 305 ); pr. in Bombay, 1903. sanaaed ( निबन्ध ? ) m. in कृत्य- रत्नाकर of चण्डे्वर ( p. 166 ). जयाभिषेकपयोग by रघनाथ. जयाणंव m. by नि. सि. and by गदाधर in पारस्रणरह्यसूज्रभाष्य. Vide युख्‌- जयाणैव. ASATAT. जलाशयप्रतिष्ठा by argyforfersr. ज्टाशयारामोत्सगंषिधि OF -पद्धति. (1) by नारायणभदु, son of शामेभ्वर ; quotes रूपनारायण ; 1513-1575 A.D. ; 566, 103. History of Dharmatastra ( 2 ) by कमलाकर ; sec. 106. जटाहायोत्सगैपकाहा pr. at Ratnagarh ( 1893 A. D. ). जलाहायोत्सर्गतस्व of रदनन्दन ( pr. by Jivananda ). Sec. 102. जातकर्मन्‌ from the संस्कारभास्कर. srerearante by केशवभदु. जातकमेपद्धति by दामोदर. जातकमादिपालाङकमोन्त by arrows. sranceantatarora by frarira; N (new series ) II p. 55-56. जातिनिणय (Baroda O. 11003 ) On कायस्थऽ etc, जाविमाला ( part of रुद्रयामलतन्त्र ). जातिमाला ( vide N. vol. II. p. 151) on the origin of different Hindu castes. I. No. जातिमाला by सोमनाथ, son of gze and ञ्ापाम्बिका, surnamed सकलकल and inhabitant of sear. Divided into three parts in verse on लक्ष्मीनिन्दा, वैराग्य, पार्वतीस्तुति ; but contains nothing en चन्न 0 जातिऽ. D. C. Ms. No. 302 of 1884-86. जातिमाला (from qerererata ) ; Stein’s cat. p. 94. जातिषिषेक m. in हष्राचारशिरोमणि of Sraser and in जुसिहघ्रसाद. जातिविषेक by छृष्णागोविन्दु पण्डित. Part of a larger work callen ब्णा- अमधर्मदीपिका, जातिषिषेक by savas. जातिविषेक by नारायणम ( Baroda O. I. 11147) List of works on Dharmasisira जातिविवेक by पराहार. जआातिविवेक by र्नाथ. जातिषिवेक by बिभ्वनाथ ( N. vol. IX १. 179). Stein’s cat. calls it fteang ( p. 89). आतिषिषेक by विण्वेभ्वरभदु ( probably same as first part of कायस्थधमं- दीष ). avatars by द्यासगो्पीनाथकत्ि of afew, son of ज्ञाङ्ग्धर, grand- son of fieqara, of प्रत्यण्डषुर ( Paranda in Maharastra ?). In three ggras ; ms. ( 1. O. cat. vol. III p. 519 No. 1639) is dated fake 1564 ( 1642 A.D.). Peterson (in Ulwar cat.No.1323) says that it is part of faeqeurareg- are, which is quoted by Barf and he gives the father’s name as MATHS previously called farq- नाथ and grandfather as ‘ Sama- raja’. जातिषिषेकषातपश्च attributed to सायण. जातिविषेकसेग्ह by विश्वनाथ. जातिसाङ्कयं by शिषलाल age. जातिसाङ्क्यवाद्‌ by अनन्ताल्वार, जातिसाङ्क्यंषाव by वेणीराम शाकद्वीपिन्‌. जिकनीयनिबन्ध 111. in. दुरगोत्सषिचेकं of शूखणाणि and by SEE जीणो खारविधि (according to नरिविक्रम) On repairing temples, images of gods &c, N, vol. X. p. 271. ahresrerasy by नारायणभदु, son of रामिभ्वरभदु. जीवश्छरादधभ्रयोग by हौनक, 549 जीव्रतिपितककतैव्यनिर्णय by WISN, son of रङ्खोजिभदु. N. ( new series) vol, Il p. 64 (ms, dated संषत्‌ 1785 ). जीषत्पितककतेव्यनिणैय by बालकृष्ण पाय- गण्डे ( Baroda O. 1. Nos, 358 and 5549 ). जीवत्पिहककतेव्यनिणेय or-eafietq by रामरृष्णमडु, son of arrqerag, son of waz. About 1570-1590 A. D. जीवत्पिहककतेष्यसंचय by ऊष्णभदरु, जी वतिपित्कविभागव्यवस्था by मधुस्दन- गोस्वामिन्‌, son of व्रजराज. जीवत्पिहकविभागग्यवस्थासार by मधुसूदन गोस्वामिन्‌, son of व्रजराज. जीवव्पित्रकविभागव्यवस्था -सारसंग्रह- 20- ridgment of the above ms. ( Ulwar cat. No. 1324 ) copied in waq-1812 ( 1755-6 A. 0. ). जीवश्ाद्ध Aufrecht’s Leipzig cat. 611, sfafraer (ed. by Dr, Caland, Pan- jab Oriental Series 1922 ). (.. सुबोधिनी by श्रीनिवास ( extracts printed in above ). जेमिनिग्ह्यमन्तरवृत्ति. ज्ञातिभेदविषेक. ज्ञानभास्कर (in the form of a dialo- sue between ag and अरुण ). Divided into प्रकाङ्ऽ on grafiae, wa ९५; vide Bik. cat. p. 398. Burnell ( Tanjore ms. cat. p. 136 b) says that the author's name appears to be दिद्धनणि. Ba- roda O. I. 1136 isa part of it ( केप्रकाश on रोगाधिकार ) and ex- 550 tends over 10000 gw and No. | 10546 15 another in 14000 अथ, जानमाला by भद्रोत्प 10. in the qe- प्रदीप of भोज and in anfgeaes of wyarqa and in आचारमयख, शानरत्नाषलि m. in हेमात्रि, atevrars ( arvar ), कुण्डकोषठदी. Earlier than 1250 A. D. जञानाङ्कर by चूडामणि, son of राघवेन्तर- az, in four wages. ज्ञानानन्दतराङ्गिणी by sera on सस्कारऽ. ज्येष्ठाविधान. ज्योतिःफालकोष्ठदी 71. by रघुनन्दन. ज्योतिःसागर 7. in कासार of गदाधर, नि.सि. ञ्बोतिःसागरसार by water. ज्योतिःसागरसार by विद्यानिधि ; N. ( new series ) vol. I p. 134, ms. dated sake 1670 ( 1748 A. b.). ज्योतिःसार m. in wages and गोविन्वार्णष. ज्योतिःसारसग्रह 11. by रधुनन्वन in ज्योतिस्तकत्व and मदनपारिजात. ज्योतिःसारसगह by दयानन्द बियालङ्कगर. ज्योतिःसारसष्ठच्चय m. by रष्नन्दन. ज्योतिःसारसुण्वय by नन्व्‌, son of देष- ` हामेगु. ज्योतिरणंव 111. in गोषिन्वा्णव, सं. कौ. ज्योतिनिंबन्ध 17. in हृद्रकमलाकर and सस्कारमणख and शह्खिमपूख ज्योतिचसिंह m. in गोविन्वार्णव and चतु- विरातिमतव्याख्यान of wath. History of Dharmatastra ज्योतिषरतन m. in संस्छारभास्कर of सिद्धे- oat. ज्योतिषरत्न by केहावतकंपश्चानन N. ( new series ) II. ए. 58. ज्योतिषाणव om. by बुगोत्सवबिषेक of seats, by रघुनन्दन. warsrerer m. by प्रयोगरत्न of नारा- mores, नि. सि. गोविन्दाणेव. ज्योतिस्तष्व by रद्चनन्वन. टोडरषकाहा by रघ्रनन्दनमिश्र, under Raja Todaramalla. टोडरानन्वु vide sec. 104. इष्टिप्रताप by विभ्वनाथ under the patronage of Maharaja gfte. On the ritcs for every day of the year ; ms. written in Sake 1589 1. c. 1667-68 a. D. ( Burnell’s Tanjore cat. p. 136. ). इुण्डुपति m. in the अन्त्ये्टिपद्धति of नारायणमभटु, by शछनन्दन in भरादर्ततत्व (vol. I 2. 213) and in शुद्र कमलाकर ; earlier than 1525 A.D. तडागप्रतिषठा तडागाविषद्धति of टोडरमह् (part of टोडरानन्द ). तडागादिग्रतिष्ठापयति by weet उपाध्याय तडागादिप्रतिष्ठाबिधि by ayaa गो- स्वामी. तडागोत्सगंतस्व by रघुनन्दन. त्तवकौदुदी by गोषिन्दानन्वकषिकङ्क oars. Itis a com. on आ्रद्धविवेक of gxerarftr. त्तवकौस्तुभ by भटोजिदीक्षित ( Baroda 0. I. No. 376 ). Written at the bidding of Seat वेङ्कटेश. Dilates List of works on Dharmatastra on the question as to who should observes तन्जं rites, dis- courses on the inadvisability of तप्तह्वद्राधारण and लिङ्गधारण. तच्वदीप by savas, तत्त्वनिणेय by परक्षधरमिभ, son of महा- महोपाध्याय वटेभ्वर, Vide Mitra’s Notices vol. V. p. 155 for con- tents; ms. copied in Sake 1661. aeararer-vide हिवतत्वप्रकाशिका,. aeagwradt vide BBRAS cat. p. 217 No. 687, probably same as the next. C, vide BBRAS cat, p. 217 No, 687. awgwmrasr of नन्दूषण्डित vide sec, 10. Gives summary of his स्सृतिसिन्धु- C. arergat by araernt. C. आलश्षा by वेणीव्त. wera by कोनेरिभटु. तत््वसागर 111. by हेमाद्रि and रघुनन्दन in एकादक्षीतच्छ and तिथितच्व and In ARATE, तत्वसार 10. in भलमरासतनत्व of tye. तत्वसारसदहिता 111. by हेमा. तत्वातधर्शास्- vide स्यृतितत्वासृत, तत््वासृतसारोदधार by वधमान, An abridg-: ment of his स्सुतितखविषेकं or त्वासते divided into four कोक्षाऽ on आचार, भद्ध, whe and व्यवहार. Composed when king राम of मिथिला was reigning. Latter half of rsth century; mentions his दण्डविवेक in व्यवहारकोश, 551 तच्वार्थकोदी by मोविन्दानन्दकविकङ्क- णाचार्य, 23 com, on प्रायश्ित्त- विवेक of sent ( pr. $ Jiva- nanda). तत््वार्थदीप,. तन्जधकाश 111, by रघुनन्दन in आद्धिक- तस्व, तन्नसारपश्चरन्न. C. तन्त्रसारपरकारिः तत्त्ठद्राखण्डन by अष्यस्यदीक्षित (against the practice of branding the body with marks, as Qeurgs do). avgaraa or चक्रमीमांसा from स्थतिकोस्तुभ. त्तष्ठव्राविव्रावण by भास्करदीक्षित. तप्ष्चव्राचिषेक by हरिरायगोस्वानिन्‌ ( Baroda 0. I. 11575 ). तपंणचन्त्रिका by रामचरण. तारको पदेशात्यवस्था by असृतानन्द्ती्थ. तिथिकल्पदम by कल्याण, तिथिकोस्तुम or तिथिदीधितिकौस्तुभ of अनन्तदेव, son of आषदेव. तिथिचक्र by विश्वनाथ ; Baroda O. I, 8336 ). तिथिचन्त्रिका by वक्षधरमिभः.(8. 0). mss, cat. vol,[ No, 145; ms. copi- ed in छ. स. 345 i.e. 1464 A. D. faftratexer by हरिदत्तमिभ. तिथिचन्द्रोदय 111. in अहल्याकाप्रधेल. तिथितत्तव by रघ्रनन्दन. C. by काडीनाथ तकोलङ्कार. N. (new series ) I. p. 155 C, by काशीराम षाचस्पति. N, (new series ) II p. 71. | 86४ C, by रामब्वरण विथावाखस्यति ; N. ( new series ) II, p, 72. तिथितत्वाशन्तामाणि महेशाटक्कर ( pr. at Benares in 1887 ^. 7. ). तिथितस्वसर by orate. ferfergtur. तिथिदीधिति (part of स्सृतिकोस्तुभ of अनन्तदेव ). तिथिदीपिका by कारीनाथ, son of जय- areraz ( Baroda O. I. No. 10724), तिथिद्धेतनिणय ( or तिथिविषेक ) by ag- पाणि, Same as above. तिथिद्धेधप्रकरण alias तिथिविवेक by gre- पाणि, Names संवत्सरप्रदीप, स्मृति सष्ठख्यय. C. by आनाथहाभेन्‌, son of भीकर, तिथिनिणय from the कालमाधव, तिथिनिणेय by अनन्तभदर (Baroda O. I, No, -1o611 is dated सबत्‌ 1583 1. €. 1526-27 A. D. ). तिथिनि्णय by कमलाकर. तिथिनिणय by ara. तिथिनिणय by गोपाल. तिथिनिर्णय by trees ( Ul- war cat. No. 1326 ). Peterson is wrong in saying that he praises One STaQWAA. TAMA 15 here «we the incarnation of freur, identified with gye(Time) and ब्रह्म, तिथिनिणैय by qarerget. तिथिनिणेय by देषवासनिश्र. तिथिनिणीय by नामदेव, son of fara; based upon निणेयसिन्धु. History of Dharmatdstra तिथिनिणय by नागोजिभदु. तिथिनिणेय by नारायणमटु- तिथिनिर्णय by पक्षधरमिभ. तिथिनिणय by बालकृष्ण भारद्वाज. २८ lies on दहेन्नाद्वि, तिथिनिणय by भद्रोजि ( pr. at Benarcs and Bombay ) तिथिनिणेय by मथुरानाथ we. तिथिनिणेय by sere. तिथिनिणेय by माधष ( part of काल- frtrz ) तिथिनिणय by tyare (probably same 25 गाध्वभदु ). W. and K. cat. I p. 282 notes that रघुनाथ is written on title page of राघवः तिथिनिणैय. तिथिनिणेय by रमापति सिद्धान्त; N. (new series )I. p. 156 } composed in Sake 1633. तिथिनिषीय by राघबभद ; names निणेय- सिन्धु and नीलकण्ठ. So later than 1640 A. D. ; ms. copied in Sake 1681 ( 1766 ^, ०.2); pr. at Bombay in 1864. तिथिनि्णय of रामवन्कर, pupil of गोपाल, Baroda O. I. No. 1524. About 1400 A. D. C by aftrg, son of the author. Ms. dated संबत्‌ 1638 (1582 A.D.): विथिनिणय by रामधसाव. तिथिनिणय by वाच्वस्पति. तिथिनि्भेय by विष्व ; names हेमा माधव, चखमत्कारचिन्तामणि, राण THAT. List of works on Dharmatisiva तिथिनि्भैय by वेयनाथ (from चमत्कार- चिन्तामणि ). तिथिनिणेय by शिवानन्वभहुगोस्वामी (711 war cat, No. 1329 ). तिथिनिणेय by grange. तिथिनिणय by सिद्धलक्ष्मण. तिथिनिणय by दर्शन. तिथिनिणय from the ayanita of माधवाखाय. तिथिनिणीय from the स्सुत्थथंसार, तिथिनिणैयकारिका by निवासाय, son of गोकिन्धायं of the कौशिकमोच्, fafaftrotress by विश्वनाथ ( Baroda O. I. No. 8336 ). तिथिनिणयतच्व by शिवनन्दननाग. विथिनिणेयदीषिका by रामदेव, son of Rey. तिथिनिभयमातंण्ड by रष्णमिनत्राचा्य, तिथिनिणयसक्षिष or तिथिनिणय by भोजि, son of लक्ष्मीधर. तिथिनिभयसग्रह by रामखन्. A sum- mary of the fafafadrr of अनन्त- भहु. C. by सृरसिंह ( Baroda 0, I. ms. No. 1524 is dated qaq 1683). Later than 1400 A. D. तिथिनिणेयसथैसघ्ठश्चय. तिथिनिणयसार by मदंनपाक. Vide sec. 9३ तिथिनि्णयेन्दुदोखर by armen. तिथिनि्णयोद्धार 0 wyfenadre or -निणयोञधार by राधबमदु- Vide तिथि- निणेय above. Also called fafar- सारसगरह तिथिपक्मश by गङ्गगवास देविन्‌. # ०, 20, = तिथिभकाराभकाश्िका तिथिप्रदीवक by भदोजि, तिथिष्दीपिका by awe. Refers to विथारण्य. तिथिधवीपिका by रामसेवक-. तिथिमखरी of गणेहा, son of ज्ञानेश्वर, son of महादेष, son of लालभटु. तिथिरत्न by महादेष. तिथिरलनमाला by नीलकण्ठ, son of अनन्त, son of चिन्तामणि, तिथिवाक्यनिणंय--\४146 तिथिनिर्णय of नारायणमदु. तिथिषिबिक of शूलपाणि 7. in रष्ठनन्दनऽ तिथितत्व, ` C. तात्यर्यदीपिका by भीनाथ आचाये- चूडामणि, son of श्रीकर ; about 1475-1525 A.D. ति, (new series) vol. 1. pp. 73-74 ms. copied in I§12-13 A. D. तिथिव्यबस्थासंसेष. तिथिसंग्रह or तिथिनि्णंय by राघव. Vide above ( pr. in Bombay 1864 ). तिथिसग्रह ano. N. ( new series ) II. Pp. 75. | तिथिस्वरूप or सर्वतिथिस्वरूप by सुरेश्वर» तिथीन्दुशे खर by नागेशाभदु. तिथ्यकं by दिवाकर, son of महादेव, son of ब्राल्ृष्ण of भारद्ाजगोत ; author of आचाराकं ( both being parts of ध्म॑हालदधधानिधि ). About 1683 A. D. अलुक्रमणिका by his son Sqara. ` तिथ्य्कपवनिर्णय ( Baroda O. I. No, 5947). The author says that ATT TOE author of त्रयोग्रत was 554 the great-grand-father (प्रपितामह) of his mother. So author. flourished about 1650 A, ए. तिथ्यर्कप्रकाहा by दिवाकर (same as तिथ्यक above ? ). b : | तिथ्यावितत्त्वनिणेय by लोगाक्षि भास्कर तीधनिभेव or दरधय of यम ( Baroda O. I. ms, No, 5772 is dated 1605 संवत्‌ 1. €. 1548-9 A. D.). Mentions दीपिका, etat- दु, माधव 2110 निणयासूत. So later than 1400 A. D. तिथ्याविनिणय by भोपीनाथ, तिथ्यादिनिणेय 0 पद्मनाभ ( part of योशी- TATE ; 1115. copied in 1707 A. D. ) | तिथ्यादिविधिसंश्यह by unre तकंशिरो- माणि. N. ( new series ) vol. II. 0. 75- तिथ्यक्तेरत्नावली by हरिलारमिभ. तीर्थकमलाकर 2.15 सर्वतीर्थविधि of कन- लाकरभड, son of wager. Vide sec. 106 तीथकत्पलता by atgegw, son of ` अनन्तदेव तीर्थकत्पलता by नन्दपण्डित, Sec. 105, तीथकत्पलता by वाचस्पति. तीर्थंकाहिका m. by गङ्गाधर. तीर्थकोष्ठदी of शङ्कर, son of age; ` mentions तीथौचिन्तामणि. Same as तीर्थोयापनकौष्ठदी. तीर्थकोष्ठदी of सिखान्तथामीहामटराचार्थ, ती्थंचिन्तामणि by बाण्वस्पतिमिभ्, in , five eres (pr. in 2. I. series) ; m. in the afar of र्चुनन्वुन and in नि, नि. Vide sec. 98. History of Dha>matisira " तीथंतत्त्व or तीर्थयाजाविधितस्व of tye. This is over and above his eafa- तत्व in 28 ayes तीर्थदु्पण ( vide under कज्ञुप्रयोग ) 01 wewa, son of विश्वनाथ, surnam ed होसिङ्ग चन्द्र ती्थंपरिभाषा by व्यास. तीथंमजरी by घङकन्दलाल. dtetararaca by रघुनन्दन. Same as dtwdaer ; sec. 102. तीथंया्नानिर्णय तीर्थ॑रतनाकर by अनन्तभद, son of यदु wg, at the request of अचृषरसिह तीधंरत्नाकर or रामप्रसाद of wae, son of भाधव, of qxrereaiter; ms. dated सवत्‌ 1690 (1634-5 A. D. ). He composed the अुक्तिस्नेहप्पूरणी, com. on gredifrer, at Benares in सवत्‌ 1600. He is author of sarqaraue ; flourished betwecn 1500-1545 A. D. तीर्थसग्रह m. in eqarrert by आधर. तीर्थसग्रह by साहेवराम. तीर्थ॑सार ( part of शसिंहप्रसादे ). तीर्थसेत by उन्दावन ow. Ardater ( part of टोडरानन्व्‌ ). तीेन्देखर of anitfrag, son of farang. Vide sec. 110. ती्थोयापनकोष्ठवी by age, son of बहालचरि. Vide under ब्रतोचापन- eradt. About 1753 A.D दलसीकाष्ठमालाधारणनिचेध by aUee ( Baroda O. I. No. 3894) List of worke on Dharmatasira qearataxer by राजनारायणं get पथ्याय. हुलसीषिषाह (taken from प्रतापमातेष्ड) Ulwar cat. No. 1334 and ex- tract 313. Tera TOTATAT ALA. तादानपरुषधयोग. तलावानघ्रकरण by सिखनाथ, तुकादानधयोग ( माध्यणग्दिनीय ). तुलावानप्रयोग by कमलाकर, son of शम- क्ष्ण, Sec, 106. तुलादानविभि. वलापति by कमलाकर. ठटाएरुषदानपवति.. तुलापएरुषदानपयोग by विष्ल. ठैटाएरुषमहादानपखति by गोपीनाथ, ठटाएरुषमहादानप्रयोग 01 तलादानाधिधि _ by नारायणभहु, son of रामेश्वर ; 9५. 103. ्िशाचूदोकी or arairatiigregiat by वोपदेव. Is it the same as the Next ? Frege or आहो्चधिशच्छोकी OF स्तककारिकां (pr. at Benares in 1876 with com, ) in 30 gaye verses on आहौच. Ulwar cat. No, 1339 ascribes it to arqxa. Vide BBRAS cat, vol. II pp. 209-210 where it is ascribed to Serf. ^ fever रधुनाथमद्ु, son of माधव, son of gaz; flourished 1560-1625 A, >, CC. बिवरणसारोद्धार by srareg कावेभण्डन, son of बाहनक्ष्ण, Names 555 नि- सि. मयर, भदरोजिदीष्ित. Bet- ween 1660-1710 ^. 9. He says he follows com. of रघनाथ On the Rreregyat. C. ametrerare. C. ascribed to fagrateat (wrong- ly). Vide under qaretet. C. by अनन्तभदु ( Ulwar cat. No. 1340 ), C. by भदुाचायं ( Ulwar cat, No, 1341); ms. in Baroda 0.1. 3883 is dated संत 1 579 (1522-23 A.D), C. खबोधिनी by अनन्त, son of कम- लाकरभटु, son of राप्नषृष्ण. About 1610-1660 A, D, C, by छऊुष्णभित्र. C. by राघव. C. by रामभदु. C, by विभ्वनाथ. C. (vide 1. 0. cat. TI p, 566, No. 1750-51 ), 0. by राभिभ्वरभारती. C, by author जिकाण्डमण्डन alias आपस्तम्बसुत्रध्वनि- ता्थकारिका by भास्करमिभ्रसोमयाजिन्‌ | son of कुमारस्वामिन्‌ ( pr. in 3. I, series). Printed text and mss, dif- fer. Divided into four sections in 575 verses on अधिकारिनिरूपण, प्रतिनिधि, grea, निभित्त and प्रकी- एफ. He names tga, कक, केहावसिखान्त, दामोदर, नारायणि on आश्वलायनभोतसज » भ्वनाग, भर दाजसज्रभाष्यकार, लोगाक्षिकारिका, wa यज्ञ, शालीकिनाथ (on पूर्वमीमांसा) TAI, Rice विधिरत्न # many of his कारिकाः, though primarily concerned with érauta rites, are quoted largely in qeterrey works. He incidentally deals with many topics of qx, such as proper actions in मलमास (1, 165-177 ), what 15 sttorere for an act etc. He is named by हेन्नाद्वि and the भद्नपारिजात. So he flourished after 1000 and before 1200 A. D. Vide Dr. Bhandarkar’s Report for 1883-84 pp, 30-31 for date, C, विवरण. C. षदभकाशिका चिकालसन्ध्या, चिपिण्डीभाद्धप्रयोग ( Aufrecht’s Leip- zig cat. 597 ). Praveremimeerer of रघ ०; vide p. 417 above. जिविक्रमपडति m.in नि. सि. त्रिचिक्रमी ( rules for the consecra- tion of images when transferred from one place to anothor through fear of mlecchas or otherwise ). पि. vol. IX p. 295. चिवेणीपति by दिषाकरेभदु ( Baroda 0. I, 5840), चरिस्थलीविधि by हेमाद्रि. त्रिस्थलीसिु of कारीनाथभटरु, son of जयराममभट. निस्थलीसेतु of oo , son of शाने savas (pr. at Anandasrama Poona ). The first part deals with rites common to all sacred places and then the special features of the pilgrimage to Hidtory of Dharmatistra wars, काक्षी and मया, Composed about 1550-60 A, D. चिस्थलीसेु्रषटुक by नागे, धिस्थलीसेतुसार or -सारसथ्रह or तीरथ- याघ्राबिधि by भद्टोजि चेलोक्यसागर 7, by वाष्यस्पतिमिभ् in his देतनिर्णय. So earlier than 1400a.p, SareTATT m. by tarfx, रप्रनन्द्न, and in वानमूख. जैवाणिकसन्यास by कैकासयति. त्ैविक्रमी- vide जिविक्रमषद्धति. qareata see sec. 43; pr. Jivananda Sm. part II, pp. 383-402, Anan. sm. pp. 72-84. (^. by एष्णनाथ. C. by तकनलाल. दक्षिणद्वारनिर्णय by नारायण ( Baroda O. I. 9175 ). OSHA eT दण्डनीतिप्रकरण (extracted from the नीतिप्रखरी of sreaerst ). quefaes of वधमान of भित्वपश्चग्राम, son of a@ey and younger brother of मण्डकनिभ्; in seven परिच्छेद्‌ऽ ; latter half of rsth century ; on penal offences, the propriety of inflicting punishments and the different forms of punishments to be inflicted. N. vol. V p. 225 No. 1910 ; composed for the king of ferfrer ; mentions कत्व AS, SHI, हलायुध, धर्मंकोशा, स्यृति- सार, STAM, रत्नाकर, पारिजात, व्यबहारतिक, धवीपिका and sa ‡ among his authorities. It is 4 part of his स्वुतितस्वविषेक List of works on Dharmatisiva TARPS. दुलककोषठदी by शामजय तकौलङ्कार ( pr. at Calcutta in 1827 in Bengali characters). Summarised in gwe- शिरोमणि pr. under the patronage of ए. C, Tagore. दुलककोस्तुम by केदारनाथदल्त ( pr. at Calcutta ). aweatexet of saraiten ( pr. Cal- cutta 1857, text with Marathi translation pr. at Baroda, 1899). The last verse is interpreted as giving tgartras the name of the author. Said to be fabricated by a pandit .of Colebrooke’s. The author says he wrote a egfe- चन्त्रिका. C. by रामेन्बरष्हक. वत्तकचन्द्िका by erecrrand. areaterer by तोखच्यर, son of भीनि- wrarary ( Baroda O. I. 6572 B.) दतकचन्द्रिकाटीका by तकनलाल. वुत्तकतत्वविनिणेय 01-निर्णय by हरिनाथ- fier. N. vol. XI. Intro. p. 5, qwatree of wate ( 2 part of his व्यदहारतिष्टक). Summarised in the aerestercrenitr. दत्तकदर्षण by देषायन (पि. X. p. 71). दततकदीधिति by महामहोपाध्याय अनन्त - भहु (pr. at Calcutta and also at Bhavnagar ). Summarised in दृत्तकरशिरोभणि. दत्तकनिणंय by तात्याशाखिन्‌. द्तकनिणंय by विभ्वना उपाध्याय. दत्तकनिर्णंय by शूलपाणि (part of his digest called स्छृतिषिवेक ). Nearly the whole is pr. in Bharatachan- 557 dra Siromani’s eereftrttentr. Also styled awepsfaae:. द्लकनिर्णंय by भरीनाथभदु. areca by अनन्तदेव ( probably same as बुलतकदीविति above ). awegaeurdt by शुसिंहभदु. दुततकपुत्रविधि by seat; same as दत्तकनिणैय above. दुत्त or दुत्तपुजनिर्णयमी्मासा of नन्द्पण्डित alias विनायकपण्डित ( pr. by भरतचन्द्र शिरोमणि at Calcutta), Vide sec. 105. C. by geqrrcere. awedratear by माधवाचार्य. awerary (an extract from the are- हारम्रणख of नीलकण्ठ ). दुत्तकविधि by वाखस्पति ; vide N. (New Series ) vol. III. preface pp. णा. VII. दुत्तकविवेक by grearitr (vide दत्तक निर्णय above ). वु्तकसपिण्डनिणंय. वुत्तकोज्ज्वल by वर्धमान, who per- forms an obeisance to egret. N. ( new series ) vol. I p, 166. दुश्षाचिन्तामाणि by ब्वेभ्वर, son of ar- सिंहः awarasrerst by व्रजनाथ rarer ( pr. at Calcutta 1875 ), द्तपुत्रतत्वविवेक by बारदेषभदु ( Stein's cat. p. 307 ). बुशलपुधविचार by गोविन्द्‌ वासदेवभद्र (Ba- roda 0. I. No, 10701 9). वलपुत्राबिधिः aera. 558 वृत्तरतयदीषिका by श्रीनिवासाचरायं. वसरत्ताकर by ध्मराजाध्वरीन्द्र, son of माधवाध्वरीन्द्र ; names बिज्ञानेभ्वर, BUSTA, वरद्राजीय, THAME, काल- . निर्णय, वत्तमी्मांसा; later than 1650 A.D. वलरत्नार्पण by सीतारामद्ाखिनर ( Baro- da O, I: No. 7204 ). aware by वेथनाथ. qerey by भीमसेनकवि. दल्तसिदान्तमखरी by बालकृष्ण, son of वेवभव्रवीित of the Phalnitkar family. His guru was अद्ेतानन्द्‌. द्तसिद्धान्तमणरी by भडुभास्करपण्डित. दलसिदान्तमन्दारमखरी. वलस्युतिसार, दत्तहोमाचुक्रमणिका इ्ताव्हां by माधवपण्डित. gare by दादा eat, son of माधव, son of afte. He was pupil of seorrara at Nasik on the Godi- vari and composed the work in Sake 1691 ( 1769 A. D. ). Names निर्णयसिन्धुकार and मयूखकार. दत्ता्चनकोषठदी or दत्तात्रेयपद्धति by चेत- न्यगिरि. दत्ता्चंनविधिचवन्द्रिका by रामानन्दयति. दल्ताहो चव्यवरुथापनबाद by रामब्रह्मण्य- शासिन्‌, son of रामशङकर; flourish- ed towards end of 18th century. दुन्तधावनषिधि. वृशनिर्णय by वेङ्कटनाथ, called वेविक -. सार्वभौम, son of रङ्गनाथ, son of सरस्वतीवलभ. On such topics as जयन्तीनिणैय, एकादकशषीनिणय) (५. 1 60.84 1... 1 Probably a part of his स्कृतिरता- कर ( पि. vol. VIII p, 14). Mentions स्यृतिच्चन्द्रिका, कालनिर्णय, HAITI querer by रामभद्र, son of बिभ्वनाघ होसिङ्ग. | ae दहाभाद्पद्धति by रघुनाथ. Based on Zarfx's work. दहौ्राद्धप्रयोग by दुयाहाङ्कर, son of धरणीधर. दृ्ोभाखुप्रयोग by waiter ( Baroda O. I. ms, 1677 dated Sake 1680), वशोभ्राद्धभयोग by शिवराम. वहौसश्िका. दशकमदापिका or-qagie of पष्ुपति for Yajurvedins ( Kanva ), He was elder brother of gergy and Pan- dit of Laksmanasena of Bengal and so flourished about 1168- 1200 A, D. दहाकमंपद्धति by महामहोपाध्याय कालेसि for Revedins (about मभौधानं ९1५.), N, vol. II. p, 61. दहाकर्मपदडति by गणपति, son of हरि- शङ्कर. दशकमंपद्धति by नारायणभदटु. दश्ाकर्मपति by पृथ्वीधर. दुहाकर्मपद्धति by भवदेवभदर ; (the work is 2150 called दष्क्म॑दीपिका oF कमालुष्टानषद्धति ). According to इन्योग school. Vide sec. 73. दहाक्मपयचति by राघ्रदक्तमेथिलं for Va- jasaneyins; same as गमोधानादि- द्हासंस्कारषद्धति | व्ाकर्मन्याख्या of हलायुध (part ०. ब्राह्मणसवैस्व ). ` List of worke on Dharmasistra $69 दशकालनिणय. | दानकाण्ड सं्ेष विधि (part of | दानकोतुक (extracted from the हरि हेमाग्रिऽ दानखण्ड ). बकाविलास of बन्दषण्डित ) दक्ञनिणैय by वेङ्कटनाथ चैदिकसा्वंभौम, | दानकोषठदी by रामजयतकौलङ्कार. son Of शङ्गनाथ, दानकोष्ठदी 0 दानक्रियाकोषदी of दङानिणय ( on fasts and festivals )m. गोविन्दानन्द्‌ ( about 1500-1540 in प्रयोगचन्त्रिका, A.D. >); mentioned in his smrg- दङपत्ाह्धिक by आनन्द, son of प्रभाकर, क्रियाकोष्ठदी. Vide sec. 1073 - pr. of the agrgs family. in B. I. series. दुङष्खकोटिष्ोमप्रयोग by देषभद्रपाटक दानकोस्तुभ ( from the स्सृतिकोस्त॒भ (Baroda 0. 1. 10963). of अनन्तदेव ) वृहाभिधविप्रपति. दानचन्द्रिका by गोतम. द्ञश्ोकी (ascribed to विज्ञानेश्वर ) 011 | वानचन्द्रिका by जयराम (abstract of आजोच, Same as आङहोचदक्षक हेमाद्रि) above. दानचन्तरिका by दिवाकर, son of महादेव C. by भद्रोजि, 501 of लक्ष्मीधर. In and grandson of शन्नेश्वर ` sur- Hultzsch’s Report III 7. 101 we named कालि; names दानेोवैयोत, find that wav says ‘ विज्ञानेश्वर दानरत्न, वानभगूखः, and व्रतकं; also मदनपारिजातकारधिषच्छ्रोकीकारप्रषटत- called दानसंक्चेषचन्द्रिक्ा. Later यस्तु नाह्णस्य वैदयादगमने षक्षिणीत्या- than 1660 ^. D,; pr. at Benares g:, which shows that he regarded in 1864 and at Bombay in 1880 ae न adamantane tans et A ते the author of निशच्छोकी as dif- and 1884. ferent from बिज्ञानेभ्वर. दानचन्द्रिका by नीटकण्ठ. दशसस्कारषद्धति, Same as गमाधानाद्धि- | वानचन्दरिका by श्रीनाथ आच यबरूडामणि, दशसस्कारपखति, son of श्रीकर. About 1475-1525 SURES. A. 7, वशाविकालनिणय. वानचन्त्रिकावली by भ्रीधरपति. TANTEI. | START: धृशाहषिबाह by वैयनाथदीक्षित. araqa om. in शुदितत्व (vol. Il धानकमलाकर of eererecag; ९८. 106, | =?" 73° ) and तिथितस्व by रषु- दानकल्प quoted in अहत्याकामधेनु. + । दानकल्पतरु of लक्ष्मीधर-747! of कत्प- धानदिनकर by कमलाकर तरु; sec, 77 | दानदिनकर by fravez, son of दिनकरं दानकाष्डपषं by साम्बाजी प्रतापन वानदीधिति by नीलकण्ठ; son of भास्कर ( from परह्ठरामप्रतापः) वानदीपबाक्यसद्वश्खय. | 560 History of Dharmabisira वानधर्मघक्िया by wagwag, son of 'कृष्णवेवसम्मिभ ate. Names wars. In four srvgs ; ms. ( Mi- tra’s Notices vol. V p. 144) dated Sake 1558, i.e. 1636-7A.D. araveft or -qfarer by नवराज, son of वेषसिह of trot family. N. vol. V. p. 150. Peterson (5th Report p. 177) reads नरराज्ञ and shows that quer compiled it at the bidding of नरराज. वानिषशी by रत्नाकर ठक्कर ~summarises वानसागर, as he expressly says. दानषशी by सुयंकरशभैन्‌- vide above under eazy also. कामपञति-कोडकशामहादानपद्दति by राम- व minister of gree king शुसिंह of मिथिला. He was first cousin ( paternal ) of qugsqz. First half of r4th century (I. 0. cat. vol. II. p.550 No. 1714). The colophon describes it as the work of wagreta, who is in the 4th introductory verse referred to as born of the शखौचालवंहा and as an अच्चिहोचित्‌ and appointed ( to compose the work ?). araaitarer by नीलकण्ठ. कानपरीक्षा by भरीधरमिभ्रः कानवारिजात by अनन्तभदु, son of arte or नागवेब, son of we of काण्बङ्कुल. क्ानपारिजात by क्षेमेन्द्र. QIAN Cay. वीनिषरकार, वोनप्रकाहा of नित्रमिभ्र (part of बीर ferret ). Vide sec. 108. वानपदीष by वयाराभ. दानप्रदीष by दयाशङ्कर. वानधवीप by महामहोषाध्याय माधव, son of feoursrta from Gurjaradesa, द।नफलविभेद दानफलव्रत- description of ceremo- nies to be performed by wives estranged from husbands or by women afraid of being separat- ed from their sons. (1, ^. cat. vol, Ill. p. §77 ). दानभागवत by वर्णिकुबेरानन्द ; com- posed during the reign of सग्राम- सिह. It isa huge work and is very valuable for the history of the text of the Purinas and for Puranic rites, as it deals princi- pally with topics of wat relying upon the gers. Vide D. C. ms. No. 265 of 1887-91 which contains 392 folios. D. C. ms. No. 496 of 1886-92 is a frag- ment of it, on grammatical points arising out of पुराणः, It gives various derivations of the word नागरी as applied to the alphabet. It mentions av हें and so is later than 1300 A.D. arasrarty by व्रजराज. ayareraret by सदाशिव, son of त्रिषा- हिपरमाननण्वु ; composed in संवत्‌ 1735 ( 1678-79 ^. Dd.) by com- mand of meer महाराज सनोहरदास araerge by नीलकण्ठ, son of शङ ag. First half of the r7th cen- tury ( pr. in Kashi S. series and by Mr. Gharpure, Bombay ). वानेसहिमन्‌, Liat of works on Dharmatistra qragerest. areca m. in qrrairaer. दानरत्न part of अनूपविलास दानरत्नाकर by ष्वण्डेभ्वर. Vide sec. 90. हानरत्नाकर by azira, son of gaz, of the होसिग family ; compiled under the direction of अनूषसिह, king of जोधापुर 1) मरुबिषय. Gives genealogy of अनूपसिह, whose ancestor ब्ीक founded Bi- kaner. भद्राम्‌ says he composed at the king’s bidding five other works arquferre (on शालग्राभपरी- क्षण ), सन्तानकत्पलातिका, TITET- कार्णं, असूतमसरी (on antidotes against poisons) and चिकित्सा- ` मालतीमाला. About 1675 A. D. वरानबाङ्य, कानवाक्यसद्वश्चय by योगीभ्वर ( Baroda. 0, I. ms. 10573 dated संबत्‌ 1687 i. €. 1630-1 ^. ०. ). D.C. ms. 332 of 1880-81 is dated सषत्‌ 1594. दानवाक्यसद्वण्वय by योगीश्वर, men- tioned in भोजदेषसग्ह, 2 ms. of which was copied in Sake 1297 (1375 A. D. ). दानवाक्याषलि by नरराज. दानवाक्याषलि by वियापति ; composed at the direction of agady धीरमतिः queen of antgea दपंनारायण of मिथिला; ms. dated wea 1539 (1483 A. D.). First half of r5th century. Vide Bhandarkar’s Re- __ Port 1883-84 p. 352 for extract. दानवाकष्याबलि Anonymons (D.C. ms, No. 367 of 1891-95 ) ४.००, ` ` क~ ० कानकिजय, वानविवेक 1. by हेमादवि, दामनि, दानमयख of नीलकण्ठ. arateae by मादुकीस्ित, son of warfa- दीसित. About 1650. A.D. वानविपेफोदये(त or दानोदथोत ( from मदनरत्म ). दानसक्षपचन्द्रिका by दिवाकर son of setaa. Vide दानचन्दरिका above. दानसागर by अनन्तभद्ु. दानसागर by काम्देवमहाराज, in imi- tation of agreea’s work, दानसागर by agreaa. Vide sec. 83. वानसार, portion of ares. Vide sec. 99 दानसारसश्रह ( only sectionon वास्तु पूजा ). Ulwar cat. No. 1355 and extract 319 वानसाराषली ( vide Bik. cat. p. 375). वानसौख्य m. in दानचन्द्रिका and दान- मपुख (part of टोडरानन्द्‌ ) दानहीरावलिषकाडा by दिवाकर, son of भारद्वाज महादेव. He was daugh ter’s son of नीलकण्डमद्रु- A ver- sified summary of contents was added to this work by his you- nger son @aara. He wrote आदारा in 1686 a. 2. The work is part of his qagregutfate Vide under aarere (1. 0, cat vol. III. pp. 547-48) अनुक्रमणिका by बेथनाध, son of the author qraganfe— part of अतुर्वगधिन्तामृणि १.५ दानार्णव composed by order of queen चीरमति, wife of कीरनारायण नरारसिंहदेव ( कामेभ्बरराजपण्डित ) of Wafaer, First half of 5th century. दानोवयोत-521116 as qrafaretrata (a part of मदनरत्नपदीप ). qrargarar by कष्णराम, वामोदरीय 01. in निणयदपिक and sfz- wae and समयमयख ; earlier than 1§00 A. D. arreragt by पाताम्बर सिद्धान्तवागीशा. About 1604 A D.; pr. at Calcutta 1904, qramerane of श्रीरष्ण wale ( pr. at Calcutta, 1828 and translated by Wynch ) ; mentions aretd- दायतस्व or दायमागतस्व of waa ( pr. by Jivananda ). Vide sec. 102. ^. by erefrerer बाचस्वति. C. by राधामोहन. C. by C, Ano, N. ( new series ) vol. II p. 80. वायदकश्लोकी in ten शादलाबिक्रीडित verses on inheritance ( pr. by Burnell at Mangalore ). £. by gig, son of argaq. aragia, com. on दायभाग. Vide un- der दायभाग, हायनिर्णंय by गोपालपश्चानन. Summary of qyaeqa’s दायतच्व. कायनि्णय by frarae. कयनिषणय by sfrecerat; quotes मवन- कारिलिति, arrum and भासति. Vide I. 0. cat. vol. WI p. 462 No. 1523; p. 463 No. 1524 shows that there is some confu- sion between गोपा and भीकरदार्मा. कायभाग of ओमूतवाहन. Vide sec. 78: (pr. with seven com. by Bharata- chandra for Prasanna Kumar Tagore, 1863-66 ). C, by दायभागप्रबोधिनी ( pr. at Cal cutta 1893, 1898 ), ^. धायभागसिखान्तङ्कु्ठदण्वण्द्रिका by अयुत चक्रवर्ती, son of इरिवास तको चार्यं ; ctiticizes sftara’s टीका and he is quoted by महेश्वर and sfteon. 1500-1550 A. D. C. by serrerge. C. by searerererat. C, by agra. C. by गङ्गमराम. C. कायदीप शीरृष्णतकांलङ्कारः whose daughter’s son was living in 1790 A, D. ( pr. in 1863 ). C, by नीलकण्ठ. C, by मणेश्बर (vide LL. R. 48 Cal. 702 ). C. by महेश्वर ; quotes अश्युत्यक्र- बरती ( pr. in 1863 ) C. by र्नम्दन (pr. in 1863 ), son of हरिहर, C. by रामनाथ विथाषाग्यस्यति. C. बिदृति or ीषिका by राममद्र, son of श्रीनाथ आायं sqerentr quoted in sreqn’s ठीका ( pr. in 1863 ). C. by sftara, son of भीकराचायं ; criticized by wget (pr. in 1863): 1474-142 AD \,. ५ List of worke on Dharmatasiva 86 C. by: वायष्ठक्तावली by ठीकाराम C. by हरिदीक्षित. arareer-vide दायमागविवेक of रामनाथ arrart-—a portion of व्यवहारनिर्णय कायविभाग by कमलाद्छर, of RRR. array by गणेशाभदु. arrart—a a of the fwany- qrremesdtemerssrea by हु्भय, son arora of जगन्नाथ, of बाददेव. Vide दायवृरश्ोकी. दायभाग by Saar. वायाधिकारक्रभसेग्रह by भीरृष्णतकालङ्कार. दायमागकारिका by मोहनश्वन्तर विद्यावाष्व- दायाधिकारक्रमसंग्रह by sem or जयष्ष्ण स्वति, N. ( new series ) I. 172. दायभागनिणंय or -विनि्णंय by कामदेव (I. 0. cat. p. 463 ). वायभागनिणय by watftr ( Peterson’s 6th Report No. 84 ). दायभागनि्णय by saree. दायभागनिर्णय of sftex-vide वायानिर्णय above. वुयिभागविवेक alias कावरहस्य by रामनाथ विद्यावाखस्यति ; a com. on वावभाग of जीमूतवाहन composed in 1657 A.D. Part of स्सृदिरत्नावलि, N. vol. V. p. 154. वायभागव्यवस्था of सावैभोम in 8 aps. Composed in ( grratrayaerrer- कलानिधाने ) Sake 1583 i. €. 1661- 2 ^. D.; composed for शाचष. दायभागव्यवस्थासंक्षेप by गणेहाभदर ( part of व्यषस्थासंकषेष ). दायभागसिद्धाम्त of बलमद्र॒तकंबागीरा- awgrare (1. O. cat. 2. 465 ). TTS ereE, Com. on दायभाग. Vide above. रायभागाथदी पिकापयावकी by शराम pupil of eget. .N. ( new series) vol. p. 174; towards end of (8th century तकांलङ्कार. Ulwar cat. No. 1356. Seems to be same as the preced- ing. दायाधिकारिक्रम by लक्ष्मीनारायण. दारभ्यरूतधर्मशास्र (on wre) D. C. ms. No. 267 of 1887-91 con- tains prose passages about says. aresarata (Baroda O. I. No. 8156). On rites of death and after death. दासीदान वाहादिक्मकवनिणय by धाकिकदेष सन्रा- स्थपति वाहादिकमपदति विनकरोयोत or हिवयमणिदीपिका be- gun by दिनकर alias दिषाकर, son of qaesnag, son of नारायणम and finished by his son विश्वेश्वर lias TTA; contains sections on आचार, ANT, काल, कान, प्रत, पतिष्ठा, TIA, व्यवहार, वर्षत्य, व्रत, शुद्र, भाद्ध, and Wepre. , दिनघ्रयनिणय of वियाधीशष्नि. | विनश्रयमीमांसा of नारायण ( for ares followers ). faerie. दिनभास्कर of gregara freqreeenefter. Manual of daily religious duties 664 of householders. About 1715 ALD. विवस्पतिसंग्रह m. by sfregrareet’s काल- विवेक विवोदासधकाहा 7. by कालनि्णयचन्दरिका of दिषाकर, दिषोदासीय m. by मि. सि. विधानपारि- जात, शखिचन्व्रिका- Earlier than 1500 ^, D. Probably the same 25 दिषोदासभ्रकाश fermen of रधुनन्दन., Vide sec. 102. C. ayerer by मथुरानाथ sre. दिष्यतन्त्र or wererargt m. by देवनाथः; mentions only Vaishnavite rites. ( Mitra’s Notices vol. VI p. 32, ms. copied in 31551 Sake i.e. 1629-30 A. D. ). दिष्यवीपिका of दामोव्रटक्कर, compiled under Muhamad Shah (N. vol. ` V. p. 282 ) दिष्यनिणय of दामोवरटष्छर, compiled under संग्रामह्ाह ( प. vol. VI. p. 40). Earlier than 1575 ^.9. Vide under fawarttqya: of कामोक्र . विष्यसंग्रह by सदानन्द. विष्यसिहकारिका by दिव्यसिंह. An abri- dgment in verse of his eredra and saree. दिष्यानुष्ठानपषद्दति by नारायणभदु, son of eparag. Vide sec.103. N. (new series ) vol. III. p. 92. terres by रघुनन्दन. Vide see. 102. दीकयातस्वप्रकारिका of रामकिशोर ( C. P, cat. No. 2202 ). drarrfivets. History of Dharmataatra arrefiser of शूलपाणि, com. on eyy- बल्क्यस्सुति. Vide sec. 95. दीपवान, दीषवानविधि 0"-कारिका. ,. दीपमालिका दीषभाद्ध. दीपावलिप्रयोग. atfret-Occurs in the name of se- veral works such as काटनिर्णय- दीपिका, भाद्धवीपिका oc. कीपोत्सषनिणणय ( Baroda 0. I. 10625 dated 1757 wag ) gine (alias स्छृतिवु्गभजन ) by चन्द्रहोखरहामा, 2 वारेनद्रब्राह्मण Of नव- दीप. Four chapters on विधि, ara, persons qualified to perform religious ceremonies such as guy पूजा, fasts and penances ; solves doubts on points of dharma. दुगौतत्त्व-\1016 दुमौत्सवतस्व, qmierer by राघवभटु. दर्गापरथ्वरणपद्धति. दूर्नाभक्तेतर ङ्गिणी or वुर्गोत्सबपद्धति 25- cribed to नरसिंहदेष of मिथिला, composed by विद्ापति. This was his last work, Praises धीरसिंह, son of atte, and his brother चैरषेन्द् who is here styled खवनारावण, though elsewhere he is called हरिनारायण ( vide Ind. Ant. vol. 14 p. 193). About 1438 A.D.; pr. in Calcutta, 1909. Mentions रत्नाकर aertararerctyott of माधव. qniatemere m. by रनन्दन इुगोत्सिवतस्थ, इनामकिकाहरी by eye: , Ldet of works on Dharmatastra 868 दुगाचैनकल्यतरु. | | दगोत्सवतस्व by रषनन्वन. Vide sec. ुगाचैनाश्तरहस्य by aguara ge. ¦ 102 दुर्गाचौकाठनिष्कषं by मधुवन षाचस्पति | वु्गोत्सवनिणय by गोपाल ( N. vol. VI N. ( new series), vol. I. p. 81. 210 ) antareraat by परमानन्ददामैन्‌. हुगोत्सवनिणय by न्यायपश्चानन (name not given ). Mitra appears to regard this as different from above, while Aufrecht holds them identical, N. vol. VII p. 7. दुगोत्सवपद्धति- vide दुगांभक्तितरागिणी. दगत्सिषप्रमाण by रघनन्वन. Calcutta Sanskrit College mss. cat. vol. II pp. 310-311 No. 336. दुगोत्सविवेक by mearfir. Vide sec. दूरगा चांद्र by काली्वरण in two ques, first describing जगद्धात्री पूजा and the 2nd कालिकाप्रूजा. It speaks of the दुर्गापूजा on कार्तिक- इाङ्कनवमी while the well-known दुर्गापूजा is in आग्विन. दुगाणैव 71. in watsrgftt. anraatrerer alias समयालोक by प्म ara, son of बलभद्र. In seven व ee Ae ree ~ ~= ee ee. ee — ---~ ~क Lee oe srares. Composed under pa- 95: tronage of दुगांवती queen of वृल- anicrafire by श्रीनाथ araniyer- पति, king on the «eer and मणि. father of वीरसाहि ; vide Bik. cat. | इष्टरजोदरनकषास्ति ( from प्रयोगरत्म of 0. 450 and I. 0. cat. p. 536 नरायणभदु ). No. 1680. M. by शाङ्करभद in दूतयोगलक्षण. द्ेतनिर्णय and names निणयासृत, दृतलक्षण मदनपारिजात, मदनरत्न Between दूलालीय by gure 1460-1550 4.9. Deals with fares on तिथिऽ, संक्रान्ति, मलमास er. | देवजानीय "1. in नि. सि oa Is 005 दलषति the same as the ¦ जात, जआचाररत्न of छक्ष्मण, Earlier author of afirexare ? The । प्रद्रा 1600 A. D. | seven sections are on समय, | देवतावारिप्रूजा त्रत, आचार, व्यवहार, दान, ute, | देषतिलकपदति (marriage of an idol इभ्वराराधन ( Or gar’) | of firey with weet ). N. (new र्गत्सवकृत्यकोष्ठदी by शाम्धुनाथसिद्धान्त- बागी. Mentions सवत्सरप्रदीष, ater. He was 2 pandit at the court of ‘the king of ज्ामखूप About 1715 a. D series ) 1, p. 179 ेवदासप्रकाहा or सवय्न्थचूडामणि by देवदासमिश्र, son of नामेक, son of अङ्धैन of the गोतमगोश्र, Extensive | digest of leading rites with दुोत्सवचन्दरिका by भारतीष्वण वधमान ¦ particular reference to luna- महापञ्च at the instance of prince | tions, and on आद्ध, orgie, ल राम्न्द्रेव गजपति of Orissa. | मास. Based as the author says Summer need सार, मिताक्षरा, sarrety, Between 1350-1500 A. D. Baroda O. I. No, 5581. वेषवासीय im. by नि. सि. विधानपारि- जात, भाद्धमयख. ( Probably same as above). देषप्ति 111. in रुप्रकल्पद्रम of अनन्तदेव Probably the महारुद्रषयति of अनन्तदीक्षित. देषपतिष्ठातस्व or परतिष्ठातत्व of zy- मन्दन. Vide sec. 102. देषद्रतिष्ठापद्धति. वेषध्रतिष्ठापरयोग by sartgeaz, son of गङ्गमधरदीकषित. देवपतिष्ठाधिषधि ( Bik. cat. p. 380 ). देवयाज्जिकपद्धति (agitate) of देष- याक्षिक ( pr. in Kashi S. series ) देवलस्छति- vide sec. 23 ; pr. Anan. Sm. pp. 85-89. देषस्थापनकोष्ठदी by हाङ्कर, son of बह्वाल, surnamed चरे (Baroda 0. I. 1464 ). ` देषालयपतिष्टाविधि by रमापति. देवीपरिश्या 111. in अहल्याकामथेनु देवीपरूजनभास्कर by हाम्धुनाथ सिखान्त- writer ( ५. vol, VII p. 154 gives date of completion as शयुगोर्भ- शिषे शाके निहाचरतिथो शमे ). देवीप्रजापखति by चेतम्यमिरि, देशान्तरद्तक्रियानिरूपण. aeafasrasan ( Aufrecht’s Leip- zig cat. 673 ). वैषजचिन्तामणि m. in टोडरानम्ब्‌. दैवकमनोहर by mater "1. by रषु awega in ज्यीतिस्तैस्व and महमास- Fitatery of Dharmatieire on कंल्यतर, we, कत्यदीष, ait | तस्व and in dygeravg and by लि. सि. ; ( probably a purely astro. logical work). Earlier than 1500 A. D. देवज्ञषष्ठभ by नीलकण्ठ or श्रीपति ; m. फिनि. सि. (probably a purely astrological work ). वालयाभ्रा. वोलयान्राततत्व OF दोया्राध्रमाणतस्व of रध्नन्वन ; vide sec. 102. N. (new series ) vol. I. p. 79. araurattwas of aearfir. Vide sec. 94. grerararaa by नारायणतरका्वार्य. दो्ारोहणपद्धति of बिथानिषास. ्व्यह्यचि by र्नाथ. द्रव्यष्ाचिदीपिका by पुरुषोत्तम, son of पीताम्बर. Author describes him- self as भीमषलभावा्यचरणाग्नवास- हास ; quotes नि. सि. छदधिमय्स, विनकरोयोत ; he was born in eg 1724 ( 1668 a. ०. ) and died about wera 1781 ; pr. in 1906. ब्राह्मायणग्रह्यपरिशिष्ट. व्राह्मायणयह्यपए्वौपरप्रयोग . ्राह्मायणगह्य्ञ Vide खादिरग्रह्यदवर ; Pr. at Anandagrama Press, Poona with com. C. by eaeqer. C. बोधिनी by भीनिबास. ब्राह्मायणग्रह्यसजकारिका by arartrenta%. ब्राह्मयणगह्यसन्प्रयोग by विनतानम्बन द्रोणश्िन्तामाभि. दाभिंात्कर्मपयति, List of works on Dharmaltistra arfderquery ( Baroda O. I. No. 12224 ). ATTATATATACT OF ATTRA AT ATO ey of egaeqa. On the twelve great festivals of Visnu at Jagannatha- puri. | arenraratsratet by विथानिषास (about जगन्नाथ). N. ( new series ) I. p. 194. ब्रावराविधय्रमीमांसा. ्ादशाइकमविधि. द्विजकल्यलता by परक्राम in 6 spires. Hultzsch’s Report III p. 60. द्विजराजोदय, द्रिजाह्िकषद्धति of daa, the elder brother of gergw. About 1170- 1200 A. D. द्विमायां्चि. दिबिधजलाशयोत्सर्गप्रमाणदक्षन by बुदि- TUTE. दिसप्रतिभाद. deren of सिद्धान्तपश्चानन. देतनिर्णय by wenttet wraerft, son of विदाधूषण. Calcutta Sanskrit College mss. cat, vol. 1. 79. देतनिर्णय by नरहरि ; quoted by रतन- पाणि in क्षयमासादिषिषेक; mentions रत्नाकर. | — of ayaaqfrftsr. Vide sec. 98. C. eter 0: जीर्णो चार by ayara- (aay. | C. भीष or कादम्बरी by भोदुलनाथ (1.0. cat. vol. प्रा. p. 488 ). 9६४ देतनिर्णय by . About 1480 1600; on doubtful points of arf. Vide Annals of Bhandarkar In- stitute vol. IJ] part 2 pp. 67-72. हेतनिणीय 71. in wes by विभ्वनाथ as composed by his grandfather. Latter half of 17th century. देतनिणैयपरििष्ट or द्वैतपरिषिष्ट by फेश- aftr; m. by रत्नषाणि; in two परिष्डेद्‌ऽ ; dwells at great length on gras. Vide Mitra’s Notices V. p. 186. देवनिणयपारिशिष्ट by दामोदर, son of शाङ्करभटु. About 1600-1640 a. 0. Rahrirrafieer m. in दवेतनिणयपरिशिष्ट. देतनिणेयसे प्रह by चन्क्रोखर वाखस्पति, son of वियाभूषण. दैतनिणयसिद्धान्तसेग्रह by wrepag, son of diweus, son of शङ्करभहु ( whose द्वितनिणीय is summarised herein ). About 1640-1670 A.D. देतविकयविषेक by वधमान, son of भवेहा. About 1500 A. D. हेतनिणयाद्त m. in gerne of Tye. ह्याघ्रष्यायणनिणय 01 -णरयन्दु by विभ्वनाथ son of छकृष्णगुजैर of twas ( Baroda O. I. No. 12708 ). Mentions दिनकरोदयात, stay. Later than 1680 A. D. धनशयसग्रह m. by रु ° in तिथितत्त्व. धनभागवियिक- vide writers, धनिष्टापश्चक- धलुषिणावीपिका 17. by कमलाकर in नि, सि. चह्ेद विभ्ता माणि by नरस्सिहभहु. ४९8 watery alias बीरथिन्तामाणि by शाक्वर. घनुरवेदसहिता by वसिष्ठ pr. at Calcutta In महाराजा क्दवचम्त्र series. धमंकारिका (author not known ) 508 कारिकऽ compiled from vari- ous authors. Mentions नि. f., कोस्तुभ, कालततत्वषिवेचन and भयूख, and so later than 1680 A. pb. ( vide BBRAS. cat. p. 219, No. 691. धमेकोहा- by बिलाचनमिश्च m. by ay- भान and in आह्धिकतत्व by zy. The work deals with व्यवहार- TTS, दायमागः, ऋणादान ९1८. धमन्त by केहावराय son of गोविन्दरायः son of रामराय 2 भारद्टाजगेत्र. Based on आश्वलायनगह्य and its परिशिष्ट, Divided into किरणऽ on ara &c. Baroda O. I. No. 5860 is dated सवत्‌ 1810. धमेतच्वकमलाकर by कमलाकरभटु, son of रामकृष्ण. Divided into tcn परिच्छेदः On व्रत, दान, क्मबिपाक, शान्ति, पूर्त, आचार, व्यवहार, प्रायश्ित्त, श्द्रधर्म, and तीथ. Bik. cat. p. 99. धर्मतत्वकलानिपि by प्रथ्वीचन्द्र, son of arrag. His बिरुद्‌ऽ are aB- oe + = = == क्राटकणप्रताव, artery. Divided , into ten eras, 7th being on आशो. Baroda O. I. No. 4006. warenrerer by ferragiz, son of गोविन्व्दीक्षित of adem ( Kopar- gaon on the गोदाषरी). Composed in Sake 1698 ( armgrag ) i.e. 1776 A. 2. at sfaerr on the Ganges ( Allahabad ). Hultzsch ( Report No. III p. V.) wrongly says that he composed it in 1746 A. D., though in his extract at ?. 84, he gives armprrge as the date ) weererame by महादेव. धरमतच्वाथचिन्तामणि. धमेतत्त्वाषलोक-५1९ गोषिन्दाणंष्र alias Taare. धर्मदीप m. in आद्धिकचन्दरिका of fen कर. धमदीपिका or स्यृतिपदीपिका by चन्द्र शेखर वाचस्पति. Reconciles dis- cordant opinions on points of धमे, धमद्धेतामेणंय-५१५९ दवेतनिणेय of eget. धमनिवन्ध by रामङ्‌ष्णपाण्डित, धम॑निबन्धन. धर्मनिणय by छष्णताताचायै, धर्मपद्धति of नारायणभई. धर्मपरीक्षा by मश्वरदास. WATETET by माधव, 12, (~ ms. NO, 221 of 1886-92 deals with सम- arate i.e. was in चेत्र and the other months; mentions माधवीय) वाचस्पतिभिश्, पुराणसष्ठख्चय. J ater than 1500 A. D. धमघरकाश or सर्वधमैपरकाहा by शङ्कर wg, son of arramg and पावती. Latter half 16th century. Says that he follows the works 01 मेधातिथि, अपराकं, विज्ञानेश्वर WA afar, mare, चन्द्रिका, sak, area, afere, Preaattg. Refer to his own हाञ्ञवीपिकाधरकाराः For a part of it on सर्कार vide I. ^“. cat. vol III p. 482 No. 1564: List of works on Dharmasiastra धर्भ॑प्रदीप or -दीप 1. by स्सृतिष्वन्द्रिका (आशोचकाण्ड p. 63), प्रायश्ित्तविषेक of च्चूलपाणि, श्द्धितत्छ of रघु०, कारवो etc. धरम॑प्रदीष by गङ्गाभदु* धर्मप्रदीप by धनय ; N. (new series) II. p. 46 (on atrex only ) धर्मप्रदीप by वधमान, धर्मप्रदीप of भोज-४।५९ p. 279 of the text, Composed betwecn 1400 and 1600 A. D. धमघदीपिका com. on अभिनवषडशीति (q.v.) by छब्रह्मण्य son of ayer. धमप्रदृत्ति by arrrong ; "1. by erg ag in देतनिणेय, by श्द्धि चन्द्रिका of नन्दपण्डित and in व्यवहारमयूख Treats of daily duties ( ahnika ), Sauca, गभौधान and other संस्कार, गोजनिणय, भाच, STATA, दान, प्राय- fart, तिथिनिणय,. स्थाखीषाक. Men- tions माधषीयकालनिणय, मवनपारि- जातः धयोगपारिजात, AST, अनन्ता- चायं, कालाद, नारायणृत्ति 011 आश्वलायन ;m. by नन्द्पाण्डित in भद्धकल्पलता. 1. O. ms.( vide cat. 2. 480 No. 1560) is dated wag 1659 (1602-3 a. ०. ). So be- tween 1400-1600 A, D. Vide 2. 420 above wana ( आपस्तम्बीव )- part of आप स्तम्बधम॑स्‌ञ धमविन्तु. धमेबोधन Wher 7. in स्वृतिन्दिका and tenfk (IIL. 2. 747 ), He 0, 72. 569 धर्ममा्मनिणय ( Baroda 0. I. 11821). धर्मरन्न- digest by जीभूतबाहन of which the काटठविवेक and दायभाग are parts. | धर्मरत्न by भेय्याभद्रु, son of भद्रारकभदु. Divided into दीधितिऽ on alge and other subjects, धमेरत्नाकर by रामेभ्वरभटु ; 01 watered, तिथिमासलक्षणः प्रतिपदादिषु धिदहित- छृत्यविघान, उपवासः, युगाविनिखूपण, संक्रान्ति, अद्भुतः, आरौ, भद्ध, वेदा- ध्ययन, अनध्याय etc. धम॑विवति 111. in भद्‌. षा. (0. 772) on the constitution of परिषद्‌ सस्कारमयग्ख and प्रायश्ित्तमगूख. मद्‌. पा. 753 quotes a wam® (on प्रायश्चित्त ). It seems probable that both are identical and are the same as धर्मभाष्य above. धर्मविवेक by चन्द्रहोखर ; explains and illustrates मीमांसान्यायःऽ. धर्मविवेक by विभ्वकमंन्‌, son of दामोव्र and हीरा and grandson of wf. Deals with fasts and festivals in 8 काण्डऽ ; quotes काटलमाधव, मदन- रत्न, हेभाद्िसिखान्तसग्रह. Between 1450-1525 ^. D. Vide Ulwar cat. extract 320 for detailed contents where the ms. is dated संवत्‌ 1583. ध्मविवेचन by राम्धन्रह्मण्यहास्िन्‌, son of रामशङकर, THRTSTETET- धर्म॑ङाखनिबन्ध by फकीरचन्त्र. धर्महाख्सग्रह-0116८110" of eae texts on srg; BBRAS. cat. p. 219 No. 692. 570 ध्शाससग्रह by बआलक्ामंपायगुण्ड, son of gaara and weft. I. 0. cat. p. 458, Vide sec, वा, About . 1800 A. D. धर्मलासरसर्बस्व by भटोजि. About 1600- 1650 A. D, धरमंशाख्रखधानिधि of दिवाकर. Com- posed in 1686 a. >». Vide arat- | शक above. धम॑सदिता or धर्मस्सृति-1. by फाटबिवेक of जीमूत. धर्मसंग्रह by नारायणदार्मन. ध्मसंग्रह by हरिभन्द्र. धर्मसंपरदायदीपिका by आनन्द. धर्मसार by gear (ms. copied in Sake 1607, vide Hp. cat. p. XV). धमसार by प्रभाकर -7. in आचारभयूख. Earlier than 1600 ^. २, ध्म॑सारसद्चच्चय- same as चतुर्विशति- स्सृतिधमसारसषछठच्चय. पर्मसारदधाः८धि 1). in आिकनिका of दिवाकर काल 214 in com. on चतुषिहातिमत by wat ( vide BBRAS cat. p. 216 ). धर्मसिन्धु or waftreyare by aersfraraz alias बाबा qrey. Vide sec. 112, wafteg by मणिराम. wagattedt by नारायण. Compiled from विज्ञानेभ्वर, माधवं and मद्न- रत्न, weeg by fae of पराहार &० on व्यवहार. Refers to विज्ञानेश्वर. wea by cgary. A vast work. भमोननादुबग्धिश्सोक by कष्णपिडित. (, by रामपण्डित. । History of Dharmatistra धमोधभेपयोधिनी of teria SET, son of gexaf ठक्कर. He hailed from माहिष्मती 10 the territory of निजामसताह but compiled the di- gest in Mithila in संवत्‌ 1410 (1353-544. D.). Contains twelve chapters on आद्धिक, पूजा, भाद्ध, आहो, ste, विषाह, religious benefactions, आपिद्धम, optional feasts, pilgrimages, प्रायन्नित्त, क्म- विपाक and duties common to all classes. Vide N. vol. VI. pp. 18- 20. M. M. Chakravarti (JASB. for 1915 pp. 392-393 ) says that सवत्‌ 1410 must be taken to be Sake, since {apa era. was not in use in fafer. But this is not very convincing. TANT START. धमोध्वबोध by weer. धमी सृत m. by वधमान in तच्वासृतसारो- arr. Probably watea may not be a work at all, but may refer in general to works on Wa. धमौसृतमहोदधि by cgara, son of अनन्तदेव. धमोम्भोधि- same as अतूपवषिलास- धमौर्णव of पीताम्बर, son of कादयपा- चार्थ. Vide Bik. cat. p. 383 (on तिथिनिणीय ), which ms. is dated 1681 A. D. | धवलानिबन्ध 7. in अन्येष्िषद्धति of नारायण, by श्च ° and in निणेयादृत. धवलसंग्रह m. in कालाविषेक of जीमूतः area, कालसार of गदाधर ( धवल. निबन्ध and चवलसंग्रह are probs bly the same ) List of works on Dharmatistra “qrearererfterrerer (on gifts of heaps of corn ). N. ( new series) II. p. 88. VAAT RTT -from इतकमलाकर, नक्तकालानणम. नक्षत्रयागदान. नक्षन्रषिधान. नक्षश्रहान्ति by बोधायन (D.C. No. 97 of A 1882-83 ). नयमणिमालिका- नवकण्डिकाथ्ाखस्‌ञ्न 0 भाद्धकत्वसूच- 6th परिशिष्ट of कात्यायन. Vide under श्राद्धकल्प. C. by ककं. C. भाद्धकारशिका by कृष्णमिश्र, son of Rrearfttsr; composed in 1448-9 A. D. C. भाद्धकल्पसजपद्ति by अनन्तदेव. TUNA. नवग्रहमख- attributed to afer. नवग्रहयज्ञ ( Baroda 0. 1. 2279 ). नवग्रहयज्ञासत ( Baroda 0. I. 6887). नवग्रहयागविधि. नषय्रहशान्ति- vide under वासिष्ठी. नवग्रहशान्तिपद्धति by शिवराम, son of fasta for ayete followers. I. O. ms. (cat. p. 570 ) copied in सषत्‌ 1800 (1749 ^. D. ). aaa 22745. cat. vol. II. P. 243. TUTTE. नवनीतनिबन्ध by राज्ञी. Is it same as निबन्धनवनीत ? 871 पवर्तिप्रतिष्ठाविभि. नवरत्नद्ान. नवरलनमाला by प्रहादभहु. AQUA नवरा्जनिणय by arqresare. नधराज्प्रदीप by नन्दपण्डित (pr. in सर- स्वतीभवन series No. 23 ) नवविषेकद्‌ी पिका by aqua. नवाक्रमाष्यनिणैय by गोरीनाथयक्रषर्तिम्‌ ( Baroda O. I. 10279 ). नवषा्ाविधि. नव्यधक्रप्रदीप by saree, pupil of जय- राम and patronised by तिलोकचन्द्र and कष्णन, Zamindars of Bengal in the 2nd half of 18th century. N. (new series) vol, II. p. 92. aMzanee 111. in श्द्रकमलाकर. Ear- lier than 1600 A. D. नागदेवीय-111. in आच्ारमयृखं ; seems to be the same as नागदेशहिक, नागप्रतिष्ठा by बोधायन. नागप्रतिष्ठा by डोनक. नागबलि by शौनक. नागबालिसस्कार. नागार्खनीयधर्मङाञ्ञ ON ATA, espe- cially awa. नानाशाल्ञा्थनिणेय by aaa, son of wager. About 1500 A. D. नान्दीद्खनिरूपण by gaara. नान्दीष्ठखभ्ाद्प्रयोग. नान्दीभाद्धपद्धति by cage alta, son of गजेश्बर, First half of r4th century. 572 arexeate (ed. by Dr. Jolly ) (^. by असहाय, as amended by कल्याणमदु. & by रमानाथ. | नारकीय 711. in the waaag@ and other ages. Probably the नारद्‌- इराणः ११र।यणधमसारसग्मह, नारायणपद्ति 111. in उयोतिस्तरव and भलमासततत्व of रघु ०. म १९५ ८।अ नाच त्ख, नासयणबलिपद्धति by ate ( Baroda O. I. 11497 ). | नारायणबिप्रयोग by कमलाकर, son of WAST. TRUST. The same as प्रयोगरत्न and अन्तयेष्टिपद्धति by नारायणभदु. नारायणमिभरीय. नारायणघ्रत्ति-171. in भचारमग्रख. Pro- bably the com. on आश्वटायनयह्य by नारायण नारायणस्शृति m. by अपराकं. नित्यकर्भपद्धति ( Baroda O. I. ms. No. 603 dated सवत 1547 i.e. 1490-1 A. D. ). नित्यकर्मपद्धति by श्रीधर, son of धभा- करनायक for माध्यन्दिनशाखा, based on कात्यायन. Also called श्रीधर पद्धति. D.C. ms. No. 228 of 1886-92. D.C. Ms, No, 179 of 1884-85 is dated संवत्‌ 1434 i. €. 1377-8 A. >. Preresisrenttret by ऊुटनिधि, नित्यकभेटता of धीरेनपश्चीषूषण, son of WHAT. History of Dhkarmatiastra नित्यवानादिपखति by शामजित्‌ चिपादिन्‌, Quotes महाणवष, नित्यस्नानषदखति by कान्हदेषव ( Baroda 0. 1. 407 ). नित्याचारपद्धति by गोपारानन्द्‌. नित्याचखारपद्धति of षियाकर वाजपेयिन, son of grayet (pr. in B. I, series ). For धाजसनेयशाखा. Bet- ween 1350-1500 A. D. नित्याचारपदीषप by नरसिंह वाजपेयिन्‌ of कोत्स्बहा, son of श्खुरारि and prand- son of धराधर and pupil of विष्नै- भ्वर ; migrated to काकी. Fami- ly came from उत्कट ; quotes कल्प- ve, Toa, भाधर्बीय. A very large work. Later than 1400 A. D. (pr. in B. I. series, 2 parts pp. 1-725 ). Ulwar cat. extract 322, ` नित्यादह 111. by काटादक्षं of आदित्यभदर. | नित्यावुष्ठानपद्धति by agar. . fraergenntr by यशोधर ( Bik. cat. p. 322 ). Contained at Icast 62 प्रकाहाऽ and dealt witn हार्तिऽ. निबन्धन m. by सरस्वतीविलास- निबन्धनषनीत by रामनित्‌. Divided into four आस्वादऽ on सामान्यतिधि- Prove घत विषिषनिर्णय,उपाकमकाल and srgers- Mentions अनन्तभद्रः हेमाद्रि, साधव and fRorataa as his authorities. D.C. Ms. No. 102 of 1882-83 was copied in सवत्‌ 1673. Between 1400-1600 A. D. निबन्पराज्ञ Vide under समयप्रकाश. Rreeafirtiafir by eee ( Baroda O. I. 4012 and 9212). ^ huge work on संस्कारः, astrological List of works on Dharmagisira 578 information about बार, नक्षत्र | निर्णयदीपफः by sere fete, one of the ctc., अयुपनीतधर्म, कर्मविपाक. निबन्धसैरव by महादेव, son of श्रीपति, | Vide under प्रायश्िन्ताध्याय. A निब- | न्धसर्वस्व is m. in चुसिहप्रसाद्‌. निबन्धसार by वरचिय, son of श्रीनाथ. A huge work in three अध्यायऽ on आचचार, व्यवहार and प्रायाश्निन्त. D.C. Ms. 123 of 1884-86 is dated | सवत्‌ 1632; m. in Tayahr. निबन्धसिद्धान्तव्रोध by aera. निणंयकोस्त॒भ by विभ्वेभ्वर 71. by रघु- नन्दन and हाक in संस्कारभास्कर. गिर्णयचन्दरिफा by शङ्करभङ, son of नारा- यणभदु. निणंयचिन्तामणि by विष्ण॒कामन्‌ महा- ` arfare at the instance of श्रीराज- जालमदासः, son of विदुर, a वैदय of the गोभिलगोत ( 9161115 cat. p. 308 contains the portion on मलमास ). निणेयतत्त्व by नागवैवज्ञ, son of शिष | (C.P. cat. No. 2598 ); he is author of आचारप्रदीष, which 15 quoted in आचारमण्ख. Earlier than 1450 A. p. ( Ulwar cat. No. 1256 ), निणंयतराणि. निणयदेर्पण by गणेक्षाचार्थ ८ (^. P. cat. No. 2599 ). Proirador by हिषानन्द्‌, son of तारा- पति ठक्कर. On श्राद्ध and other rites, नेणंयदीष 1. in नि. सि. आचाररतन of लेण, three sons of बत्सराज्ञ and pupil 01 भट्ावैनायक. He was from gage and of xat@ subsection of नागर- वह्मणऽ and was also styled भागव्‌- az. He wrote also चःरवेदोक्तमहारुद्र- विधान before this work, The work deals with श्राद्ध, srrgtiey, cclipses, तिथिनिर्ण॑य, उपनयन, विवाह, प्रतिष्टा The work was finished In सवतं 1575 ग्येष्टृष्णद्रादरी (i. ९. 1) 1518 .\. 7. ); quotes Psy रूपाःःवन्ध, दीपिकाविवरण, निर्णयासृत, क] खाद्‌, पुराणसमुस्चय, आचारतिलक, Vide Ulwar cat. extract No, 323. He has the verse ये arg केचिदिह (माटतीमाधव I) in his i ntroductoty verses ; pr, at Nadiad, 1897. C. देवजानीय m. in निर्णयसिन्धु, विधानपारिजात. Between 1520- 1600 A. 1. ` निणयदीपिका by वत्सराज 11. in नि. सि and WTGAICH. Probably same as नि्णंयदीपक by अचल, निणयपीयूष 111. in स्य॒तिसारोद्धार of विभ्वम्भर. निणेयप्रकाश. निणयप्रदीपिका 11. in श्राद्धकत्पलता of नन्द्षण्डित. निर्णंयचिन्दु by अनन्तवेष son of महादेव, on Tatas. निर्णयचिन्दु by ब्ुक्रण. निणयभास्कर by नीलकण्ठ ( (~. 2. cat. No. 2600 ). नि्णयभास्कर 1115. dated संवत्‌ 1725 arg ( 1669 ^. D. ) in Peterson’s 6th Report p. 10. 344 History of Dharmattsre frtrasrantt by गङ्गाधर. निणेयरत्नाकर by sitftaraag. निणैयशिरोमणि 71. by निणीयदीपक and by अनन्त in स्यतिकोरतुभ. Earlier than 1500 A. D. fadrrstet m. by नि. सि. निणयसेग्रह by प्रतापरुद्र. निणयसश्रह by मधसदन. निणयसद्चवाय. निणयसार by क्षेमंकर. निणयसार by गोस्वामी (८, २, cat. No. 2602 ). निणयसार by नन्दराभमिश्र son of दीप- aeaftrer. In 6 परिच्छेवऽ on तिथि, भाद्ध etc. Composed in fear 1836 ( 1780 A. D.). निणेयसार by भदुराघव ( Baroda 0. I. 86470 ). Later than 16712 ^. 9. and earlier than 1700 A, 9. निणयसार by रामभडुाचाय. निणैयसार by लाटमाणि. निणयसारसग्रह ( Baroda 0. 1. 4015). निणयसिद्धान्त by agra (probably the same as author of काटटनिणय- सिद्धान्त ) | निणयसिद्धान्त by रघराम ( This work | is probably the same as काल- निणेयसिद्धान्त ) | निणयसिन्धु of कमलाकरमभटदु, compos- ed in सवत्‌ 1668 ( 1612 4. D. ) Vide sec. 106; pr.in Ch. ऽ series and at Nir. P Rrorrrerey 1. in अहल्याकामेतु निणयासृत by gre ( or -ड ) area son of सिद्धलक्ष्मण, at the direc tion of prince gaa who ruled एकचक्रषुर on the Jumna. Gives a genealogy of the ब्रादूबाण ( argurot ?) kings of THEI The introductory verses (which vary to some extent in different niss, ) enumerate authorities on which he relies viz. निताक्षरा, ANH, अणव, स्सृतिष्वन्द्रिका, धवल, पएराणसष्ठस्चय, अनन्तभटीयश्ह्यपरिषशिष्ट, wastes, संवत्सरपदीष, देषदासीय रूपनारायणीय, विथाभटुषद्धति, विश्व रूपनिबन्ध. One verse occurring in some mss, mentions gar, erage, चिन्तामणि. But हेमाद्रिः कालनिणय 7. 34 mentions a fadraraa. The work is mention- ed in निणयदीपक, भरद्धक्रियाकोषठदी. So the work is earlier than 1500 A.D. and certainly later than 1250, There are four sections on ब्रततिथिनिणय, sre, प्रन्यदुद्धि and आहौच ( pr. by Ven. P. ). निर्णयासूत of भोपीनारायण, son of लक्ष्मण, under qdaa ( Calcutta Sanskrit Col. mss, vol, II. p. 78). Seems to be the same as निणेया aa of are, though गोपीनारायण causes some misgiving. The Bik. cat. p. 426 also refers to गोपीनारायण and qa. Priva by qeraex. N. vol X! preface p. 4 C. रत्नमाला or efifer by geome निणेयाङ्त ( पाश्चास्य ) 7. in the te Wy तस्व of tye Léet of works on Dharmatasira Prorarére by बालृष्णदीक्षित. निणयाथैप्रदीष 1. in seEearerents. निणयोखार (also styled तिथिनिणीयो ०) by awaag. Mentions निणयासिन्ध and स्शतिदर्षण. So later than 1650 A. D. ( Ulwar cat. extract 326 ). Vide तिथिनिणेय of warez. निणयोद्धारखण्डनमण्डन by यज्ञेश (Baroda O. I. 5247). 0119165 upon certain doubts raised about the निर्णयोद्धार of राघबभटु. नीतिकमलाकर by कमलाकर. नीतिकल्पतरू by क्षेमेन्द्र. तौतिगभितश्षाख by लक्ष्मीपति. नीतिचिन्ताभरणि by वाचस्पतिभिश्न. नीतिदीपिका. नीतिधकाड by कुलष्ठनि, नीतिप्रकाश् by वेकशम्पायन (ed. at Madras by Dr. Oppert, 1882). Also called नीतिप्रकाशिष्टा. जनमेजय Was instructed by Sgyeqrast at aat- rat in eight chapters on रज- wate, धलूरवेवधिषेक, aprafer, क्तायुधनिरूपण, सेनानयन, सेन्ययोग and राजव्यापार. Enumerates the founders of राजहाख. ^. तत्वविषति by सीताराम, son of नज्जछण्ड of etiteeqirs. नीतिपरदीषं ascribed to वेतालभटु. नीतिभाजनभाजन-१९१६५०४९५ to भोज- राज ( Mitra’s Notices vol. II. 7. 33). नीतिमशरी by याद्िषेदिन, son of लक्ष्मी- भर, 501) of अश्रि, son of ager द्विवे- दिन्‌ of आनम्धुपुर. In अकऽ (chap- ters) corresponding to the $75 eight astakas of the Reveda ) and 200 verses, illustrating mo- ral maxims by Vedic examples. Vide Ind. Ant. vol. ४, p. 716. Composed in संषत्‌ 15१० (1494 A. D.). He was a young man when he composed the work and could repeat the Veda in eleven ways. C. gaatiter by author. C. वेदार्थप्रकादहा by author. C. by देवराज नीतिणशनरी by सम्थुराज. A fragment called दण्डनीतिप्रकरण ( Burnell’s Tanjore cat, p. 141 b ) atlaage by नीटकण्ड ( pr. at Bena- resand by J. R. Gharpure and by Gujarati P. Bombay ). atfrenar by नारायण. वीतिरत्न attributed to वररल, नीतिरन्नाकर of sexnggafiganerns, grandfather of गदाधर, author of eraatz. About 1450 A. D. नीतिरत्नाकर oor राजनीतिरत्नाकर of Vide sec. 90; pr. by Mr. K. P. Jayasval. नीतिलता by Bate om. in ओचित्य- विचारचर््वां of the author. 2nd and 3rd quarters of 11th century. नीतिवाक्थ! ९० of सोमदेष्रि, pupil of नेमिदेव and younger brother of ngage. Printed with com, in Bombay in the Maneckchand Digambar Jaina granthamala. In 32 sections on wa, अर्थं, काल, अरिषदवमभे, frag, अन्वीशिकी) 876 History of Dharmasisiva थी, वार्ता, दण्डनीति, afar, एरो- । afereaftqat 111. in नि. सि. and स्थृति- fea, सेनापति, ga, चार, विचार, | व्यसन, सप्ताङ्गराज्य ( स्वामि &c. ), | राजरक्षा, दिवसातुष्ठानः, सदाचार, व्यव- हार, विषाद्‌, बाडगृण्य, युः, विवाहः ` प्रकीर्ण. Aufrecht notes that he is quoted by मद्िनाथ on किराता- C. (anonymons ), Very valu- able as regards quotations from numerous स्शुतिऽ and works on _ politics. नीतिविलास by व्रजराजह्युह्छ. नीतिविघेक by करुणाहाङ्कर. नीतिशाल्ञसष्ठच्चय. नीतिसष्ठल्वय. नीतिसारं attributed to चटकषंर. नीतिसारं attributed to शुक्राचार्यं ( pr. by Jivananda ) नीतिसारसथरह by मधुसूदन. नीतिद्धमे।ः. लि dy अप्पा वाजपेथिन्‌. नीराजनप्रकाङ by जयनारायण तकंपश्चा - नन. नीटवृषोत्स्गं by अनन्तमटु. नीलोत्सर्गपद्धति. नीलोद्राहपद्धति on the ceremony of | gta in भद्ध. I. 0. ms, (cat, p. 578) is dated सत 1648 ( 1591-92 A. D. ). मूतनप्रतिष्ठाप्रयोग. तृतनसूतिप्रतिष्टा by नारायणभटरु (based on आभ्वलायनण्ह्यपरिशिष् ). Ba- 1008 O. 1. 8876 A. असिहजयन्तीनिणय by गोपाटेवेशिक. कौस्तुभ of अनन्त. aftreait, 582. पितुमक्ति by अविक. Vide sec. 89, . 364 ; for students of aggée. C. by qafe. About end of 15th century. पितुभक्तेतरङ्गिणी alias भराद्धुकत्य by ara- स्पतिमिशभ्र. Vide sec. 98 p. 399. पितुमेधद्रयोग-0$ a follower of कवर्दिः कारिका ( N, vol. X. p, 271 ) पितृमेधभाष्य ( आपस्तम्बीय ) by भाग्यं गोपाल. पितृमेधबिवरण by रङ्गनाथ. पिटृमेधसार by गोपालयज्बन्‌,. पितृमेधसार by वेङ्कटनाथ, son of रङ्ग- नाथ. पितूमेषसारदुधीषिलोचन (a com. ) by a वेदिकसाबमोम. Probably the same 25 बेङ्कटनाथ above. ` पितृमेधसतर. by गौतम C, by अनन्तयज्वन्‌, son of gen. by भरद्वाज. by हिरण्यकेदिन्‌. आपस्तम्बीय (stats 31-32 ग कल्प). C. by कपरदिस्वामिन्‌ (pr. at Kum- bhakonam, 1905 ). feqatacatenrevart. पितृदितकरणी m. in पितृभक्ति of श्रीद. About 1300 A. D. freqerevea by ठीकाकारशानंन्‌ N. (new series ) vol. III. p. 116. पिष्टपहखण्डनमी्मासा or पिष्टपहामीमांसा ` by नारायणपण्डित, son of किण्वनाथं 100 pupil of नीलकण्ठ. N.vol.X.p. 312. Recommends विष्टवहा in sa- . crifices instead of a goat; ms. dated awa 1785 1, €. . 1728 a, D. Fiietory.of Dharmasiatra पिषटपद्यमण्डन by dherenente of marx (Baroda O. I. No. 2436 ). This is probably the same 25 freqgrquga above. C ( contained in Baroda Ms.). पिष्टपहामण्डनव्याख्याथंदीपिका by carare. पिटपशुमीमांसाकारिका by नारायण, son of विभ्वना. एसवनादिकालानिर्णय. पण्याहव्राचनपयोग by geetwa. वुथक्रमदीपिक। by रामभद्र on the rights of partition and inheritance of the twelve kinds of sons. पुत्रप्रतिग्रहप्रयोग-25८71060 to stra (Pe- terson’s 6th Report No. 122 ). एच्रपरिग्रहसंशायोद्धेव परिष्छेव्‌ (Stein's cat, p. 95 ). एत्रस्वी कारनिरूपण. एुश्रस्वीकारनिर्णय of रामपण्डित, son of विश्वेभ्वर, of the azetry. Men- tions विज्ञानेश्वर, wire, कालाद, acer. Later than 1400 A. D, एव्ीकरणमीमांसा of नन्दषण्डित, Same as aweetatar above. Vide sec. 109. ए्ोत्यत्तिपद्धति. पुनःसन्धान (on rekindling of the householder’s fire ). पुनरुपनयन Second initiation of a brahmana, when first vitiated by partaking of forbidden food. फनरुपनयनभयो by विभाकर, son of List of works on'Dharmasisira +. x दनर्विवाहमीमांसा by बाल्ष्ण ( Baroda | एराणसार by} prince सुब्रह्मन्‌, son of O. I. No. 9026 ). gaftarefity. राधवरायः, of aaaty. N. vol. ई, Pp. 62-65. एरण्नरणकीौष्ठदी by BET, son of माध- | पुराणसारसग्रह arene ayy. पुरश्चरणकौस्तुम of अहोबल, disciple of ईहानेन्द्र and after. Composed in Benares. एरश्वरणचन्द्रिका 711. in वर्षरत्यकौरवी of गोविन्दानन्वु and by wgo in तिथि- aver and आल्िकतत्व. ए रण्वरणचन्द्रिका by परमहंस देवेन््राभम, disciple of विडुषेन्द्राञ्नन. ( प. vol. VII p. 163). D.C. Ms, No. 33 of 1898-99 is dated सवत्‌ 1753. एरश्चरणचन्द्रिका by माधव पाठक. एरश्चरणचन््िका by Ravers. दरश्रणदीपिका by arefrary, son of जयरामभटु. प्रश्चरणदीपिका by चन्द्रहोखर. पुरश्वरणदीपिका by रामचन्व. प्रस्करियाचच्या 11. in तिथितस्व by wye, Worse 711. by हेमाद्रि, निर्णयामत, नि. सि. देतनिर्णय. Earlier than 1200 A. D. प्राणस्वस्व by गोषधैनपाठक, compiled under Bengal Zamindar श्रीसत्य In Sake 1396 ( 1474-5 a, ४. ). एराणसवस्व by पुरुषोत्तम. ( Mitra’s Notices vol. I. p. 188 ) एराणसबंस्म्र by हलायुध, son पुरुषोत्तम. On 730 interesting points; com- posed in 1474 a. 7. ( Vide Au- frecht’s Oxf, cat. pp. 84-87 ). उराणसार M. in पराहारम्यधवीय, चसिंह- पसाद, आद्धिकतसछ. Earlier than ३०० A. D, एरुषार्थचिन्तामणि of विष्छुभदु आढबले, son of wares. ^ very large work on काल, weere etc, Relies upon हेमाद्रि and माधव principally; pr. by Nir, P. and by Anan. P, ; ms. ( Baroda O. I. No. 1666) dated Sake 1706 (1784-5 A, D.). एरुषा्थपबोध by बरह्मानन्दभारती, pupil of tratarsrareeaet. Very large work in three parts, each having 4, 5 and 6 chapters respectively on religious efficacy of भस्म, शब्राक्ष devotion to gx &c. ; composed In 1476 ( probably sake ) at Ma- lavli village on the river Asa- nasi. Names विद्यारण्य and is m. In आ्रकमलाकर. Vide BBRAS. cat. pp. 220-222 No, 699, Pr. at Chidambaram, 1907. परुषाथप्रओोधिनी. परुषार्थरत्नाकर by रङ्गनाथ्रि, pupil of कृष्णानन्वसरस्वती ; 111 15 तरङ्कऽ on पुराणप्रामाण्यविवेक, reiterate, मोक्षतच्वाविवेकः बणोदिधमेविवेक, नात- कीतेनादि, पायभ्वित्त, अधिकारि, त्वं qari, छक्तगतिबेक-. एरुषार्थखधानिषि by सायणाचार्य (acc- ording to some mss, such as Baroda O. 1. No. 7101 and by विदयारण्य according to others). On धर्म, अथै, काम and मोक्ष. पुरुषोत्तमलेत्रतख of tye. On the fa- mous shrine of ज्मन्नाथ in Orissa. Vide sec. 102, queiterrfterrare Vide Peterson’s 6th Report, No. 95. gaereate Vide sec. 45 p. 228, geuegia om. in स्मुतिचन्द्रिका and गाक्वाचायं पुष्िभार्मयाद्धिक by व्रजराज (for ag- wreary sect ). पुष्वचिन्तामणि. पुष्पमाला by शुव्रधर, On the flowers and leaves appropriate to the worship of deities, कुष्वसारद्धानिधि 17. in the अहल्या- STANT. पूजनाधलिका by भवानीप्रसाद. gareafa by आनन्दतीथ son of पएलापद्धति or पयमाला by जयतीथं pupil of आनन्दतीर्थ ( Baroda O. I. 8685 ). पूजापखति = by रामचन्द्रभद्रु, son of विष्छभट छजवलकर ; 84042 0.1. | | वेठीनसिस्सृति-५{९ sec. 24. No. 10471 copied in sake 1735 1. €. 1813-4 ^. D. पूजापाल 111. in आदहिकचन्रिका. पूजाप्रकाश by rarer ( part of afz- मिब्रोदय ) Vide sec. 108, gorsara by गोषिन्व m. in दुीक्षातस्व by शश्च ०. धुलकरत्नाकर by खण्डेभ्वर. Vide sec.go. goreer by Rear. On प्रायश्चित्त. बृतैकमलाकर by कमलाकरभदु. Vide sec. 106. पूरतप्रकाक्ञ- section of the व्रतापनार- सिंह of क््रवेव. पृतैमाला by cyare. | = क क, aiid by विन्विष्वरणष्- | part of विनकरोदयोत १.४. ` पु्बाह्ृलीला-( daily duties from स्वान to ast ) for geergs. TUYAE- geataex-probably same 25 वृथ्वी- चन्द्रोदय ; m. in विधानपारिजात. पृथ्वीच्चन्दरोदय 111. by हेमाद्रि ( खतुबेभ ० IIT. 1. 182), देतनिणय of ay, बिधानपारिजात, नि. सि. Earlier than 1250 A. D. पृथ्ीपरेमोदय by trafattrerda, son of उमापति of भारद्वाजगेोन्र 20 sur- named पन्त. D.C. Ms. No. 126 of 1884-86 was composed in नन्दपश्वन्रपसमितदहाके ( 1659 1. €. 1737-38 ). It deals with अवणा- कमं, प्रायश्चित्त &८. पथ्वीरहस्य 111. in अहल्याकामधेनु. पेङ्गयस्शृति om. in मिताक्षरा (on या. lil. 18). वेतृकतिधिनिणय by चक्रधर. वेतुमेधिक by agnt, son of agug of the भरद्वाजगोञ्र. According to भारद्वाजीयसून्न and कपर्दिनि- Hul- tzsch R. I. No. 58. Qaafraas by भारद्राज in two प्रभः (each in 12 @fogets ). seter-several works end in pret ९. £. सर्वधमंप्रकाहा of शङ्करभदु, पर- छरामप्रकाचः ° प्रकाहा-०106€ sec. 74. प्रक्रियाअन्दीकां by वेयनाथदीक्ित. प्रयेतःरदति- vide sec. 46. List of works on Dharmaégastra प्रजादतिस्स॒ति-५14८ sec. 47; pr. Anan. Sm. pp. 90-98, प्रजापद्चति ON राज्ञनीति. THATS: प्रणषक्रल्य ascribed to stra. On the nature and mystic import of SPT. C. by हेमात्रि. प्रणवकल्प by आनन्दतीर्थ. प्रणवकत्य (from स्कन्दपुराण ). C. प्रकाडा by गङ्गगधरसरस्वती, pupil of रामचन्द्रसरस्वती. प्रणवदर्पण by वेङ्कटाचायं. प्रणबद््पण by भ्रीनिनासाचाय. प्रणवपरिशिष्ट 111. by wo in आद्धिक- तस्व. प्रणवा्यनयन्किका by छढुन्दलाल, परणवोपासनविधि by गोपीनाथपाठक, son of अच्चिहोत्धिपाटक and grandson of arefiarse. “ प्रतापनारासिंह of शत्रदेष, son of ay नारायण, of भारद्राज ater ; compos- ed at प्रतिष्ठान (modern Paithan on the Godavari) in sake 1632 1, €, 1710-11 A. D, An extensive digest divided into g@rers on सस्कार, पूतं, अन्तयेष्टि, सन्यास, यति, वास्तुशान्ति, पाकयज्ञ, भायश्ि्त, कुण्ड, gant, जातिषिवेक. Vide BBRAS. cat. p, 222 Nos, 700-703. पतापमातेण्ड' 07 प्रोडपरतापमार्वण्ड attri- buted to प्रतापरुद्र गजपति, king of उत्कल, son of पुरुषोत्तम, son of कपिकेभ्बर of the solar race. In 5 werers. Vide sec, 100 and N. vol. H. 9, 74. 585 X, pp, 222-225 ; 11. 11) समयलदूख and आ्द्धमशख. पपापमार्तण्ड by रामरृष्ण, son of माधव; composed at the bidding of king प्रतापरुप्रगजपति (Stein’s cat, p. 96). Probably the same as above. परतापरद्रनिबन्ध m. in देतनिर्णय by हाङ्करभट ( probably the same as प्रतापमतेण्ड ). प्रतापाकं by विश्वेश्वर of the हाडिल्य- मोच and surnamed qerarez, son of रामेश्वर, son of गङ्गगराम, son of warez ; based on his ancestor's जयर्सिंहकल्पद्रम and composed by order of king प्रताप, grandson of जयासिह ( Ulwar cat. extract 328), प्रतिग्रहप्रायाशत्तपकार. प्रतिमादान. प्रतिमाधतिष्ठा by नीलकण्ठ. प्रतिमासंग्रह 111. in दानरत्नाकर of खण्डे- श्वर. प्रतिष्ठाकल्पटता by बन्वावन Be. प्रतिष्ठाकोखदी by शङ्कर. प्रतिष्ठाकोस्तुभ. प्रतिष्ठाचिन्तामरणि by गङ्गाधर प्रतिष्ठातत्त्व 01 देषप्रतिष्ठात्व by रघुनन्दनः vide sec. 102. धतिष्ठादर्षण by पद्मनाभ, son of गोपाल, son of नारायण ( ms. in Bhadkam- kar collection dated sake 1706 1. €. 1784-5 A. D.). परतिष्ठादीधिति from the स्ृतिक्ोस्ठम of अनन्तदेव. भ्रतिष्ठानिर्णंय of गङ्गाधर. प्रतिष्ठापडति by अनन्तभटु alias बापुभहु. History of Dharmasésira पतिष्ठाप्धति by चरिविक्रमभद्ु, son of प्रतिसरबन्धग्रयोग ( rules for tying of wyatt; N. vol. V. p. 157, ms. copied in weg 1785 ). भ्रतिष्ठापखति by नीलकण्ठ. पतिष्ठापदधति by महेभ्वरमदु हष. प्रतिष्ठापद्धति by wares. प्रतिष्ठाषद्धति by शङ्करभदु. प्रतिषठाप्रकाहा by हरिपसादशर्मन्‌. प्रतिष्टाप्रयोग of कमलाकर. पतिष्ठामग्रख by नीलकण्ड ; vide sec. 107 ; ( pr. by J. R. Gharpure ) Styled परतिष्ठाप्रयोग also ( vide Ulwar cat. extract 330 ). पतिष्ठारत्न. प्रतिष्ठाकंपषद्धति by दिवाकर. परतिष्ठाषिवेक of उमापति, प्रतिष्ठाविवेक of शूलपाणि ( sec. 95 ), . प्रतिष्ठासंग्रह. प्रतिष्ठासष्ठच्चय m. in देवप्रतिष्ठातल of रघुनन्दन. प्रतिष्ठासागर of बह्लालसेन 11. in his वानसागर, Vide sec. 83. धरतिष्ठासार by रामचन्द्र 111. in हान्ति- Aq. परतिष्ठासारदीपिका by पाण्डरङ्ग zed, son of चिन्तामणि, in पश्चबटी ; composed in sake 1702 (1780-81 A. D. ); Baroda 0. I. No. 333. प्रतिष्ठासारसग्रह 111. by हेमाद्रि ( दानखण्ड 0. 134 ), $ण्डमण्डपसिद्धि and दान- ATW. प्रतिष्ठन्तु by savas, son of नारायण माटे. ( Baroda O. I. 11089 b ). पतिष्ठोदयोत्‌-( part of विनिकरोदृयोत ) by दिनकर and his son, faxyxsae alias ‘arta. —— ~~ a string as a charm on the wrist at weddings and other festive occasions ). प्रतीताक्षरा com. of नन्द्पाण्डितं on the मिताक्षरा ; sec. 105, प्रत्यवरोहणप्रयोग, part of प्रयोगरत्न of नारायणभदु. प्रथिततिथिनि्णेय by artes. प्रदीप occurs as the last part of the names of several works such as आचारप्रदीपः, छृत्यप्रदीप, समयगप्रदीप, सत्सरप्रदीप. ` प्रदीप vide sec. 80. प्रदीपदानपखति vide महापरवीष ०. प्रदीपिका 10. in गणेहा'ऽ दुण्डविषेक and in सरस्वतीविलास. Earlier than 1450 A. D. पवोषनिणेय by विष्छभट्र ( from पुरुषाथे- चिन्तामाभि ). पवोषप्रूजापद्ति by बहभेन्तर, pupil of वाखदेबेन्द्र. पपश्चसार 111. by बर्षक्रियाकौष्वी, आद्िक- ava of tyo. Seems to he a work of the तन्त्र class, earlier than I450 A. D. C. व्याख्यान, quoted by gwary in तन्नकोद्चदी. Earlier than 1550 A. D. C, by गीबौणयोगीन््र. C. by ज्ञानस्वरूप. प्रपश्चसारबिचेक 07 मवसारविषेक by गङ्गगधर महाडकर, son of सदाशिव. In 8 agras; ms. dated संषत्‌ 1840 (1783-4 ^. ०.) ; vide N. vol. X. 162, On arfge, भगवतूजा, मागवतधनै, moral maxims. List of works on Dharmatastra भ्रपश्चाबूतसार by एकराज (or Ekoji) of Tanjore, who reigned from 1676 to 1684 A. D. Some frag- ments on नीति and gar are re- covered ( Burnell’s Tanjore cat. p, 147 b ) प्रपन्नगतिकीपिका by तातादास ; mentions विज्ञानेश्वर, चन्द्रिका, हेमाद्रि, माधव, areata, वेयनाथदीश्षित. प्रपल्ञविनचयां (acccording to waraw school ). TITAS. प्पश्नोध्वदेहिकविधि. पमाकराह्धिक by प्रभाकरभदु. प्रत्राणदुर्पण. प्रमाणपलव of ae or नरसिंह THU divided into परिच्छेव्‌ऽ on आचार &c. अनाणखद्मह. प्रमाणसारप्रकाशेका. प्रमेयभाला. प्रयागछत्य ( part of Reade ). प्रयागप्रकरण or saree ( from Rreaditg ). परयागसेतु m, in स्सृतिकोस्तुभ of अनन्त- aa ( same as part of ्रिस्थलीसेतु). Taper by गणेशाषाठटकः. प्रयोगचन्द्रिका by dizzee. प्रयोगवन्द्रिका by श्रीनिषासशिष्ध, bro- ther of सीताराम. प्रयोगचन्द्रिका in 13 खण्डः. From षुंस- वन to wre ; follows arqerragar, mentions कण्डमूषण, Tartagi- रिका, जयन्तकारिका, कषदिंकारिका, Tatra, बाभनकारिका, उधीषिलो- 58 खन, स्षतिरत्नाकर, ( Madras Govt. Sanskrit mss, cat. vol, VII, p. 2798 No. 3713 ). भरयोगचिन्तामाणि ( part of रामकल्पद्रम ) by अनन्तभद्ु. sTarrgarater ( ms. in Bhadkamkar collection) on स्वस्तिक, quargaraa, ग्रहयज्ञः, स्थाखीपाकः, दुष्टरमोदशन- शान्ति, गमोधान, सीमन्तोक्ञयन, षष्ठी- पूजा, नामकरण, are and other सस्कारऽ, उपनयन, fare. प्रयोगयुढामणि ( Mitra’s vol. IV, p, 22 ). प्रयोगव्ुडामणि 10. by रघ्नन्दन, प्रयोगत of रघ्रनाथः, son of भाजि of शाण्डिल्यमोत्र, 00111 posed at Benares in 25 a@vas on ordinary religi- ०५ rites ( सस्कारऽ ), परिभाषा, स्वस्तिवाचन, were &c.; composed in Sake 1577 ( 1656A. D. ). प्रयोगतिलक by वीरराघव ( Baroda O. I. 9806 ). प्रयोगदुपेण by नारायण, son of चायम्मटु. Deals with domestic rites ac- cording to Reveda ritual. Names उज्ज्वला Of हरदत्त, हेमाद्रि, चण्डेभ्वर, श्रीधर, स्सृतिरत्नावलि. Later than 1400 A. D. प्रयोगदर्पण by पङ्ननामदीक्षित, son of भोपाल, son of नारायण ; deals with देवप्रति्ठा, भण्डपप्रजा, तोरणपूना &c. भ्रयोगदपेण by रघुनाथसरि. प्रयोगदर्थण by रमानाथवियावाचस्यति on daily religious duties of house- holders ; quotes garf®. प्रयोगद््षण by बीरराधवब. वयोगदर्पण by वेविकसावंभोभ, Notices, 888 History of // परयोगद्षेण Ano. N. (new series) vol. II p. 190. On the last rites of a man, his cremation and ‘sq. Mentions श्रीधर (author of स्युत्य्थ- सार) 25 much removed from him. भरयोगदीप ( to शाङ्कायनग्ह्य ) by qar- दाहकर ` प्रयोगदीपिका by मश्वनाचायं. भयोगदीपिका by रामषृष्णभटु. प्रयोगदीपिकाष्ति. प्रयोगपश्चरत्न 1). in खातुमास्यभयोग- भ्रयोगपद्धति of मङ्गगधर ( बोधायनीय ). of ्विगय्यकोविद्‌ , son of tang waarara ( for आपस्तम्बीयऽ ). This is called शिङ्गगभद्रीय. of दामोदरगाग्यं ; based on ककौ- पाध्याय, गङ्गधर, हरिहर and fol- lows वारस्करण्रह्य. Also styled संस्कारषद्धति. of रघनाथ , son of waz अया- चित ( आष्वलायनीय ). of हरिहरं (in 2 काण्डऽ on do- | हरिहर ( | प्रयोगपारिजात by रघुनाथ बाजपेयिन्‌. mestic religious rites ) ; at- the commentary ware of विल on the प्रक्रियाकोद्धदी of रामश्वन्दर. Vide I. O. cat. p. 166 for प्रसाद com, and Bhandarkar Report 1883-84 p. 59 for pedigree. प्रयोगपारिजात by afire a native of कर्णाटक, of the arfrecante. Has five काण्डऽ on संस्कार, पाकयज्ञ, आधान, आधिक, गोच्रप्रषरनिषय. Portion on संस्कार printed at Nir. Press (1916 ). Speaks of 25 सस्कारऽ ; mentions sragrq and कालप्दीप (On same page ), काल- दीपमाष्य, क्रियासार, फलप्रदीप, वि्वा- दहो, विधिरत्न, भीधरीय, स्यृतिभास्कर ; criticizes हेमाद्वि and माधव ; com- posed between 1360 and 1435 A. D. It is this work probably that is mentioned in gfaexare ( वानसार ), wet ( सस्कार por- tion ) and प्रयोगरत्न of नारायणभदु 715. ( Bik. cat. p. 439 ) is dated सवत्‌ 1495 ( 1438-39 a. D. ). प्रयोगपिरिजात by पुरुषोचमभट son of देवराजाय. tached to com. on पारस्करगृह्य. | पयोगपारिजातसारावलि m. in धमप्वृत्तिः प्रयोगषखति 10 कलत्यायनभादखसज. प्रयोगपखतिखबोधिनी by शिवराम. प्रयोगपारिजात by नरसिंह ( vide I. O. cat. p. 415 No. 1396). Men- tions gate, विद्यारण्य, प्रसाद्‌ ( which the editor of I. O. cat. takes to be aftrewatz). This is most probably the same as the next below and ‘rare means probably no more than प्रयोगप्रदीप by शिषप्रसाद. प्रयोगप्र्रीसहित। by श्रीकण्ठ ( Baroda 0. I. No. 12959 ). प्रयोगमणि by केशषमभद्ु, son of अमयं- कर नारायण. प्रयोगङ्टक्तावलि by भिभिस्रि () तिर्पिलि ; 0. C. ms. No. 102 of 1871-72. Quotes बि सनेभ्वर, प्रपोगयारिजातः atee, आच!ग्मयूख. Later than 1650 A. D. List of works on Dharmaéastra प्रयोगद्क्ताषलि by वीरराघव. प्रयोगरत्न OF स्मा्ताल्ठानपद्धति by अनन्त, son of विभ्वना ; deals with 25 wes according to आण्वद्ायन, 20५ स्वस्तिवाचन, पुण्याहषाचन, स्थालीपाकः परिभाषा, प्ायश्ित्त. (1.0. cat. vol. IIT. p, 515 ). प्रथोगरत्न ( हिरण्यकेशीय ) by अनन्तदेव, son of बिन्वनाथ ; vide Peterson’s sth Report No. 126. Probably same as above. प्रयोगरत्न by कशीश्ीषित, son of सदाशिव. प्रयोगरत्न by केश्ववीक्षित, WITT. प्योगरत्न by नारायणभदु, son of रामे- भ्वरभदु ( pr. by Nir. P.) for आश्व- लायनीयऽ. Vide 9९८. 103. प्रयोगरत्न by चेमनिधि, परयोगरत्न by afeng, son of नारा- यणभड, according to आश्वलायन nd शोनक ; quoted in qatar wazuTeara of भदोनि between 1500-1600 A. D watt by wae (~ P No. 3131 ) प्रयोमरतनः 01 स्मातप्रयोगरत्न Of महेह, son of महादेष बेहाम्पायन ; composed at Kasi on संस्कार, शान्ति and भ्रा ; pr. in Sake 1798 ; culogises ara- दत्त; ms, (Baroda O, I, No. 1626) dated 1844 संवत्‌ ie. 1787-8 A.D पयोगरत्न by महादेव ( हिरण्यकेश्ीय ). पथोगरतन by वासुगेषदीश्ित्त, son of जापदुव. प्रयोगरत्न by हरिहर. son of Cat. 589 प्रयोगरःरभषा by रधूनाथ नवहस्तं ( BBR- AS. cat. vol. II p. 185 ), प्रपोगरतनमाला by चोण्डषप्याचा्थ. प्रयोगरत्नमाला by agra, son of आप्‌- qauz, धष ॒चित्तपावन ब्राह्मण; on विष्णवादिसर्वदेषपरतिष्ठा, mentions निणयसिन्ध्र, Between 1620 and 1760 ^+. 0. Also called बाहुवेषी and प्रतिष्ठारतनमाला, परयोगरत्नमाला by पुरुषोत्तम वियावागीहा. प्रयोगरत्नसंस्कार by प्रेमनिधि. प्रयोगरत्नसग्रह 111. by सस्कारमयख. प्रयोग रत्नाकर -vide प्रयोगदीप of zar- दाङ्कर above. प्रयोगरत्नाकर by यरावन्तमदर ( for मेत्रा- यणीयंऽ ). Baroda O. 1. 8365. ¦ प्रयोशरत्नावली by परमानन्दधन, pupil of । चिदानन्दबरह्मन्द्रसरस्वती ( probably | on Srauta rites only ) प्रयोगलाधव by ge, son of महादेष. प्रयोगसंग्रह by रामनाथ. प्रयोगसागर by नारायण आर. Later than 1650 ^.०.; called also बृह्या- iran. | samrare ( W. and K. cat. Il p. 97) | in 8 rugs. | प्रयोगसार by छृष्णदेव स्मातेवागीङा, son of नारायण. This is also called SAC 07 सवत्सरपयोगसार. | प्रयोगसार by केशावस्वामिन्‌ ( बोधायनीय). On Vaidic sacrifices. Names aret- यण and भवस्वामी and is mi. by त्रि- काण्डमण्डन. About 1100 A. D प्रयोगसार by गङ्गभद्र ( आपस्तम्बीय ) प्रयोगसार by देव्रभद्र पाटकः, son of बल- भद्र ( कात्यायनीय ). Refers to गङ्ग 590 WISH, HTN, वाखदेष, रेण, Ss, हरिस्वामी, मधष, पद्मनाभ, गदाधर, हरिहर, रामपद्धति of अनन्त. Deals with gtr matters. प्रयोगसार by नारायण, son of लक्ष्मीधर. Same 25 यृष्याश्चिसागर Or प्रयोगसागर, भ्रयोगसार by निजानन्द. प्रथोगसार by बालकृष्ण, 2 दाक्षिणात्य, re- siding in गोक्कुलग्राम. परयोगसार by विश्वेभ्वरभदु alias गागाभदु, son of दिनकर. On पुण्याहवाचन, गणवपतिप्रूजन Kc. प्रयोगसार by शिषप्रसाद्‌. प्रथागसारावलि 111. in ध्म॑परषत्ति. प्रयोगसारपीण्ष of कुमारस्वामि विष्य ; on परिभाषा, Wear, आधिक, पायशित्त. भअरयगसारस्दछच्चय, प्रयोगादृशं by कनकसभापति, son of वेधनाथ, of atrants. It is a com. on his own कारिकिप्रखजरी. प्रवरकाण्ड ( आभ्वलायनीय ) pr. by P. Chentsalrao in मोज्रप्ररनिवन्ध- कदम्बक ( Mysore, 1900 ). C. by नारायण (pr. in the above). प्रवरखण्ड ( आपस्तम्बीय ). C. by कषदिंस्वामिन्‌ (pr. by Chent- salrao in गोञ्चप्रवरनिबन्धकदम्बकः, Mysore, 1900, pr. at Kumbha- konam, 1914 ). भ्रवरखण्ड ( वेखानस in one saz ) भ्रबरगण- 2 work on प्रवरऽ in angs- विक्रीडितं verses. Vide BBRAS cat. p. 225 No. 707 ; breaks off in verse 25 ) History of Dharmasisira प्रषरदपण by कमलाकर ; also called गोत्रधरनिणैय ( pr. in गोज्रपधवरनिबग्ध- कदम्बक cdited by ए, Chentsalrao, Mysore 1900 ). पबरदीप 01 प्रवरपरदीप m. in परवरदीषिका प्रवरदीपिका by ष्णरौष ; mentions प्रवरमसरी, स्थृतिचन्त्रिका. Later than 1250 A. D. ध्रवरनि्णय- from the feraresr. प्रवरनिणय oof भास्करच्रिकाण्डमण्डन. Calcutta ऽ. College mss. cat. vol. II p. 69 No. 65. C. शमनन्विन्‌. प्रवरनिर्णय by watfr. Also called गोच्रप्रवरनिणय. प्रवरनिणयवाक्सुधा्णव of aay. पवरमखरी- vide गोच्रपवरभखरी ; 171. in जासहभसाद्‌ . प्रवरविषरण 111. in the प्रवरदीपिक्ा- प्रवराध्याथ (there is a section on प्रवर in most of the streres). प्रवराध्याय of the मानवभोत BBRAS. cat. vol. II. p. 177. परवराध्याय ascribed to अगस्त्य, On Tras and says. भ्वराध्याय by पशुपति, minister of लक्ष्मणसेन ; about 1170-1200 A.D. पवराध्याय ascribed to मृदेव प्रवराध्याय ascribed to ल्लोगाक्षि, the eleventh परिशिष्ट of कात्यायन. पषराध्याय by बिभ्वनाथकवि, प्रवराध्याय from frente. धवराध्याय from स्यृतिद््षण. भवासकृत्य by गङ्ग धिर son of रामचन्द्र ; ‘composed at स्वम्भरतीथं ( modern Khambayat or Cambay ) in सतु Liat of works on Dharmasastra 1663( 1606-7 A.p. ). Deals with duties of साग्निक बाह्यणऽ driven to foreign lands for livelihood. WAUSAU. प्रस्तावरत्नकर of हरिदास son of पुरु- षोत्तम, under बीर्सिह, in गदापत्तन in waa 1614 ( 1547-8 A. ४. ). A work in verse on various subjects including नीति, ज्योतिः- शाञ्च. प्रह्ठादसहिता 111. in आचाररत्न of लक्ष्मण (follows ag=uea ) प्राचीनषडष्ीति ( as opposed to अभि- नवषडहीति ) vide under क्डङ्ीति, प्रातःछृत्य. प्रातःपूजाविधि by नरोत्तमदास (for the followers of Syazz ). प्रायभ्रित्तकवृम्ब 07 -निणय by भोपाल- न्यायपश्चानन. Points out differ- ences between rtyaray, नारायण, जगन्नाथतकंपश्वानन. N. vol. X, p. 119. पायाश्चत्तकदम्बसारसग्रह by sreilara- तकौलङ्कार. Mentions views of SMT, मदनपारिजात, नव्यद्रेतनि्णंय- कुस्वन्द्रहोखर. N. (new series ) I. pp. 233-35. प्रायश्रित्तकमलाकर by कमलाकरभदु. प्रायाश्रत्तकत्पतरू- portion of कल्पतरु. प्रायाश्रित्तकाण्ड- 2nd part of बेयनाथ'ऽ स्यृति्ठक्ताफल. | प्रायश्ित्तकारिका by गोपाल ; based on the बोधायन ; flourished before Tay. भायश्रित्तकुःतृहेल by छृष्णराम. प्रायभ्रित्तकुतुहल by शकुन लाल. 891 पायश्रित्तकुतूहल by रघुनाथ, son of गणेशभदु and pupil of अनन्तदेष. Stein’s cat. p. 96, Hultzsch’s Report IIIf p. 56. On both श्रोत and स्मात प्रायश. About 1660-1700. प्रायश्रित्तद्ुतूहल by रामचन्द्र ; modelled on प्रायरल्लविवेक of शल्पाणि. N. X. p, 197. प्रायश्रित्तकोञ्दी alias घायश्ित्तविवेक of SOIT स्मातैवागीश. प्रायश्रित्तकौषठदी alias प्रायश्ित्तविवेक- टिष्पनी of रामष्ष्ण. प्रायश्ित्तचन्ध्िका by दिवाकर, son of महादेव, son of रमिश्वर surnamed काल. प्रायश्चित्तचन्द्रिका by छङुन्दलाल. प्रायश्रित्तचन्द्रिका by रमापति of the भैया race. crafawataet by राधाकान्तदेव. प्रायन्रित्तचन्दिका by विभ्वनाथभदरु 5m. by दिवाकर in 175 प्रायभ्ित्तचन्द्रिका and in स्मार्तप्रायश्वित्तोद्धार प्रायश्ित्तचिन्तामाणि by वाचस्पतिमिभ्र. Vide sec. 98. प्रायश्रित्तततत्व 0 रघुनन्दन. sec. 102 ; pr. by Jivananda. C. by कारीनाथ तकौलङ्कार ( pr. at Calcutta in 1900 ) C. by राधामोहनगोस्वामी (pr. at Calcutta 1885 in Bengali chara- cters). He wasa friend of Cole- brooke and a descendant of sida, an associate of चेतन्य. C. avast by विष्णुराम feregrecrarratier. Vide 592 प्रायश्रिि्तदीष m. in परतापनारसिंह of ox- देब. Earlier than 1700 A. D. srafawdifrer by भास्कर. srafsawretftrer by राम. प्रायभ्रिवत्तदीपिका by लोकनाथ, son of वेयनाथ ( from his सकलागमसंग्रह ). प्रायश्रित्तदीपिका by वाहिनीपति. धायश्चिक्तनिरूपण by watawz. Vide sec. 73. Also ५116५ -प्रकरण. भ्रायश्रित्तनिरूपण by ftgea (pr. in Bengali characters at Calcutta 1883). पायभ्रित्तनिणेय by अनन्तदेव. प्रायश्रि्तनिणंय by मोपालन्यायपश्चानन. Summary of शघूनन्दन'5ऽ work. प्रायश्रित्तपटल. प्रायश्िलपद्दति by कामदेव. Ms. copi- ed in 1669 ^. ०. ( Aufrecht’s Oxf. cat. 293 a). प्रायश्रित्तयदखति by segaraeardizr, son of tarfx; in four qaqs. प्रायश्िल्तपदखति by रामचन्त्र, son of सयंदास. प्रायश्ि्तपारिजात by गणेहामिश्च महामहो- पाध्याय. प्रायश्ित्तपारिजात by रत्नपाणि. Men- tions कामधे. ( प. vol. VI. p. 300 ). भायशित्तपरकरणं ( Stein’s cat. pp. 96, 310). प्ायभ्ित्तप्रकरण by wearin. प्रायन्ित्तप्रकरण by wate areaat- qay. Sec. 73. प्रायश्िलप्रकरण by wera. भ्रायभिबत्तप्रकाङा of प्रय्ोतनभद्राचार्व, son of wera. Pitstory of Dharmatastra पायभ्ि्षप्रदीप 1. by रवृतिफोस्तुभ (on तिथि). प्रायश्ित्तपर्दाप by serra. srafagerare by गोपालसरि. ( Bik. cat. p. 137 says so, but it appears that गोपाटलस्रि is 2 भाष्यकार on बोधायनभोत, whom the author follows on भ्रोतप्रायश्ित्त. प्रायश्िस्षपवीप by प्रेमनिधि of पन्था, composed in Sake 1675 ( Baro- da O. I. 1490 ) प्रायश्ित्तथदीष by wasragtrantr, son of रत्नखेट श्रीनिवासदीक्षित. प्रायश्रित्तप्रदीप by waar: प्रायश्ित्तपदीप by वरदाधीहायज्वनः, pu- pil of Syareiter. पायश्ित्तप्रदीष by वाहिनीपति. प्रायाश्रित्तप्रदीप by शङ्करमिश्र, son of भवनाथ. He was ae of वधमान, flourished in 2nd and 3rd quar- ters of 15th century ). प्रायग्रित्तप्रदीपिका by अनन्तदेव, son of आपदेव. Vide sec. 109. प्रायभ्ित्तप्रवीपिका by भास्कर (Same as प्रायाश्चत्तहातष्ठयी ) on प्रायश्िित्तः 111 भनोत rites. प्रायभ्रिलप्योग by अनन्तदीक्षित. प्रायश्रित्तप्रयोग by उयम्बक (N. vol. X- 164 ), based on आश्वलायन. प्रायश्चित्तप्रयोग by विषाकर. Vide un- der sara परायभ्रित्तप्रयोग- प्रायश्ित्तप्रयोग by aregreft कागलकर Ta MTa TATE Mentions MI dare, नरिकाण्डमण्डन, प्रदीपः केशवी कार, । List of works on Dharmatasira धायश्रिलतमओरी of argug, son of महा- केष केकर. Stein’s cat. }. 96 gives बिरचनकाल as sake 1736. srafsawaarer of azixittet, son of | कष्णमिश्न, and pupil of रामभद्र and केशवमिश्र. प्रायश्चित्तमयरव of नीलकण्ड ; vide sec. 107. Pr. by Mr. J. R. Gharpure. प्रायभ्रित्तमातैण्ड of मार्तण्डमिश्र (Mitra’s Notices vol. VII, p. 7, No, 2252 dated Sake 1544 1. ९. 1622-23 A. D. ). प्रायश्रित्तघ्ठक्तावली by frarez, son of महदेव ( part of his धमेङाख्रखधा- निधि ). अनुक्रमणी . to above by वेयनाथ, son of author. प्रायश्रिश्चक्तावली by रामचन्द्रभटु. परायश्रित्तरत्न by कमलाकरभदु 1, in aE कमलाकर. प्रायश्ित्तरत्नमाला by रामचनद्रदीस्षित. प्रायश्रिलरत्नाकर by रःनाकरमिश्र. प्रायश्वित्तरहस्य by दिनकर in. in स्मृति- रत्नावली . प्रायश्िित्तवारिधि by भवानन्व. प्रायश्रित्तबिधि by भास्कर. प्रायश्ित्तविधि by माख्र अप्पयदीक्षित ; mentions garfx and माधव. प्रायश्िश्तधिधि from बरसिष्ठस्सृति. पायभ्ित्तबिधि attributed to stra पायश्ित्ताभेनि्णय by अनन्तदेव. धायंन्रित्तविनिणंय by भटजि, पायश्रिलविनिणंय by यद्ोधरभटु, ४, 2, 75, 598 | प्रायश्ित्तविवेक of gant. Vide sec 95 ( Baroda O. I. 10849 dated संवत्‌ 1501 1. €. 1444.45 A. D.) pr. by Jivananda, C. arantsiaat by गोविन्दानन्द्‌ son of गणपतिमड्ू. Vide sec. 101 ( pr. by Jivananda ) C । 0८.दिष्पनी by रामशृष्ण (^. निमृडथप्रकाहिका. N. (new series ) vol. Il. p. 14 waa aes ot श्रीनाथ. About 1475- 1525 A.D meee wees ee ~ प्रायशित्तविवेकोद्ेत- ( part of aza- रत्न ). Sec. 94 प्रायश्रित्ततयवस्थासक्षेप by चन्तामभि- न्यायालङ्क(रभडाचायं (N. vol. IV No. 1580 ). He wrote also व्यव- स्थास्तक्िपऽ on तिथि, sare, भद्ध ara, इखि. Ms. dated Sake 1611. | प्रायश्चित्तव्यत्ररथासग्रह by मोहनचन्द्र- | i प्रायश्ित्तव्यवस्थ।सार by saqaare. प्रायभ्िवित्तरातद्वयी by भास्कर in 4 प्रकरण 17). 11 नि. सि. प्रायश्ित्तद्कुतूहल of रघुनाथ, भाविपकापलतवाय श्वित्तप्रकरण. Earlier than 1550 A. 9. C. by वेङ्कटेश बाजपेययाजी ; ms. dated सवत्‌ 1641 ( 1584-5 A. D. ) in Stein’s cat, p. 311. प्रायश्ित्तडातद्यीकारिका by गोषाल- स्वामिन्‌ ( बोध।यनीय ). प्रायभ्रिि्तन्छेकपद्धति by गोविन्द्‌. प्रायश्ित्तसस्षिप by चिन्तामणिन्यायालङ्कार. Probably the same as प्रायश्रिवत्त- ष्यवस्थासक्चेषप above. प्रायश्रित्तसथ्रह by कष्णदेष स्मातेबागीहा N. ( new series ) I p.239, —— 594 araftawreag by देवराज ( This is in Hindi, prepared for महाराज चेत सिंग of Benares). 1770-1781 A.D. पायन्रिल्तसग्रह by नारायणभहु; mentions Bente, wars, स्यतिसागरसार. So later than 1600 ^. 2. De- fines प्रायभ्ित्त 25 ‘ पापक्षयमाघ्रकाम- AMIS: पापक्षय साधनं कमं प्रायभव ` . प्रायाश्रित्तसदोदय of सदाराभ, son of Taz. Taftarageaa by Rrerarafere. प्रायश्रित्तसद्वट्वय by भास्कर. पायभ्वित्तसार by व्यम्बकभडु rites. प्रायश्रित्तसार by gaat (part of च॒रसिंहप्रसाव्‌ ). Vide scc. 99, प्रायभ्रित्तसार by (waritt 7) वीक्षित m. in जयसि्टकत्पत्रम. प्रायन्रित्तसार by भीमदाउव्वाह्यह्कवीक्ित m. in प्रतापनाररसिंह ( vide BBRAS. Cat. p.224 ). प्रायज्िल्तसार by इरिराम. sian from स्सृतिसार of याव्‌- वेन्द्रविद्याशषण. N. (new series) 1. p. 240, Ms. dated 1613 (1691A.v.). भरायभ्रित्तसाश्कोखदी of बनमाह्िन्‌ (CN. vol. IX p. 58 ). प्रायभ्रित्तसारंसग्रह by आनन्वचचन्त्र N. (new series) vol, III. 0. 126. धायभ्ित्तसारसग्रह by नागोनजिभदु. Vide ° sec. TIO. प्रोयज्िविं्तसारसंग्रह by रत्नाकरमिभ, प्रायश्रिि्षसाराबाि ( por tion of ब्रहि करारदुीयप्राण ). History of Dharmatastra प्रायश्ित्तद्धधानिधि of सायण, son of न्नायण and brother of syqarare. Vide sec. 92. प्रायश्रित्तबोधिनी by sfttraremntry ( आपस्तम्बीय ). प्रायश्रित्तसेतु by सदाराङ्कर. प्रायश्ित्ताध्याय 3rd chap. of निबन्ध- स्वस्व of महादेव, son of महाज- सहन्नमह्यभीपति. ( 1. 0. cat. vol. III p. 555. ). पायभ्ित्तानुक्रमणिका by वेयनाथदीक्षित. पायश्ित्तेन्दुहोखर by कारीनाथः, son of अनन्त, (also called प्रायन्ित्तप्रयोग- सारसश्रहह) composed for बालषष्ण ; pr. in Bombay in 1863 and 1882. Vide sec. 112. प्रायश्ित्ेन्दुशोखर by aritfrtg, son of शिवभटु and सती. Vide sec. 7110 ; ms. (प्रि. vol. V p. 23) is dated सवत्‌ 1848 1. €. 1781-82 A. D. प्रायश्िततेन्दुरोखरसारसंग्रह by arte, son of firawg and सती. (1. 0). cat. vol. III p. 555 ). प्रायशित्तोदद्योत by दिनकर ( part of दिनकरोदयोत ). प्ायश्रित्तोवयोत by भदनसिंहवेब (part of मदनरत्न ). Vide sec. 94. प्रायश्ित्तोद्धार by विभाकर, son of मरहा- देष, surnamed erg. Also called varasraftae and स्मार्तनिष्छतिप्ति ( vide Baroda 0.1, 1334, 1543, 1663). प्रायन्ित्तौचसार by ware. Of fences classified under 4 heads, heinous, gross, venial and slight, and their expiation. 149 of works on Dharmatistra 595 arerqainter 111. by जटमलविलास, Earlier than 1500 A. 2. प्रासादप्रतिष्ठा by aefr, surnamed पण्डरपुर. Based on the sftreverger and ्रत्स्यपुराण ; ms. in Bhadkam- kar collection copied in Sake 1714 (1792-3 A.D.) ; names नि. सि. रामवाजपेय. प्रासादपतिष्ठा by भागुणिमिभ. पासादप्रतिष्ठादीधिति ( part of राजधमं- कोस्तुम) by अनन्तदेव. Vide sec.109. प्रासादिषप्रतिशाभिधि by कमलाकर, Sec. 106. प्रेतछछत्यनिणय. | व्रेतष्कत्यादिनिणेय Ano. वरेतदीपिका by गोपीनाथ अच्निहोतिन्‌. प्रेतपदीष by छष्णमित्राचाय. परेतमशरी- vide Hp. cat. XVII ( ms. dated 1707 A. D.). प्रेतमखरी or प्रेतपद्धति by यादुमिश्र. Ul- war cat. No, 1403. प्रतष्ठक्तिदा by aan. Tearegsracarericer by स्नातेषागीकश. प्रोहपरतापमतिण्ड or कालनिणयसग्रह by प्रतापरुव्रदेष. Vide पतापमातेण्ड. wenden. in प्रयोगपारिज(त of नूर्सिहे ( probably a purely astrological work }. फलाभिषेक. बध्ररस्पति 11. in परा. भा बरदेवाह्धिक compiled from the wer- भारत aftrateaz. afrataer. बहिर्यामपूजा. बहुचकारिका m. in नि. सि, बहूचकमंप्रयोग ( according to ज्ाकृट ) N. vol. X. 2. 5. बहूवग्ष्यकारिका by शाकलाचायं. Vide Burnell’s Tanjore cat. p. 14 b. This is the same as the above; 7. 17 समयमगूख, बह्ग्ह्मपरिशिष्ट Mm. in हेमाद्रि, रघु ०, नि. सि. नह्‌ चन्नाछनवाम बहूग्वषोडशहाकममन्यविवरण. बहुचसन्ध्यापद्धतिभाष्य. बहुाह्विक by कमलाकर, son of राम- कृष्ण, Refers to his प्रायश्ित्तरत्न. बादरायणस्सृति m. in srafsaereraey and in com, on atferarearaa. बार्हस्पत्यषठदूतविधान- argereregin m. by हेमाद्रि. बा्हस्पत्यसंहिता on gees for sarara, धंसवन, उपनयन and other संस्कारऽ and on portentous phenomena. The कीराभिन्रोदवय ( लक्षणा p. 356 ) quotes argeqaratgat on elephants in prose and verse. बार्हस्पत्य (pr. in Punjab S. series). Also called नीतिस्वंस्व बालबोधक of आनन्द चना. In 46 श्ोकःऽ on प्रायश्चित्त बालमरणविधिकर्तव्यता बालम्भदरी by लक्ष्मीदेवी; pr. (आयार, श्यव- हार and प्रायश्च ) by J. R. Ghar- pure and vyavahara portion is 596 translated by him. Vide sec, WII, 9 घालाकोंदय m. in afterare (दानसार). qaradrarege on spray. areEeraia m. by मिताक्षरा (०) या. III. 58. ). बुदिप्रकाश 111. by रघुनन्दन. ergo by arama (son of the great Shivaji). 1680-1689 A. D. On politics &c, pr. in Govt. Oriental series, Poona, 1926. guraia 2 small treatise of about one page in print in prose. D. C. mss. No. 207 of A 1881-82 and 145 of 1895-1902. Defines WA 25 श्रेप्रोभ्युदपपाधन्‌ ; and sum- ~ marises rules on gaaqqa, विवाह, ग्माधान and other संस्कारः, qawgt- aq, पाकयज्ञ, east, aan, rules common to all, duties of the four qos, वानपस्थ and यति, राजधर्म. हेमाद्रि in चतुर्ग (II. 2. 746 ) quotes some sittras on , उथनयन 214 it is m. in ` प्रायश्चित्तत्रयख. 1. O. cat. vol. IIl p. 386 (No. 1323 ) sets out the whole egf. Vide sec. 25. C. by हरिराम. बधाष्टमी. | बुधाष्टतीत्रतक्राल निर्णय. बुधाष्टभीव्रतोयापन Stein's cat. p. 96. बृहज्जातिवितरेक by araftarref ( Ba- roda 0. I. 9705 ). बृहत्वारारारस्शति ( pr. Jivananda Sm. part Il. pp. 53-309 ). wgratgar by व्यास. Hislory of Dharmatdstra qeaa.pr. 111 Anan. Sm. pp. 99-107, Texearat of वामनभटु. qextaardvs m. by ego in मलमास- req and ससफारतश्छ . यहद्तिष्ठस्सृति 111. by मिताक्षरा, हलायुध, मद्‌. OT. वृहद्िष्स्तृति. करहवत्यास m. by Rare. - वृहस्यतिशान्ति (from संस्कारकोस्तुभम of अनन्तदेव ). वृहस्पतिस्प्रति-५14८ sec. 37; pr. Jiva- nanda Sim. part I pp. 644-651 and Anan. Sm. pp. 108-111. C. m, by हेप्राद्रि (परिरोषखण्ड, काल 1. 309 ). वेजवाप ( 01-पि ) ग्य 11. by कुमारिल- wz in तन्गरार्तिफक on मीमांसासत्र (I.3.11)in the words 'आण्वलायनक aa बेजवरापिशते vat”. anarregia m. by अपराक्रं (in verse about spra(ret and सपिण्डन ) बेनवापायन 111. by हेमाद्रि. वोपणभद्रीय. C. by माधवन arareagzer Pr. in Mysore ©. O. L. series, ed. by Dr. Shamagiastri } divided into 4 प्रश्चऽ of गह्य, two sats of qyeraaxaitaren, 5 stats of warary, 3 of पितरमेशरह्त्र and one of feqitatreaax. It is the बोधा- यनगरह्यशोषसुन्र (11. 6) that contains a passage about gamfame (adop- tion ) that resembles closely a passage of बरतिष्ठ धमष. C. परणव्याख्या by अष्टाबक्छ, Lest of works on Dhurmasastru C. भाष्य (called ferret). Hul- tzsch II No. 668. द्रौधावनगह्यकारिका by कन raurahy. व्रोधायनण््यपद्दति by केहावस्वामिस्‌. बोधायनगर्यपरिषशिष्ट (cd. by 1111111६}. दाधायनगद्यप्रयोगमाला by राम, son of चोण्ड or चाउण्ड. Ulwar cat. ex- tract 21. rcfers 10 परयोगसार. MEILGDIOR ICIP ORE p HweAala ON say ritual. चोधायनवर्भस-४१५९ sec. 6:9¢. Anan. Sin, pp. 425-404 and Mysore (०, O. {. series Coby गीभिन्दस्वामिन्‌ ९८ Mysore G.O.L. series 3, C. gam by qinarafarss. वरोधायनसंग्रह. बोधायनस्नातघथोग | bY कनकरसभापति. Hultzsch (२. [. No. 672. याधाय्नस्श्रति- गोधायना्धिक by विदयापतिभदु. बाधाथनीयपारेक्ञि् in. in आद्िकतच् by रध. नह्मगभस्घृतति in. in मिताश्चरा (on ar. HT. 268). अपरक, entre 5१? त्रत्मसस्काग्मखखते bv नागयणङ्रक्कर. Re- 1९15 to मुगािभिःष्य, TIZUTPT, पाग स्फरगरहाभाष्य. N. (new series ) p. 250 बल्लौदनधरायश्ित्त by श्रीनिवामदीस्ित ( Baroda (2. 1, 6789 ५). ब्राह्मणपद्धति. ब्राह्मणसवस्व by हलायुध; (sec. 72 ). 707. धा Calcutta in 1893 and at Benares. जाह्यवधम्मृति m.in faararer (या. 17. 237). weeny ov रद्रुनन्देन. Probably difficut izvom che famous रधर AeRTAS AUT. N. (new. series ) 1 भक्तिपरन्रलत ०, तरयग्धूनन्यून 10 8 उदयोतः. भच्िमागमयादा OV PAZ aay, WAEARTATS ot ATMS ). | WENA ra 2 SON OF लिबदास. व्ह्मचारिव्रतलोपध्रायश्चित्तप्रयोग 1131२५९. , cat. vol. IL, p. 24५. वद्मदतभाष्य Mm. in shea by wee 25 quoted by कल्पतरु. So earlicr | than 1100 ^. D. It appears to be a (0. ON Breer Tar. नह्रकाशिका ( com. on सन्ध्यामन्तर ) of वनन्नालिपनिश्र son of म्रहेक्षयिश्र. ब्र्मथज्ञिरोरत्न by afi 4 भक्तिरसासृतसिन्ध ^, तत्रातन ; vol. 1, p. 260. भीमपराक्रम Mm. in wResradt of मोषि- न्दानन्व, in भद्धसोख्व ( ठोडरानन्द ), in तिथितच्व (seems to be an astrological work ). शक्तिदीपिका (on the question, when food may be taken before an eclipse ). खक्तिपकरण by कमलाकर. खजबलभीम of भोजराज. Vide pp. 278- 279 above ; m. in आद्धविवेक of कल पगाणि, टोडरानन्द्‌. An astrologi- cal work. argh Aufrecht’s Leipzig cat. No. 538. भ्तछ्छद्धयादिप्राणषतिष्ठा Leipzig cat. 537. Aufrecht’s ( 0. 499 ) of चण्डेभ्वर. Probably ५ work of भोज धरिभ्वर. दपालपद्धति 1. in rere. दपालबललम by परष्ठगम. An ency- clopzedia of Dharma, astrology, poetics &c. m. in नि. सि. ; निर्णय - दीपक, काठानिणयसिदखान्तव्याख्या. „~ ~~~ ------- -- ee ~~ 599 इपतिमादान. भगुस्यति m. by Rowen, कालबिषेक of जीगत ०, मिताक्षरा, sare. भेरबार्वापारिजात by जेच्रसिंह. भेराच्ापारिजात by भ्रीनिषासभटु, pupil of छन्दरराज, and son of श्रीनिकेतन, अ्रष्टवेषणवखण्डन by भीधर. मकरन्दध्रकाश by geen सिद्धान्त. On आहिक, सस्कार ; ms. ( Bik. car, p. 416 ) is dated wag 1725 (1668- 9 A.D.) मङ्गटनिणेय by गणेश, son of Faq @agq. On the rites to be per- formed at उपनयन, विवाह &c. मथरी- Occurs as the last compo’ nent of many works, e. 8. मोज्र- प्रवरमसरी, स्मृतिमजरी (of गोषिन्द्‌- राज ). मटश्रतिष्ठातत्त्व of रद्चनन्दन. Vide sec. 102. मटाम्नायादिषिचार (on religious [126 tices in the seven principal ma- thas ot the इाकराचा्थं school ), N. vol. X. 256 and Stein’s cate p. 312. । मटोत्सगं of कमराकर (C. P. cat. Nose 3771-72 ). | wateay of भाश्चेदेव ( C. P. cat. No. शपालछत्यसष्ठच्चय 111. 111 छत्यरतनाकर ! 3770). मणिमशरीच्छविनी. मण्डपकतव्यतापरूजापद्धति by शिवरामश्चङ्क. मण्डपङकुण्डमण्डन of नरहरिभदु anit. C. प्रकाशिका ( by author ). मण्डपङुण्डसिद्दि by frase दीक्षित, son of बरह्मा ; composed at काही in sake 1541 ( 1619-20 A. D, ). 600 History of Dharmasaisira C. बिदति by author ; HURTS. इण्डरत्नाकर, प्रतिष्ठासार- सग्रह, प्रयोगसार, रामवाजपेथी. मण्डपनिणंय 11. 11 उत्सगंमयख . मण्डपपरकरणः मण्डपोद्ठासनप्रयोग $ a son of धरणीधर. नण्डलकारिका ( Auticchts Leipzig cat. No. 647 ). मण्डलदेवतास्थापन ( Aufrecit’s Leip- zig cat. No. 648 ) waaay. मतोद्धार by agraitea. मश्ररासेत by अनन्तदेव, son of आपिदेव ; m. 111 स्शृतिकोस्तम. Sec. 109. मरखनपारिजात utributed to मदनपाल (composed by fasavaqzag |. Vide sec. 93. मदनमहाणेव Vide एहाणय . Heated OF मदनरत्नप्रदीष altributcad to मदनसिहदेव. Vide sec. 94. Ulwar cat. cxtract 336 for wRareale; Baroda O. 1. No. 1035 on gre is dated सवत्‌ 1551 (1494-5 A.D.) This last refers to भहुविभ्वनाथ भ्रीमाह्लिगूजर as the author मधुपकानणय. मधुषकंपद्धति. मध्यमाङ्गिरसस्सृति 111. in मिताक्षरा ( या. IN. 243, 247, 257, 260 ). मध्वाह्धिक. मनुस्सृति or भानवधमंशान्ञ. Vide sec. 31 ( vide p. 157 for editions of commentaries ) C. मन्वथ्क्तावली by seeaz. _ Vide sec. 88. He was a native of बारेन्द्री 1. ९. Rajsahi in Bengal. mentions C. मन्धाहायाज्ञुसारिणी by गोषिन्दराज (pr. by V. N. Mandlik ). Vide sec. 76 C. नन्दिनी by aeqarart. A lau writer. (pr. by V. N. Mandlik). C. भमन्वथवित्रति bv नारायणसवन्न. Between 1100-1 3५0५ A.D. (opr, by ४, N. Mandlik ». C. मन्वथचन्हिका by गधत्रानन्द- सरस्वती. Laer than gee Gy om V.N. Man2uik ). C. खखबोधिनी by मणिरामदीक्षित son of agra ( vide Stein’s cat. p. 98 ) C. bv असहाय. Vide see. $$. C. by उदयदङर 11. in तिं. र. lar- lier than 1360 4. D. C. by gare. 11, in मेधातिथि भाष्य, C. by पञ्ज. (.. by छरष्णनाथ. C. by धरणीधर in. by कुटयुफमभटर. Between 950-1200 ^ 1), C. by भागुरि m. by fz. ; vide p. 157. C. (भाष्य ) by मेधातिथिः vide sec. 63 (pr. by, V. N. Mandlik and by J. R. Gharpure ). C. by asaq, m. by arariafar. C. by रामचन्द्र (pr. by V. N. Mandlik ). C. by sfraz. C. anonymous ( Kashmirian ); portions pr. by Dr. Jolly. “Sy मेभ्रातििभ्ष्यि मन््रकमलाकर by कमलाकर, List of works on Dharmaéastra HET 111. 10 आचारमप्ख, wewerer by आशावित्यच्रिपाटिन्‌ in 20 दरिष्टेवऽ. Ulwar cat. extract 651. generat by अनिरुखभदर महामहा- वाध्याय, said to be a वाक्षिणात्य. In four काण्डऽ explains azas of arawramraa; ms.(N. vol. X. p. 122) dated sake 17171. ©. 1795 A. D. araneanerer m. by tye 11 एका- qafteres: मन्रपकाहा 1. by tye in दीक्षातच्व. geacararer by हरदत्त. Vide under एकाश्चिकाण्डमन्त्रव्याख्या . मन्बरह्वक्ताषली 71, in ghar and मलमासतसतव by Tye. अन्तररत्नदी पिका m. in अहल्याकामधेनु. मन्त्रसारसग्रह 11. in सदवाचारचन्दरिका मन््रसारसेग्रह Of शिवराम. sya 07 मेघमाला OF रत्नमाला attributed to नारद्‌. Deals with indications of prospective rain, famine etc, from the appcar- ance of the atmosphere &c.; . in अद्धुतसागर of agree. warfare by wage in 7 kandas. ( Tri. cat. Madras Govt. mss, 1919-22 p. 4404 ). मरणकर्मपद्धति ( ascribed to the ag- trues ). aroraraftrefrot on fites and ex- piations to be performed at time of death ( Bik. cat. p. 420). प्रीचिस्वृति- vide sec. 48. vurnfteg m. in xengtadiirer of एरषोलम ४.२. 76. 601 मलमासका्थौकार्यनिणय. भलमासतनत्छ or भलिम्डुचतच्य of ty नन्दन; pr. by Jivananda. C. by praftera ब्राचस्पति, son 01 राधावह्यभ and grandson of ee कृष्ण. (. by मथुरानाच. C. रिष्यनी by राधामोहन. C. by शरन्दाबन. C. by हरिराम. मलमासनिरूपण, मठभासनिणय by ददापुश्र. मलमासनिणय by हृहस्पति, son of we- रेव ( Baroda O. I. No. 12851 ). मलमासनि्णय by waar, son of मर- सिह. मटमासनिणयतन्त्रसार by षाददेव, मलमा सरहस्य by बृहस्पति, son of wage, composed in sake 1603 (1681-2 A. D.). aaaratrar Ano.; composed in 1579 A. ०. ( Bik. cat. p. 417). The date scems to be rather 1679 ( 1600 हके ). aeararrasait Ano, मलमासाथसंग्रह by गुरुभसादशमन्‌ ; N. ( new series ) vol. I, p. 279. - महागणपतिपूजापद्धति. महादाननिणय by king Marx of fer, with the help of ; ms. (Hp. cat. pp. XII, 36 and 122) dated ल. सं 392 (1 6. एए A. D. }, The pedigree is given as WUT, his son हरसिहदेष, his son Weer, 602 styled रूपनारायण here, though ह रिनाराथण elsewhere ; vide also Ulwar cat. No. 1413 where this work appears to be styled ` भहादानप्रयोगपदति. महादानपद्धति by रूपनारायण (1. O. cat. p. 550. No. 1715 must be taken as dated in Sake 1452, i, €. 1530 A.D., as the cyclic year fwaiz agrees ). Also called agr- कानपरयोगपद्धति; 10. by बाचस्यति in देतनिणेयः, by कमलाकर, in grange. महावानपद्धति by fea. महादानवाक्यावली of रत्नपाणिमिभ्, son of imttetaeltearitsr ; mentions a work called इविहाससद्चच्चय. महादानाहक्रमणिका, महावीपवानधिधि. महदिवपरिच्च्याप्रयोग ( बोधायनीय ) by gvareatfira, pupil of रद्रामतीथ. N. vol. X. p. 239. भहदिवीय m. by fatrarga. भहापदीपरत्नपद्धति N. ( new series ) I. p. 280. महाप्रयोगसार m. by we in आद्धिक- तस्य. भहाधरबरनिर्णय. महाप्रवरमाष्य by पुरुषोत्तम m. in his गोच्प्रषरमशरी. महारुग्रकमेकलापपद्धति. महारुत्रजपहोम नापदि. भहारुत्रन्यासपद्धति by बलभद्र. अहारुद्रषद्धति- see रुद्रकल्पद्रम. भहारुद्रपदति by अचटवेष दविषेविन्‌, son of त्सरा (acc. to शांखायन ) | ‘About 1518 4.9, History of Dharmatistra महारुद्रपद्धति by अनन्तदीक्षित, son of , विश्वनाथ, surnamed यज्ञोपत्रीत ; quotes प्रयोगरत्न of नारायणमभदु. So later than 1575 A. D. (also call. ed महारृद्रघ्मयोगपद्धति ). महारुद्रषदखति by काहीदीक्षित om. in VAPOWURA, महारुद्रपखति by नारायण (acc. to आश्वलायन ). महारुद्रपद्धति by परष्राम, son कणं (acc. to सामवेद); m. by शद्रकभ्ला- कर. Composed in 1459 A. D. महारुद्रपद्दति by बलभद्र. महारुप्रषद्धति by arafira ( or wrest) son of तिगलाभद्र, son of TANG ; of स्थलः, in शुजैरदेही. The work is also called sarefasrayét and the author was also called देदाङ्गराय- About 1627-1655 a. p. ( Ulwar cat. No. 1415 ). महारुग्रष्ति by रामचन्त्राचचायं ( 01 गोभि्ीयऽ ). Baroda O. I. 1250. महारुद्रपखति by षिष्छश्मंन्‌. महारुद्रपद्ति by वेदाङ्गाय, son of तिगलाभदट्र. Sameas the work of Haat. महारुद्रयज्ञपद्ति. माणव or महाणषप्रकाल्ञ 110. by हेमाद्रि ( vol. IIL. part 1, pp. 183, 1440) and by आधिक of ह्यूलपाणि This is also called eepfrererore or -प्रकाहा. Vide p. 308 above. | महाणंव ( कभमेविपाक ) attributed to भान्धातु, ason of agate: Vide ४९५८, 93, pp. 382-83. ,. Liat of works on Dharmaiietra meray by दिन्वेभ्वरभदु, son of पोङ्ग- we (? वेविभदु ). Vide sec. 93. (N. vol. VII p. 121 ). Same as महाणव attributed to wear. महाणषत्रताकं, WETSATAT- WOSTATAT AA नहाषिष्छपरूजापद्धति by अखण्डानन्द्‌, disciple of अखण्डातुबति. महाविष्णुपूजापद्धति by चेतन्यगिरि. बहारान्ति in two अध्यावऽ (of 18 and 25 sections ) on expiatory and propitiatory rites, srerferererfeeierote. महादिवराजिनिणंय by sana of काद्मीर. महाटमीनिणेय, महिषीवान, महिषीदानपन्त्र. महेश्वरधमाधम. मांसनिणंय by gite. मांसपीरषटता by weaver (C. P. cat. No. 4143 ) मांसमश्चषणकीपिका by वेणीराम शाकद्ी- पिन्‌. | मांसमीमांसा by नारायणभटु, son of रामेभ्वरमदु m. in नि. सि. मांसधियेक by भदवामोवर. Tries to prove that the directions about offering of flesh do not apply to the present age. मासविवेक or मांततस्वविवेफ by विभ्- नाथन्यायपश्वानन्‌, Composed about 1634 ^. D.; pr, in सरस्वतीभषन se- ries. Styled also ataavatyare 996 माधोयापन. भाण्डष्यस्सृति 11. in कालविवेकं 0 जीषूल ०, हेमाद्रि, दानमपूख , मातुलदतापरिणय. मादगोत्रनिणय by नारायण. मातृगेाच्रनिणय by लोगाक्षि भास्कर, son of चबन, son of ernater. ( Ba- roda O. I. No. 1463 ). On the question of भातुनेोन्र being prohi- bited in marriage to माध्वन्विनीयं ब्राह्मणः, arerere com. on हिरण्यकेशि्ध m. in fa. सि, भातुसावत्सरिकथाखप्रयोग, मातृस्थापनाधयोग. भाच्राविभादखनिणय by कोकिल. माधवधकारा or सदाचारयन्ोदय. Vide आ्चार्न्तोदय above. माधकीयकालनिणय. Vide कालनिणप of ane above. माधवीसारोद्धार by ererercoraivara, son of नारायण. An abstract of qe- कशरमाधवीय for महाराजाधिराज लक्ष्म oraex. Vide Stein’s cat. p. 309 for extract. About 1575-1600 A. D. arqareta m. by tye in देषप्रतिष्टा- area ( p. 509 ). माध्यन्दिनायाचारसथ्रहदीपि et Dy पताम. AaaIT eT ( ed. by Knauer and andin the G. O. series with com.) in two parts called qoqs. C, (भाष्य) by -अष्टावक्र ; mentions याज्ञवल्क्य, गौतम, पराशर, बेजवाप, 604 शवरस्वामी, wager, and मदुअष्टा- we himself. In € Intro, to 2nd gew he says he composed when roo years ( of what era? ) were completed. मानषणह्यपरिशिद् ( BBRAS cat. p.206 No. 657 ). मानवधमशाख- vide under भनुस्थृति. भानवश्ाखकल्य mn. by हेमा. arramnivaa of arafirg (^. २. cat. No. 4116 ). मानसोलास of ara. Vide अभिल- feerafaearator above. भाकंण्डेयस्सुति m. by मिताक्षरा (on या. 1. 19 ) and स्सृतिचन्दिका भा्तण्डदीपिक्रा 71. in अहल्याकामधेनु. मातण्डाखनचान्द्रका by घुकुन्द्लाल. भालवदकषन 111. in दानरत्नाकर of चण्डे- श्वर. Itis probably only a refe- rence to some view of भोज्ञ and -notto a work of that name. भासद्त्य, नासतस्वविवेचन Ano. Onthe months and appropriate feasts, fasts and religious rites in each. ( Bik. cat. p. 421 ). भासद्षण. मासनिणेय by भोजि. मासमीनांसा by गोङुलनाथ महामहो- वाध्याय, On 4 kinds of months, आण्ड, सोर, साधन and नाक्षत्र, and on the various religious rites and festivals of each of the twelve months of the year. भासादिनिणेय by gftg. History of Dharmatistra मासिकशथाद्धमिणय by eerseot father of saazret ; m.in नि. सि, भासिकभा पद्धति by गोपीनाथमदु. भासिकश्रादधपयोग ( आपस्तम्बीय) by रघनाथ मडुसम्राटस्थपति, भा सक चमानापन्यास by मोनि Rett: वीत. मिताक्षरा com, on गोतमधमसत्र by avam. Vide sec. 86. मिताक्षरा com. 01) याज्ञवल्क्यस्मुति by मथुरानाथ. मिताक्षरा com, on याज्ञवल्क्यरभृति by विानेभ्वर; also called ऋलज्चुमिताक्षर. Vide sec. 79. C. प्रमिताक्षरा or प्रतीताक्षरा by नन्दषण्डित, Vide sec, 105, C, बालम्भदी 21125 लक्ष्मीष्याख्यान by लक्ष्मीदेषी. Vide 566. Irr; ptr. in Ch, S, series (उ्यत्रडार) and by J. र. Gharpure (आचार, प्रायश्चितं and व्यवहार). C. wart -by विन्वेभ्वरभदु. Vide sec. 93 p. 285. (व्यवहार text pr. by Mr. Gharpure and tr. by him ). C. भिताक्षरासार by ayaaa गो- स्वामी. C. by प्रङन्दलाल- C. by र्नाथ वाजपेयी ( vide Peterson’s 6th Report p, 11). . C. तिखान्तसंश्रह by राधामोहन- wai. C. by qergwag. 0. अथाख्यानकौीपिका by निरदूरि- असवेपाध्यायः, son of दैवराजभष्ुः On व्यार. 1491 of works on Dharmasistra 608 मिताक्षरासार (summary of विज्ञान श्वरःऽ work ) by मयाराम. मिथिलेशाहिक by taraitisrat, son of saeeata ( Palm-leaf Ms. No. 11950 Baroda O. I. ) on मोनादि- बिधि, दाय, अरोच, प्रायि. गगोलीससीवेभ्वरशमरी composed WANA. under prince gaftre of मिथिला. छनिमतमणिमाला by वामदेव. Speaks of the daily religious duties according 10 qraaz such 25 होचबिधि, व॒न्तधावन, स्नान, सन्ध्याविधि, तपण, swag, देवपूजा, मोजन, मांसभक्षण, द्रव्यशुद्धि, गाहस्थ्य- धम. >. vol. VI. pp. 30-32. [Ie wrote also चनिथिलेङचरित describing Hegreme and his nine descendants, gsr having got wy from Delhi king. N. vol. VI. p. 48. मीमांसापल्वल by इन्द्रषति, son of रुचि- पति and रुक्रििणी ; applies rules of मीमांसा to waarrer matters such as qeraeftra, भा, उत्सं. N. vol. V. p. 281-82. His teacher was गोपालमटु. मरक्तकेत्रप्रकाह्च by भास्कर son of आपाजिभटू ; divided into प्रकारऽ छनृरसृतरृत्याविपदति by pra. Quotes हुखितच्व. N. ( new se- ries ) vol. III. p..15§2. मुहूतकण्डामरण. मृदतेकलीन्दर by सीतलदीक्षित. खहतकल्यद्रम 71. by महदेव in शहतै- दीपक ( Earlier than 1650 A. D. ). मुदूतेकल्पदरूम by केशष. छदतकल्पद्रम by विद्लवीकषित, son of gaara, of कष्णािगोच्न ; composed in 1628 A. D. C. मसरी by author. aeaeerret by दुःखमखन. इदतेगणपति by गणपतिराषल, son of | हरिदाङ्कर, composed in 1685 A.D. C. by परमडुखः, son of सीताराम. —— on seven holy places अयोध्या, ¢. by परष्ठराममिभ्र. मधुरा, माया &c. ( Baroda O. [ 12386). He quotes दतचक्राबलिः vedic passages like [सितासिते सरिते छहूरतचन्द्रकला by हरजीमष्. About (101 प्रयाग ), अष्टचक्रा नवद्वारा देवानां 1610 A. D. पूरयोध्या ( तेैर्मयारण्यक ), धागक्षरं प्रथम्रजा (ते at.) for अषन्तिका and गोपालतापिनी, शसिंहपूर्बतापनीय and छदूतीचिन्तामाणि by रामदेषज्ञ, son of अनन्त and younger brother of नीटकण्ड, composed at Benares रामतादनीय for मथुरा, माया and काशी respectively. हक्तिचिन्तामाणि by गजपति दरुषोत्तमदेष. On religious duties on a pil- gtimage to जनक्ञाथपुरी. About 15600 A, D. in 1600-01 A.D.; 71.10 सस्कारमरख of सिदेभ्वर } pr. at Bombay in 1902; ( vide Ulwar cat. extract 543 which shows that नीलकण्ठ '* was a Pandit in Akbar’s court ) His ancestors came from चिम, (. प्रमिताक्षरा by author ; pr. at Benares 1848. C. कामधेचु. C. by नीलकण्ठ. C. diqwattrer. C. दीयुषधारा by गोविन्द, son of मीलकण्ड, composed in 1603 A.D. Pr, at Bombay in 1873. गोचिन्वु was nephew of author. CC. by रषुदेषजः (^. षदसाहन्नी. ह्तयिन्तामणि by वेङ्कटेशामटु. छहर्तचिन्तामणिसार. हहर्तचिन्तामणिसारिणी, छ्तशूहामाणि by firateg, son of sft- senda of arcarsritrs. शतत by केश देषज्ञ, son of कभ- लाकर ; m. in संस्कारकोस्तुभ. C. by author. C. by earara. C. by गणेदावेषज्ञ, son of aare- कैवज्ञ ; composed about 1540 A.D. C. by महादेव m. in gatas sain 11. in andes. (~. दीपिका ( Madras Govt. mss. cat. No, 1870, 1874). बदतवषण by रालमणि, son of जगद्राम, son Of spreret of अलकंषुर to the south of syary. Ulwar cat. ex- tract 544. इहर्तदषण by frarares. ^. by माधवभटु. छदतंदीष by जयानन्द. हषूतेदीष by a son of शिषवेवज्ञ. Fitetory of Dharmatasira हदतंदीपक by arte. छडर्तवीषक by महदिव, son of argh ( ereafsra ? ). Vide Aufrecht's Oxf. cat. p, 336a. C. by author composed in Sake 1583 ( 1661 ^. ०. ). Mentions टोढडरानन्व्‌. छहर्तदीपक by रामसेवक, son of deter. बहूरतदीपिका m. in कालाचिधान acc. to नि. सि wpadifrer attributed to बादरायण, हद तंनिरणय. wearer. aariattar by देवराअ. घहर्तद्षण 07 मीर by रामसेवक fre- fea ( प. vol. XI preface p. 4 ). दतं शवणदीका by रामवत्त, हू्तमेरव by गङ्गाधर, son of मेरव- देवज. छहर्तभेरव by दीनदयाद् पाठक. घ्हतमओरी by यदुनन्दनषण्डित in 4 गुच्छ and ror verses. Vide Ulwar cat. extract No.5 45; com- posed in waa 1726 ( 1670 A.D.). werent by हरिनारायण. BEATA. हहूर्तमणि by विश्वनाथ. हहतंमाधवीय ascribed to सायण oF माधबाचायं. हषतंमार्तण्ड by dere. हरतमार्वण्ड by नारायणम, son of अनन्त, Composed in sake 1493 Phalguna (1.6, about March 1572 A.D.) near Devagiri in 160 verses, | Laat of works on Dharmattietra (^. srteeagar by author; pr. , aedeag m. in संस्कारमरएख of सिद्धे ( with text ) in Bombay, 1861. | भ्वर 2110 सेको. Earlier than 1650 Brena by शश्नार्थ; son of सरस, छ | न the हाण्डित्थगोज्र and चित्तपावन C. by लक्ष्मीपति. subcaste ; pr. at Ratnagiri in | हदूतसचय by क्षेमराम 1878. छहतंसर्व॑स्व by wyararant ( ? ), Is it ब्तंछक्तामाणि. not the same as the next ? हष्तंखक्तावली by erefrar. छदसरवस्व by रषुषीर, son of fage हूतष्ठक्ताबली by वेवराम. दीक्षितः, son of gq, at Benares ; atcamrret by भास्कर. composed in sake 1557 i. €. ggtamract by after ( vide 11]. 1635-36 ( vide N, vol. I. p. war Cat. extract 546 ). | 109). हहतंहक्ताबली by लक्ष्मीवास, son of | amare (vide Burnell’s Tanjore गोपालः; composed in 1618 a. p. ` cat. p. 79 a ). हहर्तष्ठक्ताषली by भरीकण्ठ. | छतेसार by भावुवत्त. छ्ार्तष्ठक्तावली by हरिभदु. | sig ggacear by वुगौसहाय. | aqafet by नागदेव. अहतेरत्न by ईभ्वरदास, son of ज्योतिष- |. setter by महदेव. राथ (also called इहूर्वरत्नाकर ). | | बद्तैसिन्धु by मधुस्वनमिश्र pr. weiter by गोविन्द्‌. | Lahore. । me tery, | me re ; m. in b 8 शद्तरत्नमाला by श्रीपति ; m. by tye. om mare by सूत्युजय कोकिल. C. by author. Gwar beaut: इदरत्नाकर by हरनन्दन. C. by author. छदतालङ्कार by गङ्गाधर, son of Fw. inden tadinaes Composed in gake 1554 are 15 जि by ( 1633 a. p. ). Vide Stein’s cat. इदर्तराजीव . ए | 7. 343 for extract. शरहृतैलक्षणपटल- | छदतोलङ्कार by जयगम. ature 111. in कालभाधष . iain | छदूतीवलि. हदतंदिवरण. मूखहा- a treatise on सङ्कर्पवाक्यऽ, ना- इदतहततदात. | न्दीभाखं, तिथिव्यवस्था, cettesre- कताशिरोमाणि by ध्मेभ्वर, son 0 राम ¦ व्यषरथा, आखग्यवस्था, गोषधादिश्ाय- wy, न्स, व्यबहारवायादिष्यवरथा, विबाह- and N. ( new series ) vol. II pp. 146-7, बूर्तिपरलिष्ठा- N. ( new series) I. 293. बर्तिधतिष्ठापन मूलनक्षन्नहान्ति ( 11165 for averting the ]). evil effects of birth on a day when the moon is in the Mala constellation). मलनक्षन्र्ान्तिप्रयोग attributed to शौनक. बलभदुप्रयोग by yea. मलहान्ति attributed to शोनक. भूलक्ान्तिनिणय Vide Stein’s Pp: 99. मलशान्तिषिधान. मूलदान्तिषिधि by मधुसवन गोस्वामी. गलाविकशान्ति. मल्यनिरूपण of गोपाल ( (.. P. cat. No 4321) WATE 07 मूल्याध्याय by arguz; con- tains summary of fines ordained in lieu of various gifts at vari- ous ceremonial rites, when one is unable to give the gifts. Names ataraurey. Ms. dated Sake 1756 (N, vol. X. p. 238). बल्याध्याय ( 111 5 1/2 verses ) attri- buted to कात्यायन. Deals with sub- stitution of money for gifts of cows and other property. Vide BBRAS. cat. vol, II p. [त for text. C. by eraatediiize. N. ( new ` series ) vol. III preface p. IV. cat. | History of Dharmatistra mararfy. Vide N. vol. II p. 49. C. by गोपालजी. C. by faga, son of areeren, sur- , named केष्णब and resident of sf पुर, Mentions edtesex and his | son, Later than 1670 A. D. — oe = जक Trent. सुत्युजयस्यृति m. in हेमाद्रि दानखण्ड pp. 764-65, 784 and in दानमयख. ! सृत्युमहिषीदानविधि ( gift of a she-buf- | 810 at the time of death of a person ) मेत्राय्णीयगृह्यपदाथोव॒क्रम मे्ायणण्यपद्धति (on 16 सस्कारऽ ac- | cording to मेन्रायण school ). The chap. called प्रथमपुरुष | मेन्नायणीयगष्यपरिशिष्ट m. by हलायुध, | हेमाद्रि, a. or मरञ्जायणीयोष्वैदेहिकपद्धति- Vide क्रिया- : पति मोक्षकल्पतरु (a part of Sarees 01 फल्पतरु ) by लक्ष्मीधर. Sec. 77 मोश्षिश्वरनिबन्ध 11. by गवाधरे in com. on पारस्करण््यपरिशिष्ट, This 's pro- bably the same as the प्रश्चज्ञानदोष- पच्छाप्रकरण of ब्रह्माकं, son of मोक्षे- sat ( Bik. cat. pp. 325-326 ). -मोहचडोत्तर Or मोच्चष्टोत्तर; 111. in हेमाद्रि (IIL. 2. 883 as मोहचौरोक्तर ), नि. सि यजुर्बह्भा or कर्मसराणि by विद्रलदीक्षित or विहलेह्ा, son of qgurart and younger brother of atatara, 17 3 काण्डऽ ON HUMP, सस्कार, AAT ara (consecration of wer fire ) according to aygwy. Vide Ulwar cat. No. 1280. । | | Liat of works on Dharmatdstra यञुर्विगाहपखति. यङ्ेविषृषोत्सगतततव of geo. Vide S€c. 102. यश्वविभाद्धतश्व of age. Vide sec. 102. यजुर्वेदीयभाखविधि of Steg. Vide un- der भद्धविधि, यशःशाखाभेदतत्वनिणैय by qs cg टकल ( Baroda 0. I. 374 ). His ferarer is that wherever the word ate occurs by itself तेत्तिरीयहाखा is to be understood and not graye. यकपाभ्वेसगरहकारिका m. in गदाधरभाष्य On पारस्कर, यज्ञासेद्धान्तविग्रह by रामसेवक. धज्ञसिद्धान्तसंग्रह by मपसाद्‌. यक्तोपबीतनिर्णय ज्ोपवीतपद्धति by रामदत्त, son of गणे- श्वर ( for बाजसनेविहाखा ). यतिक्षोरबिधि by मधुसदनानन्द (Baroda 0. I. sors ). यतिखननादिपयोग by भीहोरवेदकोटीर- लक्ष्मण ; mentions यतिधभम॑सच्चुख्वय, यतिधमं by पुरुषोत्तमानन्वसरर्वती, pupil of पणानन्द, विधं Ano. यतिघर्मपकाश by वा्देषाश्रम ( Baroda 0. 1. 12289 ). धतिचमप्रकाशा by बिभ्वेभ्वर. Same as ०सद्मह below. धतिपर्मपवोधिनीं by नीखरूण्ठयतीन्व् पतिषर्मसद्रह Ano (N. vol. IX. p. 278), First speaks of sraraaceqer from हाङ्कराच्ायं, of भठाम्नाय and then of gfinnt. ४, 8, 77. 609 यतिधर्मसेग्रह by Reaacacertt, pupil of edgy Rarer (pr. by आनन्वाभस, Poona ). यतिधर्मसष्ठच्चय by यादषप्रकाहा in 11 parvans for Years. यतिधम॑सष्ठच्चय by र्ुनाथमदराचायं. यतिध्मसष्ठच्चय by विभ्वेभ्वरसरस्षती, pupil of wag विश्वहा ; ms. (N. vol. VIII. p. 293) dated सवत्‌ 1668 (1611-12 A. D. ). Also called यतिध्मसग्रह (same as above). यतिनित्यपद्धति by आनन्दानन्द (Baroda O. I. 5017 ). यतिपत्नीधमनिरूपण by परुषात्तमानन्द्‌ - सरस्वती, pupil of guitsex. यतिमरणोषयुक्तांशसेग्रह. यतिलिङ्कसम्रथेन in 3 स्कल्धऽ. यतिवन्दननिषेध. यतिषन्वनरातदूषणी, यतिषन्वनसमर्थन, afragar or aeararafe of विष्व waa. On सन्यास, the four kinds of afas, viz. कुटीचकः वद्ठुक) हस, परमहस and their duties. N. vol. X. 175. Mentions विधानमाला, थतिसंस्कार ( 2 part of धतापनाररसिंह ). यतिस्तस्कार ( on the funeral rites and wares for यति performed by his son). N. vol. ॐ. p. ro. यतिसंस्कारप्रयोग by रायम्मदुः यतिसस्कारपयोग by बिश्वेभ्वर. N. vol. I p. 173. rfertvarcrare (two different works) Vide Stein's cat. p. 99, 610 यतिसंस्काराबेधिनिर्णय (1. 0. cat. Pp. 523 No. 1647 ). यतिसस्कारोपयोगिनिणय, यतिसन्ध्यावार्तिक by इरेभ्बर, pupil of ergy. N. vol. X. p. 9. यतिसिद्धान्तनिणय by सरस्वती. यत्यवुष्ठान. यत्यनुष्ठानपद्धति by शाङ्करानन्व्‌. यत्यन्तक्मपद्धति by रघनाथ. यत्याचारसंग्रहीययतिसस्कारप्रयोग by षि- भ्वेभ्वरसरस्वती ( N. vol.I p. 174). यत्याचारसपर्षिप्रजा ACG Aaa. यत्याह्धिक ( Baroda 0. I. 8563 ). यमस्मृति. Vide sec. 49; pr. Jiva- nanda Sm. part I pp, 560-567 and Anan. Sm, pp. 112-116, सञिवानन्द्‌- य्लाजीय by agit son of agug. On funeral rites, सपिण्डीकरण etc. Relies on जआश्व्टायनसज्, भार- anrag, wreqs thereon and on यदाबन्तभास्कर by भास्कर or हरिभास्कर, son of आपाजिभटु, son of हरिभदु, son of पुरुषोत्तम ; patronised by यदहावन्तवेव, son of इन्द्रमणि, king of Bundelkhand, Bik. cat. p. 508 contains सवत्सरक्त्यप्रकाह out of this work.’ N. vol. IV p. 269 has same. हरिभद्र hailed from श्यम्बङेभ्वरषुरी and was of कास्यपगोत्र and आपाजिमह dwelt in @reft. About 1676. धा्ञबर्यस्चुति- vide sec. 34. History of Dharmaéastra C. by अषराकं ; vide sec. 79. ^. by कुलमणि oe C. by देषबोध 11, in शुचित्वं of tye C. by ध्मैभ्वर m. in हालपाणि'ऽ प्रायश्चित्तविवेक ( p. 529 ). (^. बालक्रीडा by विश्वरूप. Vide sec. 60, CC. विभावना. CC. apgereafeaett of सोमयानिन्‌. CC. aqaaret by pupil’s pu- pil of सोमयाजिन्‌. CC, ano. C. मिताक्षरा by मथुरानाथ, C. भिताक्षरा by विज्ञानेश्वर. Vide sec. 70. For com. on मिताक्षरा, vide under ftrateret above. C. by tgarerag. (~. दीपकलिका of शूलपाणि. Vide ४९८, 95. C. बीरमित्रोदय by भिधमिश्र. Sec. 108 ( portion printed in Ch, S. series ), याक्िककमलाकरी (C. P. cat. No. 4414 +. या्राप्रयोगतत्व by हरिशङ्कर यात्राविवाहाद्यपाय (auspicious times for marriage, journey &c. ) ( new series) vol. II p. 149 युक्तिकल्पतरु of भोजदेष, Deals with state administration and topics of राजनीति; such as दृत, कोष, छषि- कमे, बल, यात्रा, सन्धि, जिह, नगर- निर्माण, agra, छत्र, धवजः. पञ्च - रागाधिपरीकषा, अञ्ज, शञजपरीक्षा, AAT” Lést of works on Dharmatastra लक्षण &८. Names भोज himself as authority and garenz, गर्ग, बृहस्पति, पराहार, वातस्य, लोहप्दीपः, शाङ्गधर and several पुराणऽ. (pr. in Cal. O. series No. 7 ) युगाणव ( C. ?. cat, No. 4418 ). GUSIES: युखकोशाल by er. युद्धचिन्तामणि by wares Pravda. युद्धजयप्रकाहा by दुःखभसन. युद्धजयार्णव m. by रघु° in ज्योतिस्तसत्व. युद्धजयाणेव (from अ्चिएुराण chap, 123-125 ), युखजयोत्सव. C, ano. C. by मथुरानाथ aya. C. by रामदत्त. युखजयोत्सष by गङ्गगरामर in five qaprats. Ulwar cat, extract 551, जुद्धया्रा m. in wares by eyo. GEXHTAGT: रङ्गनाथदेशिकाह्धिक by रङ्गनाथदेहिक रजतदानप्रयोग by कमलाकर रत्नकरण्डिका by द्रोण. ( Hp. cat. pp. X-XI ms. copied in संवत्‌ 1189 + 1. €. 1132-33 ^. 0. ); treats of rites for Vajasaneyins. 0. C. Ms. No. 273 of 1886-92 is in- complete and contains the fol- lowing topics, viz. srafsaw, WEEE, शाषारोच, ATT, गहस्थाभरमपरम,' दायः, ऋण, व्यवहार, दिष्य, wep &c. रत्नकोक्ञ m. by हेमाद्रि ( III. 2. 750 ), In HeArereT Of Tyo, टोडरानन्व, 611 रत्नदीपषिण्वप्रकाहा. रत्नमाला by शतानन्द ; 11. in ज्योति- erea ( vol. 1. 2. 596 ) रत्नमाला "1. in शुचितस्व of nyo, गोचि- न्वाणव, निणयदीपक ; probably sf- पति ऽ work or हातानन्द्‌ !§ work. रत्नस्रह 11. in नि. सि, रल्सागर mM. in नि. सि, शत्नाकर- vide under चण्डेश्वरं sec. 90. रत्नाकर by गोषाल. रत्नाकर by शमप्रसाद. Stein’s cat. p. 100 has the portion on व्राय- faa. रलाणव 71. by tye. रलनावलि m.in हेमादि ( 171. 2. 857), by रघ ° in भलमासतच्त्व. रथसप्तमीकाठनिणय. रविसंक्रान्तिनिणय by रघनाथ son of माधव. रसासृतसिन्धु M. 11 सदाचारबन्दिका ( probably on भाक्त ) राप्रवभद्ीय 111. by नि. सि राजकौस्तभ or राजधर्मकोस्तुभ ( part of स्सृतिकास्तुभ ) by अनन्तदेव. Vide sec. 109 राजधर्मसारसग्रह attributed to तलानि- राज of Tanjore ( 1765-1788 ). Watatra ano. राजनीति by द्वीदास. राजनीति by भोज राजनीति by वररुचि (2). Begins with the well-known verse about nine gems ‘ धन्वतरिः etc.’ ( vide Burnell’s Tanj. cat. p. 141 ०), 618 History of Dharmastisiva राजनीति by हारिसेन of Benares. weatireraty by अनन्तदेव, रजनीतिकामधेष्ठ m. by राजनीतिरत्नाकर crvarfiteraty by रिष, son of विभ्व- of अण्डेण्डर, SAT. राजनीतिषकाहा by firaftrer (part of वीरमित्रोदयः) pr. in Ch. ऽ, series. राजनीतिप्रकादा by रामचन्त्र अहुद्ीवार, राजनीतिमर्ख-- same as नीतिमयूख of नीलकण्ठ. शजनीतिहाञ्च by चाणक्य in 8 chap- ters and about 566 verses. W, and K, cat. II. p. 182. Tere 01 शुपश्षणी (on politics ) by रामानन्दतीथ, Names टयक 5 eter on मनुस्सृति.. शजमार्तण्ड of भोज. Vide p. 278 above. D.C. Ms. No. 342 of 1879-80 is a work callsd wa- मार्तण्ड of भोज्ञ॒ on astrology in relation to qetsrrey and contains such topics 25 व्रतबन्धकाल, विबाह- wae, विषाहराशियोजनाविधि, सक्रान्तिनिणय, विनक्षय, परुषलक्षण, नेषादिलन्रफल. The Ms. is dated सवत्‌ 1655 Qa (1. €. about April 1598 ). C. by गणवति. राजलासक m. in सरस्वतीविलास ( My- sore ed. p. 21). गजषहुम (by सज्रधारमण्डन ? ) m. in छषतैर्दवीपक of महादेष. राजाभिषेक by अनन्त. राजाभिषेकथ्रयोग ( from नीतिमयूख of नीलकण्ठ ). राञ्याभिषेक (from टोडरानन्द्‌ ). राज्याभिवेकपदखति (part of विनकरो- वोत ). राज्याभिरेक्परयोग by कमलाकर, son of रामङ्कष्ण. Sec, 706. राज्याभिषेकपयोग by wary सन्रादस्थ- पति, son of arr. रामकत्पद्रम by sarang, son of कम- लाकरभदु. Divided into ten kan- das, which were in order काल, UTA, AT, सस्कार, TAIT, शान्ति, ara, आचार, राजनीति and ( gap, probably geast ). Aufrecht says that there were seven @rugs, but a ms. in Bhadkamkar collection gives ten and names them as above except the last. Flou- rished about 1640-1670 A. D. ( Vide Bik. cat. pp. 445-447 for some of these kandas ). THEE 11. in निकषयासत and fx. सि. Traraearera attributed to सायण. रामदेषप्रसाव alias ararecfroiq by विश्वनाथ or feepaz, son of हाम्धुदेष ; composed in sake 1506 (1584 A. D. ). रामनवमरीनिणीय 0 गोषालदेशिकाय. Quotes नि. सि. रामनवषमीनिणय by faethe. रामनाथपद्धति by रामनाथ. रामनित्या्वंनपति ५” खत्ज शमनिबन्ध by क्षेमराम, son of भीभव- नन्व्‌, son of atfarerarg. Compos- - edin 1720 ^. 9. ( Ulwar cat. No. 1431 ) List of works on Dharmasistra रमध्जापयति by क्षेमराज. ( Ulwar cat, No. 1432 and extract 341 ). राघषजापखति by रामेपाध्याय, Stein’s cat. p, 101. CTAARIT (1) com. on ereeeattrr by राम- (2) a digest of religious obser- vances compiled in the name of eaqreret ( described as attz- agenda ), son of याव्वराज and descendant of the royal family of माणिक्यचन्द्र, छपाराम was himself a feudatory of Jehangir and Shah Jehan. The I. O. cat. ( vol. III. p. 502) says that the real author was राघवेन्द्र, son of ereftater and father of wate चिरथीव. Relies on ?arfx, माधव, and stg writers, Latter half of 17th century. Peterson ( in Ulwar cat. No. 1433) says that this is a com. on the कालकतच्वविषेखन, But from the description in the I. O. cat. this does not appear likely. गमपसाद्‌- vide तीथैए्नाकर, रामाजुजनित्यकर्मपडधति Vide Peterson’s 6th Report p. 107. रामाथेनवन्डिकां m. 10 frre and हडितखव of go, नि. सि. रामाचनखन्द्रिका by अण्युताभम. राम्राथेनखन्दरिका by आनन्ववनयति, pu- pil of प्रमहंसपरिवाजकाचायभीमन्छु- gerea in 5 qezes. (D. C. ms. 440 of 1891-95 is dated Sake 1607 a8 1, €, 1685 a. D.), Traces शस परम्परा from af to. गोडपाव्‌, गोविन्द्‌, शङ्कराचायं, विभ्वरूप, सुरेभ्वर; in four qees C. aydifrer by गदाधर. राप्रा्चनचन्दरिका by कुलमणिशुद्ध 1चैनदर्षण ( Ulwar cat. No. 1435). ९1नाचखनदीपिका रामाचेनपद्धति by रामानन्द. रामा्चनरत्नाकर by फेशाषदवास m. in अहल्याकरामधेल रामाचापद्धति by रामानुज waggerata m. by रघुनन्दन in g- दित, भादतच्च ( 2. 213 ). रायसिंहप्रकारा of गदाधर. रासयावापडति by रेषु ०, Vide p. 417 above. रासयात्राविषेक of sesanitr. Vide sec. 95. रुद्रकलशस्थापनविधि by राम्रङृष्ण, son of नारायण. रुद्रकत्प रुद्रकल्पतरू, (1) ano. ( Burnell’s Tanj. cat, p. 138a); ms. dated qaq 1714 (1657-8 A. D. ). (2 } by a son of विश्वेश्वर. रुद्रकल्पत्रुम 07 महारुदरपद्धति by अनन्त- देव, son of उद्धव द्विवेदी, resident of Benares, Mentions हेबाहि, टोडरानन्द्‌, प्रयोगपारिजात श्द्रकारिका of परशुरामः, नि. सि. Later than 1640 A. D. रुग्रचिन्तामणि 01 wari by शिवरामः son of विश्राम; for छन्दोगऽ ( Baroda O. I. 8018}. ` 614 श्ग्रजपसिद्धान्तरिरोमणि by रामचन्द्र पाठक. A very large work. Ba- roda O. I. 10946 has 13 प्रकरण and probably there were more. रुद्रपद्धति. (1) by परशुराम, son of कर्ण, an . eteqsreror. Describes’ the rites connected with Siva worship in the form of wer- ex. There are in all 1028 ver- 565 ON रुद्रजपप्रशासा, ऊण्डमण्डप- लक्षण, पीटपजाविधि, न्यासबिधि. Composed in संवत्‌ 1575 (1458 a. D.). Also called रुद्रकारिका, (2) another shorter treatise on same subject; introduction being partly identical. Com- posed between 1578-1643 A.D. ( vide I. O. cat. p. 584). (3) by अनन्तवीक्षित, son of frsq- ary. Baroda ms. 8030 is dated सवत्‌ 1809 (1752-3 A.D.), (4) Describes रुद्रप्रयोग following तेतिरीयराला, though रद्र is recited in all Sakhas; says ° स्मार्तरुद्रपरयोगस्य बोधायनसूअमूल- कत्वेन बहुचादीनां च तत्र बोधायनं ्रा- ह्यम्‌। रुद्रः पश्चधा रूपं sat wear महारुद्रोतिरुद्रश्चेति एकादशगुणन्र- ख्या । स्व॑श्च ar जपरुद्रो होमरत्रो- भिषेकर्द्रश्नेति । ` I. 0. ms. dated संवत्‌ 1587 1, € 1530-31 A. D. ( vide cat. p. 580 No. 1783 ); quotes खपनाथं often, रुद्रपद्धति ( मेत्रायणीय ) Baroda O. I. 2452. History of Dharmatistra emma by आपदेष. रु्रपद्धति by कारीदीक्षित, son of war- शिव. Also called sargeravatt and मरहारुत्रपडति. रुद्पद्धति by नारायणभटु, son of रामे- ग्वरभटु. ‘QUES शाखा शद्रः पठश्चते तथापि तैतिरीयश्ाखादुसारिण रुग्रः पठश्चते. | रुद्रपद्धति by भास्करदीषक्ित, son of शम- कृष्ण ( according to श्ाङ्कायनगुह्य). शुद्रपद्ति by tue; ms. (Bik. cat. p. 6071 ) dated Sake 1604 ( 1682 A. D. ), रुद्रपद्धति by बिभ्वनाथ, son of grata and younger brother of रामदेव ( for भाध्यन्दिनीयःऽ ). रुत्रपूजापद्धति- Peterson’s 6th Re- port p. 109. रुग्रविधानपद्धति by काहीदीक्षितः son of सवाशिबदीक्षित- रुद्रविधानपद्धति by ware. रुद्रविलासनिवन्ध by नन्दनमिश्र. रु्रस्नानविधि or शुद्रस्नानषद्धति by राम eer, son of arrqurag ; 771. in शान्तिरत्न oof कमलाकर. About 1570-1600, ; रुव्रपरतिष्ठा. - रुद्रलष्न्यास- manual of formula intended for ex worship. exaa or -योग by अनन्तदेव, son of उद्धव, residing at Benares, also called Sfrqate for वाजसनेयशाखा; Peterson’s 5th Report p. 175+ QRIATATCT,. सव्राक्षपरीक्षा. List of works on Dharmatistra रु्राचुष्ठानपद्धति by नारायण, son of weary ( D. C. No. 283 of 1886-92 ). Seems to be same as रुद्रपखति (4) above. wargeterata by मेङ्गनाथ, of the family of सर्वज्ञ. Relies on महाणव as the principal authority. रु्रष्ठानपचति by हाङ्कर, son of बहा- Wart "1. in व्रतोयापनषद्धति ; १. v. About 1750 A. D. रद्रावुष्ठानपति 01 -दीपिका. Vide ez- tate above. रुद्रालष्ठानध्रयोग by खण्ड भद, son of gear, surnamed अयाचित. रुद्राचनचन्दरिका of freer. सब्राष्चनमसरी by वेदाङ्गराय ; vide महा- रुद्रपदति खूपनारायणीय ( पद्धति ) by उदयसिंह ख्यनारायण, son of arftefirg. In the D. C. ms. No. 240, of A 1881-82 ( 428 folios ) a pedi- oree is given, which starts with भास्रकेसरी; in whose family was born arate who conquer- ed भोगिराज; his son was मदनसिह. उदयसिंह was 13th from मदनरसिह and king of उत्तरकोसल. The work deals with qresragraras such as getaey (upto folio 210), and 511). कूपवापीतडागादिषिधि, नवग्रहहोम, अयुतहोम, लक्षहोम, दुग - त्स. Relies upon भोजराज, टक्ष्मी- धर ( कत्पतरु ), हेमाद्रि, चण्डेभ्वरः पारिजात, हरिहर, भीमपराक्रम, ear धर, चिन्तामणि, वर्षदीप. महादान- परति of श्पनारायण ; described . above seems to be a part of 618 this; "1. in जलाहायारामोत्सगेषद्धति of नारायणमभटु. Between 1450- 1525 A. D. रेएकारिका or रेएककारिका- vide az स्करग्रह्यकारिका above. In 1266- 67 ^. D. | लक्षणप्रकाहा by मिच्रमिश्र; part of बीरमिन्नोदय (on politics ) ; pr. in Chowkhamba S. series. लक्षणरत्नमालिक। by नारोजिषपण्डितः, son of द्िष्वनाथ; in five Tefys on बणौ- भ्रमाचार, दैव, राज, TNT, शरीर ; seems to be a com. 01 his sage (in one hundred verses ), Vide Burnell’s Tanj. cat. pp. 132 b and 164 b. लक्षणङ्ञातक by नारोनिषण्डित. लक्षणसंग्ह 11. by हेमाद्रि in दनिखण्ड 7. 328, ऊुण्डमण्डपसिद्ि. लक्षणसदच्चय by हेमाद्रि. On the in- dications and predictions from bodily signs and on Prakrits. Vide Bik. cat. p. 411. लक्षणसष्ठच्चय 171. by हेमाद्रि in दान- खण्ड 0. 823, by नि. सि. लक्षणसारसद्खुस्वय- rules for the con- struction of शिषलिङ्गऽ in 32 sec- tions. लक्षहोमपद्धति. (1) by काक्ीदीक्षित, son of सदा- शिवदीक्षित. (2) by गोविन्द, son of पुरुषोत्तम, (3) by नारायणभदटु, son of रामेश्वर. Sec. 103. लक्ष्मणस्चल्चय 111, in शछदरतेदीपक 0, महादेव. 616 लक््मीतारायणार्चांकोददी by िवानन्व्‌ गोस्वामी in five syersrs. लक्मीसपर्यासार by भीनिवास, लष्कारिका by विष्ठाम्‌, son of tq- दस ( for माध्यन्दिनहाखा ). Baroda 0. 1. 12072 dated संवत्‌ 1552 and No. 4055 dated 1507 संबत्‌. ल्कालानिणणय by माधवाचार्य. The first verse is व्याख्याय माधवा- चायों धमौन्पाराहारानथ and the last verse is व्यतिषाते च वेधत्यां तत्कालव्या- feet तिथिः । (vide Bik. cat. Pp. 408-409 ). लष्चाणक्य, ल्टचिन्तामणि by बीरेश्वरभट गोडबोले. लष्जातिषिवेक 111. in greeter. लङ्कनारदस्छृति 171. by नि. सि. सं. कौ. ल्चनिणय by शिषनिधि ( Baroda O. I. 12854 ). लधुपद्धति or कमेतश्वप्रदीपिका by eenr- wg, son of geqiwa, son of wy- ara ; based on कारिका and aft, धामनभाष्य and जयन्त. Deals with leading topics of आचार, व्यबहार, N. vol. X. p. 248 ; Baroda 0.1. No. 1422 is dated सषत्‌ 1592 (1535-6 a.p.). It mentions चन्द्रिका, स्यरतिसार, «radar. Between 1300-1500 A. D. लष्षाराष्ारस्यृति. ९४4 हस्पतिस्पूति, लघुयमर्खति 71. by अरा (on थ. 1. 238 ) and by इलायुष in wae. ल्वसिस्दृति, कि) of Dharmatictra ल्खाषष्छुस्यृति 111. in अवरां and बाह्मण- स्व॑स्व 07 हलायुध ; pr. Anan. Sm. pp. 117-123. wyzare ( pr. Jivananda Sm. part II Pp. 310-320 ) m. in संस्कारमपूख, wyergegia pr. in Anan. Sm. pp. 124-127. लष्हातातपस्शृति pr. Anan. Sm, pp. 128-135, लघुशोनकस्सृति in 114 verses (Baroda O. I, 11863 ). लष्हारीतस्शृति- 111. in अपरां (pr. in Anan, Sm. pp. 136-141 and Jivananda Sm, part 1, pp. 177- 193 ). wvafireata (pr. Jivananda Sm. part I pp. 1-12 ) vide p. 109 above. लष्वाभ्वलायनस्सृति pr. Anan. Sm. ( pp. 142-181 ). BAN AS ललिती्चनचन्द्रिका by सख्धिदानन्दनाथ, guru of विच्ानन्दनाथ. कलिता्चनदी षिका. लदिताेनपद्धति by व्िदानन्वनाथ, pu- pil of स्वयप्रकाशानन्वनाथ, Proba- bly same as ; samara (on offerings of salt cakes to the deceased on 4th day after death ) ferftrreaftr- vide sec. 13, p. 76 ; Pr- Jivananda Sm. part II. pp. 375- 382 and Anan. Sm. pp. 182- 186 D. C. ms. 44 of 1866-68 contains a लिखितस्थृति in 6 अध्यायः where wftry and other sages are represented as asking लिखित about aratudwat and srreferes. List of works on Dhar'matastra लिङ्गलोभव्र. लिक्रतोभद्रकारिका- लिङ्गधारणचस्दरिका. लिङ्गधारणदीपिका. लिङ्ग्रतिष्ठा by अनन्त. लिङ्गप्रविष्ठापनविधि by अनन्त ( accord- ing to बोधायन ), 1. 0. cat. vol. III. pp. 584-585. लिङ्गगदिप्रतिष्ठाविधि by नारायणमभदरु, son of रमेभ्वरभटु. लिङ्गगचैनचन्द्रिका by सदाशिवदृहापुत्, son of मदाधर, son of बिष्णु, com- posed for pleasing king wafer. He wrote strantqeqhraaet also. First quarter of the 18th century. ठेखपश्वारिका on fifty forms of deeds, bonds and letters, com- posed in 1232 ^. 9. Vide Bhandarkar’s Report for 1882- 83, No. 410; ms. dated wag 15 36, 1. €. 1479-80 A. D. लेखपसखति contains forms of mort- gage-deeds, sale-deeds, treaties, cited from actual documents in the royal secretariat from 9th to 16th century of Vikrama era, published in G. O. series ( 192; ) लेखष्क्तामणि by हरिवास, son of बत्स- राजं in 464 verses and four सगऽ on उद्धब ( origin of writing ), गणितः, few (the art of the scribe) and सुनीति; ms. copied in 1625 a.D. (Aufrecht’s Oxf.cat.). ॐ, ०. 78, 617 wrewerer by Xtrex. Latter half of rith century; gives specimens of letters, bonds, deeds &c. लोकसागर M. in अहल्याकामधेचु. लोदहितस्शृति. लौगाक्षिस्यृति- sec. 50. ब्गिपएरेभ्बरकारिका by afipgear. बचचनसग्रह (Baroda O. I. No. 5507). बचनसशथ्च्चय ( Bik. cat. p. 489 ). व्यनसारसंग्रह by श्रीहोलताताचा्य॑, son of gaqrara; mentions मद्‌. षा. बटेभ्वरसिद्धान्त m. in कालसार of गदाधर. बत्सस्यति m. in कालमाधष and by मस्कारेन्‌ 011 गोतमधमेच्र. बपननिणेय. वरव्राजीय (Hultzsch R. I. No. 448). बज्यांहारविवेक by वेङ्कृटनाथ. वर्णकाचार. AUST eA बर्णसङ्करजातिमाला by मागेवराम. On mixed castes. N. ( new series ) 1. p. 332. वर्णसारमाणि by वेयनाथ ater. बर्णा्रतधरमं by वेयनाथदीश्ित. . Proba- bly the same as above. दर्जाभमधर्मदीप or -दीपिका by छष्ण, son of गोविन्द, son of area of the भारद्वाजमोज; composed at Benares on संस्कारऽ, मोच्प्रवरनिर्णयः, स्थाली पाक, लश्चहोम, कोटिष्ोम, ठटापरुष धास्तुबिधि, आद्धिकविषि, सर्वप्रायश्नित शरतिपतिष्ठा &c बर्णाभ्रमधर्मदीप by king eer who ruled over महाराष्ट्र on the banks 618 of the भमोदाधरी (vide Bik. cat. p. 489 ). This is a large work. बधेमानपद्धति m. in aga of tye (styled नत्यवर्धमान ° ). avery by era, son of लक्ष्मीधर ; pr. at Benares in 1903 ; m. in दुगोत्सवविरेक of ज्लपाणि. »» of राचणषा्मन्‌ of चम्पहद्धिं fami- ly. Deals with सक्रान्ति and the festivals and was of the 12 months of the year. » by विद्यापि. About first half of 15th century ; m. in मल- मासतच्व of रघ ०. »» by शङ्कर. It is also styled WABUNST OF TATA ( Bik. cat. p. 468 ). + by हरिनारायण (^ २. cat. No. 5017 ) वषंछत्यतरङ्गः from the कृत्यमहार्णच. ब्षृत्यप्रयोगमत ( माला ) by मानिश्वर- sta ; ms. dated 1477 ^: . (B. O. mss. cat. vol. I. No. 312 and JBORS. for 1927 parts III- IV p. 1V) atataat or a¢arretadt by गोषिन्दा- नन्द, son of qoraitag ( pr. in B. I, series ). Vide sec. ror. ~ wigdo m. 11 aretrehrater of दिवाकरे, in समयमयूख. Earlier than 1600 A. 1, धर्षवीधिति part of स्पृतिकौस्तुभ of अनन्तदेव. व्षदीप 11. in रूपनारायणीय. वषेवीपिका 17. in छत्यरत्लाकर by वण्डेभ्वर, History of Dharmatastra वर्षभास्कर by शाम्युनाथ सिद्धान्तवागीशा, composed by order of king wa- देव. ` बसन्तराजीय alias हाकुनाणैव by षसन्त- राजभहु, son of शिवराज and younger brother of विजयराज; composed by order of चन्द्रदेव of मिथिला; m. 1) aggerarrme by बलालसेन and in हुरगोत्सवविवेक of शूलपाणि. Earlier than 1150 A.p. C. by argeeaaftr 11 Akbar’s reign. घसिष्ठकत्प. वसिष्ठधमसञ्र vide sec. 9 ; 7, in ए. 9. series, Jivananda Sm. part II. pp. 456-496 and Anar. om. pp. 187-231. C. by यज्ञसवाभिन्‌ m. in गोविन्द्‌- स्वामिरीका on बौधायनधर्म॑स्. वसिष्ट सहिता or महासहिता in 4; अध्या On शान्ति, जप, हीम, बलि- दार, 01) certain astrological as- pects of सक्चत्र, बार €५. ( Ulwar cat. extract 582 ) afueraix in ten अध्यायऽ and about 1100 verses. On _ the “eers for वेष्णवन्नाह्मणऽ, ate, विष्वाराधन, wre, arena, बिष्ण- afaafasr (1. 0. cat. vol. 1. p. 392 No. 1339 ). Baroda O. I. Ms. No. 1885 is dated sake 1564. वसिष्ठस्यृति or वासिष्ठी. | C. वासिष्ठमाष्य by वेदेमिश्र. राम 15 said to have asked बसि why he was exiled. Deals with propitia- tory rites for evil aspects of List of works on Dharmatastra planets, लक्षहोम, केोटिहेम. Says that it was based by श्रासिष्ठ on माध्यन्विनी शाखा. Vide D. C. ms. No. 245 of 1879-80. Ba- roda 0.1. 1412 is dated सवत्‌ 1565 ( 1508-9 A. D.). The com. gives only the प्रतीकऽ of verses. It says that wanfra was im- parted to नारद and others by वसिष्ठ. वसिष्ठहाप्पद्धति, वाक्यतत्व of सिद्धान्तपश्चानन. On pro- per times for religious ceremo- nies. Part of daava. धाक्यमीमांसा 111. in चुसिंहप्रसाद्‌. वाक्यग्त्नाषछि 11. in काटसार of गदाधर. वाग्भटस्मृतिसं्रह 11. by अपरक्त. वाग्वतीतीर्थयााप्रकाश by afer, son of रामभत्र. वातत्याधिक्रम॑प्रकाश. वादभयङ्कर- a work by a follower of विज्ञानेश्वर, according to drerar- aq. Vide pp. 289-90 above; m. by कत्यतरु. Between 1080-1125 A.D. aR ERT 0 वाध्रणश्द्यागमहृतति- रहस्य by सङ्गमय्रामवासिमिश्र. Deals With कणत्रयापाकरण, बह्म च्थ,सस्कारः आधिक, भाद्र, सीध. वापीटृपतडागादिषदयति. ATOR. वामनकारिका- a large work in verse ; follows खादिश्गरह्य mainly. वामनपद्धति 7. in श्राद्धसौख्य ( dter- नन्वु ). 619 वारत्रतनिणय. वाराणसीदपेण by सुन्दर, son of राघव. धाराहगरह्य- 71. 11 G. QO. seriesin 21 wogs on सस्कारऽ from जातकम, नामकरण tO पुंसवन 214 on dare and पाकयज्ञ. वार्तिकसार by यतीङा, son of टेकचन्तर ; composed in 1785 A. D. वार्पिकटठ्त्यनिणव. वासकमंप्रकाक्ञ. बासन्तीषिवेक by शूलपाणि. Sec. 95. वासिषठटघुकारिका. वासि्ठीज्ञान्ति by महानन्द, son of विश्व- नाथ (he rather revised or restored it). Vide Bik. cat. p. 490 ( werat दूषिता शान्तिर्वासिष्ठी सा प्रोधिता). वाषदेबी or प्रयोगरत्नमाला; pr. in Bom- bay 1884. Quotes हेमाद्रि, ठत्य- रत्नाकर, चिविक्रम, रूपनारायण, नि-सि So later than 1620 a. D. Speaks of मूतिनिर्माणप्रकार, मण्डपप्रकारः वि- शुपरतिष्ठा, जलाधिव्रास, शान्तिहोम- प्रयोग, बरूतनपिण्डिकास्थापन, जाण- पिण्डिकायां देवस्थापनप्रयोग. वास्तुचन्दरिका by करुणाशङ्कर. वास्त चन्द्रिका by छपाराम. वास्त॒तच्च by गणपतिशिष्य ; Lahore ( 1853 ). वास्तुपद्धति 07 वास्तु्ापन ( Baroda 0. 1. No 1672). बास्तषजनपद्धति by परमाचाय. वारतुपूजनपद्धति by aire areqadte by araza 1. in नि. सि. aramaay by रघुनन्दन. Sec. 102, pr. at wreyearats: by जीवनाथवेवज्ञ, pr. at Benares, 1883 and Calcutta,1885. wreagenter by रामकऽण, son of नारा- यणभदु. According to आभ्वलायन- गृह्य ; m. in erfacet of कमलाकर wy. वास्तुहान्तिप्रयोग- हाकलोक्त. वास्हहान्तिप्रयोग- extracted from शान्तिसार of विनिकर. wreqarer by मय; 171. in नि. सि. धघास्तुशिरोभाणि by शङ्कर at the bidding of स्यामसाह son of ayaatex. Ul- War cat. extract 576. वास्तुसर्वस्थसंगह pr. at Bangalore, 1884. किखारनिणय by गोपालन्यायपश्चानन- महाचाय. विजयदहमीनिणय. विजयदहामीपद्धति ( Ulwar cat. No. 1444 and extract 344 ). विजयविलास by amas on ats, स्नान, सन्ध्या, ब्रह्मथस्, तिथिनिणय. Relies upon भाष्यऽ of कर्वः, हरिहर, and गदाधर, विज्ञानमाकण्ड 11. in च्रसिंहप्रसाद. विज्ञानललिन 7). by Fark ( दानखण्ड p. 109), in दानसार (part of श॒सिहप्रसाद ). fageta m. in भाद्धसग्रह of creer. विहुरनीति- (from the gates of महा- भारत chapters 33-40 of the Bom- bay edition); pr. at Gujarati Press, Bombay. वियाकरपद्धति m. in नित्या चारथदीप pp. 566, 571. History of Dharmatistra विथाधरीविलास m. in जयोतिस्तस्व by र ०, विधारण्यसग्रह- vide स्यृतिसग्रह. वियाविनोतर m. in नि. सिं. ( may also be the name of an author ). विद्ठन्मनोहरा- com. on पराहारस्यृति by नन्वपण्डित, Vide sec, 105, विधवाधमे. विधवाविवाहखण्डन. विधवाविबाहविचार by हरिमिध. विधानखण्ड 11. in नि. सि. विधानष्छम्फ m. 1 विधानपारिजात of अनन्त. विधानपारिजात of aren, son of ara, Composed at Benares in 1625 A.D, He styles himself काण्वशाखाबिदां भियः. In five wags on स्वतिषाचन, शान्तिकमं, आहिक, संस्कार, तीर्थ, वान, प्रकीणविधान and funeral ceremonies, the third dealing with onfiee, सस्कार and काल, the fifth with sya, area. व्यवहार and धाय ०. Mentions देब- जानीय, दिबोदासीय, जरिस्थर्लीसेतु ( pr. B. I. series ), विधानमाला or छ्खा्थविधानमाला by afaeaz of अतिगोच्च. Resided on the agai near चन्त्रनगिरि in वेराट- der; m. in संस्कारकौर्तु म and विधान- पारिजात. Earliar than 1550 A. D. There are 240 प्रकरणःऽ in the I. O. ms. ( cat. p. 575 No. 1769 ) which was copied in संवत्‌ 1732; pr. in Anan, P. series, 1920. ( 1765-6 ^. D.). Baroda O. I. No. 10449 copied in सवत्‌ 1622 ( 1565-6 A.D. ), Last of works cn Dharmatastra C. by विश्वनाथ, son of हरि. विधानमाला by ay. विधानमाला by विग्वक्मन्‌. विधानरत्न by नारायणभदु. विधानरहस्य 171. in अहल्याकामधेनु. पिधानसारसय्ह Ano. Vide Bik. cat. ए. 494. विधिपुष्यमाला ( पद्धति ) m. in Rant of श्रीदत्त. Earlier than 1300 A. D. विधिरत्न by गङ्गगधर, विधिष्त्न m. in च्रिकाण्डम्रण्डन, हेमाप्रि, प्रयोगपारिजात. विनायकपूजा by रामकृष्ण, son of योगी- भ्वर, surnamed शोच ( शोचे ? ). Composed in 1702 A. D. विनाथकरान्तिपदडति. C. by भ्रीधराचार्य, Baroda O. I. No. 5491 dated सबत्‌ 1607 ( 1550-1 A. D. ). विद्मुधकण्ठसुषण- com. on gary by वेङ्कटनाथ. विभक्ताविभक्तनि्णय. विभागतत्व -तच्वविचार by रामर्ष्ण, son of नारायणभदु. Relies on निता- क्षरा, About 1575-1600 4.9. Deals with अप्रतिबन्ध and सप्रतिबन्ध वाय, छख्यगोणपुत्ाः, बिभागकाल, अपघ्रवाया- दक्रमः माता preferred to पिता as heir, The Bhadkamkar collec- tion ms. comes up to only WaAT:. विभागनिर्णय. विभागसार of वियापति ; composed un- der orders of दर्पनारायण, son of हरिसिंह, son of wag. On दाय- 621 लक्षण, विमागस्वरूप, दायान, अबि- भाज्य, स्ीधनः, दादकषविधपुत्र, अषुव्र- धनाधिकार, समृष्टविभाग. N. vol. VI. p. 67. fraferarcer. विव्रलोदयमाला or विभलोदयजयन्तमाला- ४ 0011. ON आभ्वलायनग्ह्यसज. विरुद्धविधिविध्वंस by लक्ष्मीधर, son of महदेव and श्रीदेवी and pupil of भगवद्वोधभारती. His gotra was @raaq and his grandfather was . बामन and grand-uncle स्कन्द्‌ and great-pgrand-father was ae, who was a minister of सोमेभ्वर of शाकम्भरी ( Sambhar ). स्कन्द्‌ was commander-in-chief and वामन was सान्धिबिग्रहिक of पृथ्वीराज, who was killed by तुरुष्कऽ, स्कन्द्‌ crown- ed हरिराज in शाकम्भरी and वामन went to अणदिह्ुपाटक. The family originally came from आनन्दुनमर, Work is divided into seven अधि. करणऽ ; ms. (I. O. cat. p. 489 No. 1577) is dated सवत्‌ 1582 चेत्र (1526 ^. 7. ). Deals wich disputed points of sacred law, such as the persons entitled to offer श्राद्ध to the deceased, ax- प्रायश्चित्त etc. विलक्षणजन्मप्रकाशिका, विलाससथ्रहकारिका 70. by क्ालसार of गवाधर. विषस्वत्स्मुति m. by स्सृतिचन्दरिका,हेमान्रि. विवादकल्यतरु (a portion of the कल्पतरु of लक्ष्मीधर ) vide sec. 77. विषादकोस्ुदी by पीताम्बर सिद्धान्तवागीश composed in Sake 1529 ( 1604 622 A.D. ). He was patronised by the Raja of Assam. विषाद चन्द्र by मिसरुमिभ्र. Vide sec. 97. बिषादचन्द्रिका by अनन्तराम ; quotes wear and स्मा्तभटाचायं. Later than 1600 A. D. विवादचन्द्रिका by wat महामहोपाध्याय, pupil of चण्डेश्वर. In his श्राद्ध चन्द्रिका quotes वधमान. On the 18 titles of law. About 1450 4.9. विवादचिन्तामणि by व।चस्पतिमिभ. Sec, 98 ; pr. at Bombay. विवादताण्डव by xaaretaz. Scc. 106. विवादनिणय by गोपाल. धिवादनिणैय by श्रीकर. विषादभङ्गाणव by जगन्नाथतकपश्चानन. Sec. 113. Colebrooke translated two out of the several principal topics of this work. Vide N. ( new series ) vol. I. preface pp. XIII-XIV. विषादरत्नाकरर by चण्डेन्वर. Vide sec. 90. विवादवारिधि $ रमापतिडपाध्याय सन्मिश्र, on the 18 titles of law. विष्रादत्यवहार by गोपालसिद्धान्तवागीडश. विवादसार of कुलक, m. in his आ्आब्- सागर. Vide sec. 88. विधादसाराणैव compiled by wate- गमा fiat at the instance of Sir William [0165 in 1789 in nine तरङ्गः. The colophon has the rather picturesque words 'सर्षिल्य मिस्तरभीजोन्समहयीपाज्ञ त 61८५ ˆ ‘Histo-y of Dharmatistra (cat. of Madras Govt. mss. vol. VI. p. 2407, No. 3203 ). विषाद्सिन्धु. विवादाणवभसखन्‌ or -भङ्गः compiled by मोरीक्रान्त 2114 several other Pandits.( D.C. ms. No. 364 of 1875-76, N. vol. IX p. 244 No. 3165 ). विवादाणवसेत compiled in 1773 for Warren Hastings by बाणेष्वर्‌ and several other Pandits and trans- lated into English by Halhed ( which translation was publish- ed in 1774 A. D.). Divided into 21 ales ( waves, sections ) on ऋणादानि and the other titles of law ( व्यवहारपदऽ ). Pr. by the Venk. Press, Bombay. This edition shows that the work was composed at the court of Ranjit Singh of Lahore. To- wards the end the names of the Pandits who compiled it are given. Vide N. vol. X p. I15- 116 and N. ( new series )I pp. 339-341 where the verses about the names of the colla- borating Pandits are given, but the reference to Ranjit Singh does not occur. विवादार्थसं ५६. विषाहक्म by अग्निहोचरि विष्णु of मधुरा. | विवाहकर्मपद्धति. Vide विषाहपद्धति. विषाहकर्ममन््त्याख्या उत्रोधिनी ( Ulwar cat. No. 1452 धत _ extract ) Relies on हरिहर, List of works on: Dharmagistra frareunageag ms. copied in 1113 A.D. (Hp. cat. p. XI). विवाहकोद्दी (C. P. cat. No. 5140" 47 ). विवाहचतुथीकमं. विवाहततत्व or sarearet by रघुनन्वन Sec. 102. C. by qrattera. विबाहतस्वाणव 111. in उद्राहतक्छ ( vol. II. p. 117 ) of wqo. विषाहद्ठिरागमनपयति, विषाहनिरूपण by aera. Praretrecot by वेयनाथ. विषाहपटल 111. in ज्योतिस्तस्व of रध 9. Probably an astrological work of वराहमिहिर or of हार््गधर. विवाहपटल by सारङ्गपाणि (शाङ्खपाणि ?); son of gapeq. विवाहपटल by atearafr. धिवाहपटलस्तबक by . सोमखन्द्रशिष्य. Baroda 0. I. No. 133. परिवाहपद्धति or विषाहादिषद्धति गोभिलीय. विश्राहद्धति by गोरीकशङ्कर. विवाहपद्धति by चतुभज. षिबाहपद्धति by जगन्नाथ. विवाहपद्धति by नरहरि. धिवाहपद्धति by नारायणभटु. विवाहपद्धति by रामचन्द्र. विवाहपद्धति or धिवाहाविकमषद्धति by रामदत्त राजपण्डत, son of pay, son 0दादित्य. He was paternal first cousin of 'अण्डटेभ्वर and 50 flourished about 1310-1 360 ५ 9. On आभ्ुदपिकभाद, विवाह; ——— | 629 चतुर्थकम, पुंसवन and the other सस्फारऽ UP (0 समावर्तन. He wrote for ब्राजसनेय students. विबाहपद्धति from the अवृषविलास. विवाहपद्धतिषव्याख्या by गृदडमल. विवाहप्रकरण- from the लघुकारिका of विवःहरत्न by हरिभटु. An -claborate treatise On marriage in 122 chapters, विषाहरत्नसक्षेप by क्षेमकरः. विवाहदन्दावन by केडावाचायै, son of राणिग or राणम, in 17 chapters on auspicious times for marriage. One ms. is dated sake 1326 i.e. 1398-99 A. D. (BBRAS. cat. part I p. 109 No, 322 ) ; m. in ga- दी पक of महादेव, in टोडरानन्द्‌. C. दीपिका by गणेहादेवज्ञ, son of ara, in Sake 1476 1. ९. 1554-5 A.D. ( BBRAS. cat. part I p. 110 No. 334 ). See Bhandarkar’s Report for 1883-84 pp. 372-373, where we rcad that मणे first composed igerag, then आद्ध- विधि, then a com. on लीलावती, 2 com. 01 इ्ुहूतंतत्व. C. by कल्याणवमेन. विषाहसोख्य by मीलकण्ड (seems to be 1 portion of ateqrae ). Prarenirates rena a. विवाहादिकमुष्टानपद्धति by भवदेव. विवाहादिप्रयोगतच्छ-25011060 to रघुनन्वन (N. vol. XI Preface p. 14 ). बिवाद्यकन्यास्वरूपनिणंय by अनन्तराम- ANS. 624 विविधवियाविचिारबतरा of भोज on pro- pitiation of angry deities and consecration of tanks and wells &c. Ms. (Hp. cat. pp. XIII and 65 ) dated छ. स. 372 1. €. 1490- 97. This is different from धारे म्बरभोज. विवेककोखदी by रामरृष्ण. Discussion about wearing the हिखा and यज्ञोपवीत, विधि, नियम, teen, स्नान, तिलकधारण, तपेण, हिवपूजा, Argue, प्रतिष्ठोत्समेमेदु. N. vol. X. pp. 105-107. विचेकदीपक by दामोदर. Treats of wetatas; compiled under auspices of सग्र(मसाह ; ms. ( 1. 0. cat. p. 551 No. 1716) copied in सवतं 1638 ( 1582 ^. D. ). विषेकमशरी. विषेकसारषणेन- विवेकाणव by श्रीनाथ m.in his छत्य- तचवाणैव. 1475-1525 A. D. बिष्ठदधिवर्षण by रष्नन्वन. On आशोच of two kinds, जनना्ोच and हाषा- विन्वदीप m. in arate. feared fizaia. बिभ्वनाथभद्री ( C. ?. cat. No. 5197. किष्वप्रकाश D.C. ms. No. 144 of 1884-86. For बाजसनेय followers on daily duties like qeeqraeqa, Sswusemedtiana, ग्रहणनिणेय, and भाद. बिभ्वप्रकाशिकापद्धति of विभ्वना of the qeraretia, son of पुरुषोत्तम, son of जिधिक्रमः, son of नारायणाचा्य, History of Dharmatistra On various ceremonies and ex- 7120005 $ based on आपस्तम्ब. Composed in 1544 ^. D. Vide N. vol. >. pp. 233-235. faracgre m. in दद्रकमलाकर. विभ्वरू्पनिबन्ध m. in छत्यचिन्तामणि, नि. सि. Vide pp. 263-364 above. Bik. cat. p. 497 No. 1967 1s विभ्वरूपनिबन्ध which deals with afavg relationship in marriage, particularly about the girl being beyond the fifth and the seven- th from the mother and father respectively. विण्वरूपसस्रुचय m. in उद्राहतत्तव by wqe (vol. II p. 116). Rear by कविकान्तसरस्वती, son of आच्ार्यादित्य, who styles himself गीतार्थप्रबीण. Author was devotee of विश्वेश्वर in Benares. Divided 1070 4 काण्डऽ ON आचारः, व्यवहार, प्रायभ्रिवत्त and ज्ञान. 15 काण्ड has 42 स्लगधरा verses and one अवुषटभर on daily religious duties such as gia, दन्तधावन, छुहाविधि, स्नान, सन्ध्या, होम, Pravda, दान; 2nd काण्ड (on व्यवहार ) has 44 verses in various metres ( मालिनी, अनु- By, मन्दाक्रान्ता, &५. ) ; 310 ( प्राय शित्त ) has 53 verses ( all स्रग्धरा except last which is मालिनी ); 4th ज्ञानकाण्ड has 53 verses in शावृलविक्रीडित, रिखरिणी, अबु्टुम्‌, and other metres on बानप्रस्थ, सन्यास, त्वपदाथं, का्ीमाहान्म्य. Au- thor’s patron seems to have becn धन्य OF धन्यराज, son of नागाञ्चंन, at List of works en Dharmasastra काक्षी. Refers to gw, wear, rant and विज्ञानेभ्वर. M. by हेमाद्रि ( HI 2. p. 102, which oc- curs in com. on frareet III. 37) and by स्यृतिचच्िका ( आहोच, Mysore 60. p. 164 ‘ पतित्रता त्वन्य- feageresur oft पतिं चित्यधिरोहणेन | que मतुरघस्य शिः भादखदयं स्या- त्कृथगेककालेि ॥ ). Later than 1100 A. D. and earlier than 1200 A.D. (This information is based on two mss. in the Bhadkam- kar collection ). C. by author ( Vide BBRAS. cat. part 2 pp. 229-231 for fuller details ) : विश्वागिन्रकल्प- on the daily cere- monies performed by ब्राह्मणः. विश्वामिन्रकल्पतरु- विश्वाभिश्रसहिता by भधर. विग्बामिन्रस्शुति- vide sec. 57 p. 236. frepafrars m. in सस्कारमयूख. Probably the भदनपारिज्ात or छबोषिनीटीका of विभ्वेभ्वर. विन्वेभ्वरपद्धति by विश्वेश्वर on सन्यास 10. in सस्कारमय्ख. विन्वे्वरस्वुति ( Hultzsch R. I. No. 69). frparegfnaves ( Hultzsch R. 1. No. 144 ). विण्वे्बरीयपद्धति (or aftratane ) by अच्दयुताभसम, pupil of चिदानन्वाभम. Mentions ज्ञानाणंव. Teaatterfs by अश्युताभम, ‘ विषचटिकाजननशान्ति 07 विषनाड्ीजनन शान्ति (from हखमाग्यंसंहिता ) on ४, 2. 79. 685 rites for averting evil conse- quences of being born atone of the four periods called feqy- टिका. Reavers by वनमालिन्‌. Digest of sara rites for माध्व followers. विष्णततत्वतिनिणय by आनन्दतीथं. विष्छतीरथीयव्यास्यान by सरोत्तमाचाय. विष्णधमममीमांसा by चरसिंहमट, son 01 सोमभटु. Ulwar cat. 1457. विष्छधमसन्र. Vide sec. 10. Pr. Jiva- nanda Sm. part I pp. 60-176. (. बेजयन्ती by नन्द्पाण्डित. Vide sec. 105. freguatga m. in नटमहलबिलास. विष्छधमोौत्तरासूत m. in कालबिवेक of जीमूतवाहन. विष्छप्रनाक्रमदौीपिका by दिषदशाङ्कर. C. by सदानन्द्‌. विष्णप्रूजापद्धति. विष्छप्रूजाविधि hy sreta ( Baroda O. I. No. 5487.said to be author’s copy is dated qaq 1692 i. €. 1635-6 A.D. ) frogmterratt. विष्छघतिष्ठाविधिदपण of नरसिहसोमयाजी, son of माधवाचायं. विष्छभक्ति्न्त्र m. in निणेयदीषक. बिष्छभक्तिखन्दरोदय by शृसिंष्ठारण्य or afierara in 19 kalas; m. by परुषोल्तम in दरव्यह्याद्धिदीपिका. Deals with principal बेष्णव fasts, fes- tivals, and ceremonies; ms. dated awa 1496 ( 1440 A. ०. ). Bhandarkar’s Report 1883-84 p. 76. 626 विष्णुभाक्तेरहस्य 111. by रामानन्द. विष्णुमूर्तिप्रतिष्ठाषिधि by कृष्णदेव, son of रामाचायं (part of a larger work called वेष्णवधमीनुष्ठानपद्धति or सुर्सिहपरिखर्यांपद्धति). Ms. copied in सवत्‌ 1675. विष्णायागपद्धति by अनन्तदेव, son of आपदे. Sec. 109. Deals with rites in honour ot Visnu to be performed by one who desires a son. Ulwar cat. No. 1458; Baroda 1. 0. 2264 datcd संवत्‌ 1604 which seems-to be sake. विष्णुरहस्य m. by अपराकं, दानसागर, काल विवेक of sia. | fasgatig ( part of नारायणबलि in गोभिटगृह्य ). विष्णुभ्राद्धपद्धति alias वीरपुजापद्धति, विष्णुश्राद्धपद्धति by नारायण son of रामे - saz ( Baroda O. I. 8171 ). freyageaa m. in अपराक, मद. पा. (p. 291 ). विष्णुस्सृति- vide विष्णुधमेसून्न, above. वीरनाररसिंहावटोकन- vide बीररसिहावटो- कन. बीरमित्रोदय, com. on याज्ञवत्वेयरमृति by मिजमिश्र (4 parts on आचार 07, 11 Chowkhamba S. series). Vide sec. 108. वीरमित्रोदय by frafasr. A digest divided into प्रकाष्ोऽ on व्यवहार (pr. by Jivananda ), वरिभाषा, amen, तीथ, प्रजा, राजनीति, लक्षण, हदि, समयं ( the first six pr. in Ch. S. series ). Vide sec. 108. बीरहोषधमेनिर्णय. History of Dharmaéisira difaeftsreca ( संस्कारपरकरण ) by रामज्योतिषिवर. वीरसिंहावलोकन or -बिलोकन by king वीरसिह, son of देववन्‌, son of कमलसिह of तोमरषंश्ष. On expia- tions for lapses committed in this life; composed in संवत्‌ 1439 (1383 ^. D.). Stein’s cat. p. 189. D. C. Ms. No. 85 of 1869-70 is dated सवत्‌ 1572. It says that the work ( which is ever 400 folios ) is a compen- dium of आयुवेद, ज्योतिःशास्र and aaa. It borrows from af, गोतम, शालिहोत्र, AB, व्यास, पुराण. The work ‘is also styled इूयौरुण. देक्षायापन. दृत्तरन्न प्रदीपिका by वात्स्थषेदान्तदासं on proper time for breaking fast on दादी. दृत्तरातसग्रह 01 वत्तशतक by महेश्वर, son of चिनोरथ and father of भास्कराय; m. in fa. सि. गोविन्दार्णष, An astrological work, About 1106 17150 A. D. In TI व्रकरणऽ on यागविधि. aasfaty, संस्कार, विषाह, AVL LITA, भूषाविधि, Waa, AAT, गोचरचिधि, सक्रान्ति, वेवप्रतिष्ठा. Ba- roda O. I. No. 8173. षृद्धगोतममंहिता pr. in Jivananda Sm. part II pp. 497-638. बृद्धपाराहारीसंहिता (in 12 chap. ). Vide ब्हत्यराहारसहिता pp. 195-96 above. aeerarrrerta- pr. in Anan. Sm. | pp. 232-235. 149 of works on Dharmasastra ewertacafa (pr. Jivananda Sm. part I pp. 194-409 and Anan. Sm. pp. 236-356 ). ganaeafa 77.11 Jivananda Sm. part 1. pp. 47-59. बद्धिशराद्‌. व्ृद्धिभाद्धद्रीपिका by अनन्तदेव, son of उद्धब. वृद्धिभ्राद्धपद्धति by अनन्तदेक्र, son of उदव्रदिषेदिन at Benares. वृचिश्रद्धप्रयोग by नारायणमभदु ( part of प्रयोगरल्न ). ब्रचिश्राद्धविधि by करुणाहाङ्कर वृद्धिभराद्धविनिणंय "( माध्याश्दिनीय ) by अनन्तदेव, 501 0 उद्धव ( Baroda O. 1. 10464. ). वृन्द्रावनषद्धति for followers of the वलभाचाधं sect. दष भवान. वरषभोत्सगं. वृषोत्सर्ग ङोखद्री by cass. बृषोत्त्भतच्व by reo. He wrote one for each of agvdz, THIZ, सामवेद. वृषोत्स्पद्धति ascribed to शानक with reference to eratasrraer. वृषोत्समगपद्धति by नारायण, son of TAT. वृषोत्सगपरिशिष्ट. TUTTI ( वाचस्पतिमत ) for यज्ञ वेद्‌ students ( वोधायतीय ). वृषोत्सगप्रयोग by अनन्तभद्, son of नागदेब. Also called Atazo. वृोत्स्ग पयोग ( geht) attributed to रघु०. वृषोत्सगं भाष्य Stein’s cat. 0. 104. 627 वृषोत्सगंविधि by ayer गोस्वामी. aviraniaraa of arama in 307 verses. Baroda O. I. ms. 9470 is dated waa 1592. वेगराजसंहिता by Ramer 1 1559 सवत्‌ ( रन्धेषुबाणशषशि ) 1. €. 1503 A. D. वेणी Directions for worshipping वरण before starting on a jour- ney. Bik. cat. p. 492. वेणुगोपालप्रतिष्ठा. वेद्त्यासस्मृति- pr. Anan. Sm. pp. 357-371. बेदत्रत. वेदानध्याय On the holidays as to Vedic studies, वेखानसधर्मपश्च Vide sec, 15. C. by सूर्सिंहव्राजपेयी, son of माध- arara (on 2 out of 3 gaqs only found yet ). वेखानसमन्जभश्च (containing the मन्त्रऽ required in the S@raqeartas )- in 8 gars ८4 प्रश्चऽ pr. at Kumbha- konam 10) 1910 ). वेखानससंहिता m. by areanrata, नि. सि. समयमश्ख. वेखानसरुदषण by afte, son of माध- वाचार्यं बाज्येययाजिन्‌. Hand-book of domestic rites according to ्रेखानमगद्य ; pr. at Ellore 1915. बेखनिसकषतरालुक्रभदीपिक्रा of वेङ्कटयोगिन, son of केोण्डपाचाय. Jerawentas in 10 प्रश्चऽ ( 7 of wer and 3 of धम ) pr. at Kumbha- konam 19714 and by Dr. Caland in B. I. series with English translation ( 1927 text, 1929 ). C. by शसिंह वाजपेयी, son of माध- वाष्वायै. वैजयन्ती, com. on तरिष्याधमंदत्र by wer- mega composedin 1623 A, 9. Vide sec. 105. वेतरणीदान (on gift of a black cow to secure for the soul of a de- ceased person a safe passage over the Vaitarani river in hell ) वेतरणीदानपरयोग- Stein’s cat, p. 104. देदिकथक्रिया, वेविकविजयध्वज. नेविकाचारनिर्णय by सञ्चिवानन्व्‌. बं्नाथसग्रह. & a e Cas बंशनाथीय. Vide स्मृतिष्ठक्ताफल. वेशम्पायननीतिसग्रह- vide under नौति- प्रका OF- प्रकाशिका, बेहाम्पायनस्यृति 111. by मिताक्षरा (ar. 7. 326 ), अपराक. a ~ a वेष्णवचन्दरिका by रामानन्व्‌ न्यायवागीहा. वस्णवदाक्षापद्धात वेष्णवधमखण्डन ( Baroda 0.1. 1741) against पुण्डरधारण &c. वेष्णवधर्मपद्धति of कृष्णदेव. वष्णवधर्मपीमांसा by अनन्तराम. देष्णवधर्सशाख in 109 verses divided into five chapters on सस्कार, We- Ta, आभमःऽ, पारिव्राज्य, राजधर्म. बेष्णवधमंउरतरममरी by सङ्कणरारण, 2 follower 0किक्ञावकादमीरी, who was a follower of fears. बेष्णवघमान्टानपद्धति by छष्णदेष, son of शमाय. बेष्णवनिर्णय Ulwar cat. No. 1466. by aaqersenn. Men- History of Dharmatistva tions विज्ञानेभ्वर, नि. सि., छधीषि- लोखन. . बेष्णवलक्षण by ठष्णतातायार्थ. वैष्णववर्षदत्य ( Baroda 0. I. 8133 ). वेष्णवसदाचारनिर्णय वेषणव सर्वस्व of हलायुध 111. in his ब्राह्न- णसर्वस्व. वेष्णवसिद्धान्तदीपिका by राम्रशन्द्र, son of दल्ण, son of शहर, C. by विहल, son of afte, son of wreraex ( the author ). वेष्णवाचारसग्रह. वेषणवासृत 11. in आद्धिकतत्व by ego and in नि. सि. aeoraraa by भोटानाथ. N. vol. VI. p. 185-6, वेष्णवाह्धिक ( Baroda 0.1. 10543 ). ्रेष्णवोपयोभिनिर्णय. D. ¢. ` Ms. No. 160 of 1884-86 is dated सषत्‌ 1732 ( 1675-6 a. p.). It men- tions sv@reaiyar, रामाचंनचग्रिका. It supports the marking of the body with चक्तं by citing verses from कटज्ञाखा and अथववेद (एमि वयद्चरुतमस्य Peau लोके उभगा भवेम । ) व्यतिषङ्गनिषणेय by cyanea. व्यतीपातजननशान्ति by कमलाकरभदटुः STAT ATT व्यतीपातव्तकस्व. वयवरथादूरपेण by आनन्दहामा, son of रामकशार्मा, On points of rata rites and rules, such as तिथिस्वख्वः, मल- भास, संक्रान्ति, SETS, भद्ध, दाया- afrente, वायविभाग.. N. vol, Vill p. 211, List of works on Dharmatietra हयवर्थादीपिका by राधाया. N. vol. X 2. 84 is confined only tO आशोष्य. इयदस्थानिीय Ano. on तिथि, सक्रान्ति, आशो 9 weaver, प्रायि, विवाह, वीय. वयशस्थाप्रकाहा. यवस्थारत्नमाला by लक्ष्मीनारायणन्याया- लङ्कार, son of गदाधर In ten गुच्छ On grat, सखीधन, दत्तकव्यवस्था ; mentions freer and विधान- भाल. वयवस्थाणेव Ano. उथषस्थाणैष्र of शधूनन्द्न ( ON pre-emp- tion ) दयवस्थाणीव of रपुनाथ, at order of | king रायराचब. saaearore of रामभद्र. Vide under cafrereafarftrire. वयवस्थासक्षिष by serena. srrearame by गणेङाभटु. Gives de- cisions on grafiaw, inheritance etc. उथश्ररथासंश्रह by ayer. On definite conclusions about ayretra, सपि- ण्डीकरण, सक्रान्तिविधि, gies, जन्माष्टमी, आदिक, देषपतिष्ठा, दिव्यः दायभाग, प्रायभव. Based on ty°. steearare by नारायणरामेन्‌ (1. ^¬. cat. १. 452) on आदिक, आक्षोच, तिथि, bok LB विषाह, ATE: Differ- ent from next. sTavararceag by नारायणशा्भैम्‌, On law of inheritance. This is also called व्वषस्थासारसश्य. Vide N. vol. III pp. 126-127 and I, O. cat. p. 453 which shows that the work embraced aretre, वावभाग and भाच. व्यषस्थासारसग्रह by महेश. Probably same aS श्यषसर्यासश्ह, व्यवस्यासारसग्रह by रामगोविन्दुखक्रवर्ती, son of ggeq, on तिथि, संक्रान्ति, अन्तयेष्टि, आहौ etc. Vide N. vol. [V pp. 289-291 ; N. ( new series ) I. p. 349 describes him as the son of रामगोपाल of चद्व. sTaearag by pataexerdia; ms, co- pied in Sake 1741 ( 1819-20 A. D. ). दथवहारकमटाकर by कमलाकर, son 01 रामकृष्ण (7th section of yee). त्यवहारकल्पतरु by लक्ष्मीधर ( portion of कल्पतरु ). Vide sec. 77. व्यवहारकोश् by वधमान. A part of his तच्ासृतसारोद्धार on judicial procedure and civil and crimi- nal law composed under qe, king of निथिला. Latter half of 5th century. व्यबहारकोठदी by Rrererarfreragt- चार्व. (Baroda 0. 1. roros dated Sake 1535 ). व्यवहारचण्डेभ्वर 111. in सस्कारमय्ख. व्यवहार्चन्दरोदय (part of कीर्तिचन्द्रोवय, on judicial procedure and the विवाद्पव्‌ऽ. व्यवहारचमत्कार by खू्यनारायण, son of भवानददास, son of ara; compos- ed in संषत्‌ 1637 (1580-81) in 13 प्रकरणऽ (in D.C. ms. No. 199 of A 1883-85 and 14 in Mitra’s Notices vol, V. p. 91, which 580 Splits frare into two ); on astro- logy in connection with गरमा धान, एसवनः सं मन्तोज्ञयन and the Other संस्कारः, व्रित्राह, याचा, मल- ! मासनिणप. व्थवहारचिन्तामणि by वाचस्पति. Vide | above p. 400; on भाषा, उत्तर, क्रिया 214 निणेय. N. III. p. 34. उयवहारतत्त्र by नीलकण्ठ, son of शाङ्कर- WE. Sec. 107. दयवहारतच्छ by रघुनन्दन. Vide 6८.102. वहारतच्वालोक- vide उपवहारालो क. श्यबहारतिलक by भवरदेवभङु. Vide sec. 73 Ppp. 301-302. उयवहारदपंण by अनन्तदेव याज्ञिक. On meaning 0 त्थिवहार, plaint, reply, means of proof, witnesses, do- cuments, possession, judgment. sraeregan by रामकृष्णभटु. On राज- धमं, माषा, उत्तर, प्रत्यवस्करन्दन, भाड्‌. न्याय, साक्षि, लिखित, शुक्ति, जयपच. व्यवहारदशश्लाकी Or दायद्कः by श्रीधर wz. त्यवहारदीधिति (part of राजधर्भकौस्तुभ). व्यवहारदीपिका 72. by eyo in दित्यत on ordeals. व्यवहारनिणय (गोड) m. in शु्रकमलाकर. व्यवहारनिणय by मथाराममिश्रगो इ resid- ing at Benares, by order of जयसिंह. On judicial procedure and the उपवबहारपद्‌ऽ. D.- C. ms. 140 of 1892-95 copied in संवत्‌ 1885 ( 1798-99 A. D. ). उयवहारनिणेय by वरदराजः; m. in स. वि.. नि. सि. ; composed about 1 $6० ( tr. into English by Burnell ). व्यवहारनिणय by श्रीपति m. in ज्योति- sree and तिथितच्व of ty°. Pro- | | = History 8/1] / bably astrological as bearing on THEE suaereaqeara. ( Vide Tri. cat. of Madrras Govt. mss. for 1919-22 vol. IV ए, 4836). Breaks off in the midst of 8th tupic ( भाषा- निरूपण ), the other seven being व्यवहारावलोकनधर्मः प्रादविवाकधर्म, स- भाटलक्षण, सभ्यलक्षण, सभ्योपदेश, त्यव- हारस्वरूप, विचारविधि. व्यवहारपरिभाषा by हरिदत्तमिश्. व्यबहारपरिशि्ट. व्यवहारप्रकाश by मित्रमिभ (part of वीरमनिन्नोदय ). Vide sec. 108. व्यवहारघक्राश् by शरभोजी (king of Tanjore 1798-1833 a. ४. ). व्यवहारप्रकाङा by हरिराम. व्यवहारप्रदीष by कल्याणवरमा. द्यवहारप्दीष by कृष्ण. On astrology applied to धर्म॑ज्ञाञ्ल. ( Hp. cat. pp. XX and 253 ) m. in दिव्य ava by रघु ०. व्यवबहारपरदीष by पद्मनाभभिश्र. On ju- dicial procedure. व्यबहारप्रद्रीपिक्रा 11. by वधमान. व्यवहारमणख by नीलकण्ड. Vide sec. 107 (pr. by the Bhandarkar O. Institute Poona, by J. R. Gharpure, Bombay and by V. N. Mandlik ) व्यवहारमातृका OF earTaTget जार वाहन. Vide sec. 78 p. 321. व्यवहारमाधब- (the third part of पराशरमाधवीय ). स्यबहारमाला by बरद्राज. 18th cen- tury. Much used in Malabar. List of works on I harmaéastra व्यबहारमाचिका ( Baroda O. I. 6373). व्यवहाररत्न by भावुनाथदेषज्ञ, son of चन्दनानन्द of the atsiedar. व्यव्रहाररत्नाकर by चण्डेश्वर. Sec. 90 p. 367. व्यवहाररत्नवली. व्यवहाररिरोमाणि of नारायण, pupil of विज्ञानेश्वर; vide pp.292-293. Vide Tri. cat. of Madras Govt. mss. vol. 111. part 1 C. p. 3938 No. 2750. व्यव्रहारसष्ठस्चय by हरिगण. MANAG Mm. in देषपरतिष्टातच्छ by रघ 9, and in नि. सि. व्यवहारसवंस्व by स्ैश्वर, son of विभ्वे- म्वरदीक्चित, On व्यवहार 1. ©. judi- cial procedure etc. व्यवहारसार by मयाराममिभ. त्यवहारसार 71. in नि. सि. and निणय- दीपक. व्यवहारसारसग्रह by नारायणश्मां. व्यषहारसारसग्रह by रामनाथ. N. ( new series ) vol. III p. 192. यव्रहारसारोद्धार by मधुसूदन arearet composed under Ranjit Singh of Lahore ( 1799 A, D. ) त्यवहारसिदान्त पीयुष by चिच्रपति, son of नन्दीषति, at the request of Colebrooke, in fake 1725 ( 1803-4 a. D. ), C. by author. MIM LT ( part of दोडरानन्ड ). ‘Tarra by भोडम्रयाराम- fst of Benares at the order of जयसिंह. Deals with judicial pro- cedure and व्यवहारपव्‌ऽ (titles of law ). 691 व्यवहारादक्ं by चक्रपाणिभिश्र; D.C. ms. No. 247 of 1887-91 deals with wrrafafa, अभोज्यान्ञ ( ms. is incomplete ) व्यवहागथसार by मधुसुदन. Same as यवहारसारोद्धार. थवहाराथ॑स्सृतिसारसश्चुच्चय by शरभोजी (king of Tanjore 1798-1833 ^, 0. ), Probably same 25 व्यक हारपक्छाक्ष above. व्यवहारालोक by गोपासिद्धान्तवागीश. व्यवहारोच्चय by इरेभ्वर उपाध्याय; m-by टोडरानन्दः नि. सि., गोषिन्दाणव, स्मृति कौस्तुभ. Earlier than 1500 a. D. घ्याघ्रस्मृति or उयाघ्रपादस्यृति om. in मिताक्षरा (on या. 3. 30 ), अषराकं, हरदत्त. व्यासस्मृति Vide see. 52; pr. in Jiva- nanda Sm. II. pp. 321-342 and Anan. Sm pp. 357-371 (about 248 verses ). C. by छृष्णनाथ. aaa: व्रजपद्धति, व्रतकमलाकर by कमलाकरभदु. Sec. 106. व्रत्रल्प m. by निणेयदीपक. व्रतकालनिणय by आदित्यभटु. व्रतकालनिर्णय by areata. त्रतकाटनिष्कषे by waeqrarsena. aaararare of बुलपाणि. Vide sec. 95. aaaiaat of रामरृष्णभद्ु. व्रतकोषठदी Of STAT: ब्रतकोस्तुम. 682 ब्रतखण्ड (the first part of the खहु- वरगखिन्तामणि). WAST. waerer of myo, Sec, 102. ब्रतनि्णैय by ओदम्बरषि. ्रतपखी by नवराज of द्रोण family ; son of देषरससिंह. व्रतपद्धति oof स्व्रधर महामहोपाध्याय. Vide sec, 96 p, 397. One ms. dated लक्ष्मणसेनसवत्‌ 344 1. €. 1463 ^. D. Hp. cat. XIII and 73 ). masrerer (2 part of the dtutatea). ्रतप्रकाश- vide बतराज. बतप्रकाहा by अनन्तवेष- अतध्रतिष्ठातत्त्व by रघु ० Vide amare. ब्रतप्रतिष्ठाप्रयोग 07 साधारणव्रतपतिशा- प्रयोग. ब्रतबन्धपखति by रामदत्तमन्विल, son of गणेभ्वर ( for बाजसनेयशाखा ) अरतबोधविषति or वतबोधनीसग्रह in five परिष्ठेदऽ for वेष्णवऽ on तिथिनिरूपण, ब्रतमहाद्वादशी, रामनवम्यादित्रत, निरूपण, वेहाखाविचेत्रान्तमासरृत्यनि- wor. N. ( new series ) vol. II. p- 182. ameeniee by सामराज pr. at Shola- pur in 1871. mers by eroewg. व्रतराज 07 वरतप्रकाहा by विश्नाथ, son of गोपालन, Compiled at 86465 in Sake 1658 ( 1736 ^. D, ); was a Cittapavana Brahmana of San- dilya gotra and came from ` Sahgamesvara in the Ratnagiri District. Pr. several times at History of Dharmatistva Bombay, Ven. Press ed. being the latest. | ब्रती. व्रतविवेकभास्कर by छष्णखन्तर. व्रतसंग्रह composed by order of इरि- सिंह, king of कणौटवहा. First qu- arter of 14th century. व्रतसद्ठणश्वय m. by निर्णयदीपक, ब्रतसपात. व्रतसागर 111. by खण्डेभ्वर. व्रतसार by गदाधर. व्रतसार by वलपति ( part of चुसिंह- प्रसाद्‌ ). ब्रतसार by sftaw. Vide sce, 89, mara by रत्नपाणिशामां, son of गङ्गो- कीसशीवेभ्वरदामौ atthe order of महेग्वरसिंह, king of मिथिला, son of enfirg, son of wate of खण्ड- aw family; mentions श्रीदत्त as one of his authorities and also ज्योतिनिर्बन्ध. wares by गदाधरदीष्ित. ware by शङ्कर, son of नीलकण्ठ ; 2 huge work ; flourished between 1620-1675; wrote his gumarest in 1671 A. D.; pr. at Lucknow in 1877, 1881. अतोदोत ( part of दिनकरोदोत ). व्रतो्ापनं wararereradt by रामृष्ण based on हेमाष्रि, as he expressly says ; di- lates upon those was that are observed among ates. by शङ्कर, son of बहला waft, surnamed wit of the चित्त- वावन subcaste. He wrote atut शाषनकोद्धदी and refers to his eat List of worke on Dharmafisira gutastatr. Composed in éake 1625 (शाके gregaryaed i. ९. 1703- 4 A. 2.) ; pr. in Bombay at ज्ञान- aim press ( 1863 ^. ०. ). Peter- son ( in Ulwar cat, extract 352) wrongly reads वित््थावनसं्तिना for fawaredte. बरतोपषाससंग्रह by निर्मेयरामभटु- ब्रात्यत्ाप्रायश्ित्तनिणेय ( extracted from the प्रायभ्रिित्तन्दुशेखर of नागोजिभदु); decides that modern princcs are not entitled to have gqaaq_per- formed (pr. in Ch, S. series, two recensions, gga and wy ). ज्रात्यताष्ाङ Stein's cat. p. 105. ज्रात्यताह्ाखिसग्रह (pr. in Ch. S. series ). ब्रात्यस्तोमपद्धति by माधषाचार्य. N. (new series ) vol. III p. 194 (aver means qfeerarfrstts ). शाकुनार्णव 07 हाकरुनकशाख or aga by षसन्तराज. Vide under aaea- राजीय, C. by भाचन्न्द्रगणि. शाङ्करगीता m. by कालविषेक of जीमूत ०; tarfe. Earlier than 1000 A. 9. शङ्कुषतिष्ठा (on ceremonies at the time of laying the foundation of a house ). शङकरमही. Werner by पुरुषोत्तम, son of पीताम्बर ( Baroda O. I. 736 ). Wewageaq m. by wraftae of आधूत ०, दङ्खलिकितचर्मचज. Vide sec. 12. C. m. by क eqae and वि, र. 8, 2; 80, ४ — = --- ee ere 638 हाङ्कलिखितस्सखृति- Vide sec. 12 ; pr. Anan. Sm. pp. 372-373. शङ्खुस्सति- Vide sec. 12; pr. Jivanan- da Sm. part II pp. 343-374 and Anan. Sm. pp. 374-395. रातक्रतुस्शृति m. in भद्‌. षा. हातचण्डीपदखति by गोविन्द्‌. शतचण्डीपरयोग by छृष्णभटदु, son of arer- यणभदटु. रातचण्डीविधानपद्धति by जयरामभदु. डातव्वण्डीषिधानप्रूजापद्धति vide Stein’s Cat.p. 237. हातचण्डीसहस्रव्वण्डीप्योग by कमलाकर ( from his हान्तिरित्ने ). इातद्वयी on srafiaw. Vide srafirw- arerat. C. grafrasatfter. रातश्छोकी by aay. रातश्छोकी by वेङ्कटेश शतानन्वसंग्रह 71. by कालसार of गवाधर wat. श्चुमिज्ोपशान्ति, शाय्यावान. हारदक्षस्सृति 10. in AMSAT OF वतराज. राकटायनस्सृति 111. in अपराकं, are भयस. WSS M. in व्यषहारमग्मख, दत्तक मीमांसा. हाङ्खायनग्रह्यनि्णंय. शाङ्कायनग्ह्यपरिशिष्ट m. in नि. सि. and of विश्वनाथ. ग्रह by araya, son of fae (pr. in Ben. S. series ); 634 Stein’s cat. p 19 gives waa 1428 as the date, शाङ्खायनगह्यसूञ (edited by Olden- berg in Indische Studien, vol. 15 pp. 1-166 and translated in ऽ. 2, E. vol. 29 ) C. ( भाष्य ) by aaraw quoted in कल्पतरु according to syfxae (vol. II. p. 312). Earlier than 1100 A. D. C. ( on four अध्यायऽ only ). N. vol. I pp. 2-4. (~. प्रयोगदीप by qarergx, son of धरणीधर. C. अथदपण by रघनाथ. C. vargarefa or आधानषद्धति by weraex, son of adara, son of शिषदास, son of भीधरमाटब. C. श्द्यप्रवीपक by नारायण, son of eis द्विवेदी, son of भीपति; gives pedigree of family which was नागर from भरीपाटलाधुरी in Gujerat. श्रीपति was 8th from चण्डा of that family. Work composed in 1629 ( at नन्दकरतुचन्द्रसेमिते माथे &c.) probably of ferme era (i. e. in 1573 A. D. >); ms. in Bombay University Library. He wrote gerasrata also. Vide Ulwar cat. for a long extract and D. ^, No. 6 of 1879-80. C. बालावबोधपखति. enganige or-faediirer by अचल, son of षत्सराज. About 1518 A. D. शाटथायन 0"-निस्तृति m. in कालवितेक of जीकत ०, अपरां, History of Dharmasastra शाण्डिल्यगरष्य m. by sxqwz on आष- WMATA 9. 11. 21. शाण्डिल्यधमशाख् ( in verse ) on गभौ- धानादिसस्फार, बह्मचारिधम, गहस्थ- विहितधम, य॒हस्थनिविखधम, वर्णधमे, Bares, साविश्रीजपादि, खहु्वणंदोष, (Vide Tri. cat. of Madras Govt, mss. for 1919-22 vol. IV. `), 5153 ). siftacueafa m. in rare (ar. III. 280 ), स्सृतिच ०, मस्करिभाष्य on mami; in five अध्यायऽ on भागवताचार (cat. of Madras Govt. mss. vol V, p. 1991; Baroda 0). 1. No. 7966 ) शातातपस्यृति- Vide sec. 28 ; pr. Ji- vananda Sm. part II. pp. 435- 455 and Anan. Sm. pp. 396- 410. सातातपस्मुति in mixed prose and verse On expiation and आचार ( 1. 0. cat. p. 398). हातातपस्मृति in 12 अध्यायऽ ( 1. O. cat. p. 399. graraqeafa in 87 अध्यायऽ and 2376 verses(N. vol. II p. 4). शाग्तिक्रमटाकर or sriftacer of कम- wrevaz on the propitiatory rites in case of portents. Vide sec. 106; ‘pr. at Bombay. शान्तिकत्पदीपिका on propitiatory rites for several happenings such as the following, viz. of a frog in domestic fire, qgftewa, birth of a child on ay or भान्तेषा नक्षत्र etc. List of works on Dharmatistra हान्तिकल्यघ्दीप 01 छत्यापलयवदीपिका by भीकष्णवियाधागीक्. 01 incanta- tions for killing, subjugating or bewitching rivals. प. vol. II. ¢. 107 and vol. V. p. 275 (ms. dated सबत्‌ 1851 ). शान्तिकल्पलता Ano. हान्तिकल्याणी. शान्तिकविधि of वसिष्ठ in 213 verses. See शासिष्ठीभाष्थय above. वसिष्ठ tells शामन why the latter and others like qam, qrgaqs, कंस suffered from unfavourable stars and dilates upon अयुतहोम, लक्ष- होम, कोटिहोम, नघग्रहहोभ. Employs areas from माध्यन्दिनीयशाखा ( vide 0. ८. ms. No. 104 of 1871-72). sirerstaat of कमलाकरभटु, son of रामकृष्ण. Probably the same as शान्तिकमलाकर. सान्तिकौस्तुभ (C. P. cat. No. 5585). शान्तिगिणपति by गणपति रावल, About 1685 A. 7, शान्तिचन्दरिक्ा by कवीन्द्र ; m. in his काव्यचन्द्रिका (vide Aufrecht’s Oxf, cat. p. 211 9). शान्तिचरिष्न. शान्तिचिन्तामणि by छऊुलष्ठनि m. in his नीतिध्काशा. हान्तिचिन्तामणि by रिषराम, son of विभाम of मोह caste. हा ततस्वाखत or शान्तिकतस्वाचूत by नारायणचक्रवर्ती. Names अद्भुत- सागर. Defines शान्ति as ‘aur sren- पथातानां ere विनिवारणम्‌ । तथ, | 635 दैगोपधातानां शान्तिभवति arco ॥ पतेन अवृषटदवारा पेहिकमाच्रानिष्टनिवारणं दान्तिः i’. शान्तिदीपिका 111. by रप्र in हुखि- तत्व, संस्कारतः, एकादहीतच, भादु- तच्छ ( p. 195 ). शान्तिनिणीय. शान्तिपद्धति by शिषराम, son of बि- भाम. It deals with rites propi- tiating the nine grabas (planets) according to Samaveda. The author wrote also छन्दोगानी- atfas. Ms. (1.0. cat. p. 570 No. 1762) dated aq 1806 ( 1749-50 A. D. ). शान्तिपारिजात by अनन्तभदटु. शान्तिपुस्तक, शान्तिपोष्टिक of वधमान. शान्तिपकरण ( बोधायनीय ). सान्तिप्रकार by गोभिल ( same as the first 7 chapters of the gaudy ). हान्तिप्रकाहा (from the बीरमित्रोदय ) हान्तिभाष्य by Raft. Same as धासिष्ठीभाष्य. हान्तिमथख of नीलकण्ठ. Vide sec. 107; pr. in Bombay by J. र. Gharpure. हान्तिरत्न or कशान्तिरत्नाकर of फमला- Betas. 9०८. 106 ( BBRAS cat. p. 234 No. 729 ). Vide शान्ति- कमलाकर above. हान्तिधिवेक by विश्वनाथ on rites for propitiating planets etc. ( part of भअवनरत ). Vide Ulwar cat. extract 353 for table of con- tents. 636 हाण्तिसर्येख्व 111, in नि, सि., संस्कार हान्तिसारं by aerate ( part of शरिषहपरसाव ). errferare by विनकरभटू, son of राम- een. A very big work on pro- pitiatory rites like अयुत्होम, war- होम, कोटिहोम, ग्हक्ान्ति, वेनायकी- शान्ति, षिवाहावो ुरुहान्ति ; pr. in Bombay several times, the most recent edition being that of Venk. Press. enfergra by माधव. eiregaura part of मदनरत्न. Vide Sec. 94. हापविभोचन, UIT शारदाक्रमदीपिका Mm. In दुर्गात्सवविषेक and by सरत्रायणीय. + सत्याषाह. » आभ्बलायनीय by कमलाकर. अद्धपयोग , hy रामभ, son of विभ्वनाध.. भ्राद्धप्रयोग by atarsafe. Mentions canada, वैे्नाथीयनिबन्ध, छधी- विलोष्वन. List of works on Dharmatlstra आखप्रयोग by दयाशाङ्कर. आद्धपरयोग by नारायणभद्र. A part of his प्रयोगरत्न, आद्धघयोगचिन्तामाणि of अनूषरसिह. आद्धप्रयोगपखति ( कात्यायनीया ) by कारीदीकषित. आद्धअरासा. भखबाह्मण. आख्धभास्करपयोगपद्धति, आद्धमसरी Mm. in नि. सि. and हुद्धिषिवेक of exaz. भाचमखरी by बापूभदु केकर, re- siding at कणक्ञी in Rajapur Taluka of Ratnagiri District in Sake 1732 (1810 A. D.); pr. in Anan. P. भाद्धमसखरी by gyrate. argneseatear- from the ब्राह्मण- स्वस्व Of wera. Ulwar cat. ex- tract 356, | भाद्धमयख of ीटलकण्ड. Vide 5९५, 107. Pr. by J. R. Gharpure. atadtatar by नन्दपण्डित. भाद्धरत्न by लक्ष्मीपति, pupil of इन्द्र- वति, for followers of सामवेद and yeaa. Relies upon श्रीदत्त. ्राचरत्नमष्टोदधि by विष्णुशम॑न्‌, son of यदत्त. Mentioned in his भखाङ्ग- भास्कर, भखुरहस्य 111. by रामनाथ in स्मति- रत्नावलि. भाखबव्वनसय्ह. अ१ छ वमनभायश्ित्त भआदधवणेन by हरिगम. भाख्वसिध 111. in सं. sy. Same as 6e7 आदविभि कोकिलोक्त; vide D.C, ms. No.223 1879--80 ; mentions स्कन्दपुराण, कात्यायन, आपस्तम्ब, FA, हातातव, याज्ञवल्क्य ; On टदि्राद्ध, गणाधिष- पूजा, मातपूजा, other sas. छन्वोग. ( माध्यान्दिनीय ) by डोण्र. Vide BBRAS. cat. p. 236 No. 236; refers tO SH, BITS, श्रीकण्ठडपा- ध्यायः हलायुधीय, श्राद्धमाष्य. Bet- ween 1200-1500 A. D. ्राद्धविधिसक्षिष. भ्राद्धविभक्ति- on the point when the genitive, objective, dative and vocative are to be used in sry. N. vol. X. p. 347. srafirre by ठोदरूमिभः, son of पाण- कृष्ण. Peterson’s 2nd report p. 188. आद्धषिवेक by रुद्रधर, son of लक्ष्मीधर. Vide sec 96 ; pr. at Benares. भाखविवेक by शूकपाणि sec. 95 ; pr. in Calcutta by M. M. Madhu- sudan Smrtiratna. C. रिण्यनी by अच्युतचक्रवर्तिष्‌ ; m. in his बाय मागटीका. C. अर्थकोष्ठदी by गोषिन्दानन्दु ; sec. IOI. C. भावाथदीष by जगदीश. C. by sfteeor; pr. at Calcutta in Bengali characters, 1880 A. D. C. by नीलकण्ठ, C. by श्रीनाथ आचा्यंचुढामाभि, son of sftex. N. (New series) vol. I pp. 381-382 ; shows that sfrara 648 only elaborated what his father said. C भाखाविषिविककोष्दी by महामहो- ध्याय रामर्ष्णन्यायालङ्गार N. vol. X. p. 119. भादखषिवेकसंग्रह. आद्धदत्तिप्रकरण- माद्खल्यवख्या. भद्धव्यषस्थासक्षेप of चिन्तामणि. Vide एचिष्यषस्थासंक्षेष. भाखषोडदहाविधि - Ulwar cat. 1508 and extract 357. No. भाद्धसकलन. भराद्धसंकतल्य- from प्रयोगपारिजात of रघनाथ. MACHT: भाखसग्रह. (1) 7.11 the स्मृतिचन्दरिका. 221 lier than 1200 A. D. (2) of erreur, son of कोण्डभदु, son of प्रयागभडु. Bascd upon कात्यायन ऽ आद्धकल्पसूज. He wrote संस्कारगणपति on कातीयगु- erag. Composed at Benares in sake 1673 ( जिनगश्रयाख्ये ) i.e. 1751 ^. 20. Vide I. O. cat. pp. 560-6 1, No. 1738. I. O. cat. p. 562 gives the date ७ शके गगनाजगा( gt? rath (1670-1690) and 1826 of विक्रम (1. €. 1770 A. D.) which is probably the date of copying. Mentions ककं, ह्ा- युधः, गदाधर ऽ भाष्य on कातीय- गद्यर, काशिका and दीपिका. भदखसहन्चय, History of Diarmatastra AGATA. (1) by छुम्भकमभदु (?). Is it a mis- reading for कुहक Or छक wz? (2) by कृष्कभटु. Vide sec. 88 pp. 361-62. (3) नारायण आरड 111. in his गृह्या शिसागर १.४. Later than 1650 A.D. ATTAIN. (1) part of चरसिंहप्रसाद ; 11. in वि- धानपारिजात, (2) by कमलाकर. भाद्धसोख्य- part of टोडरानन्द्‌. Vide sec. 104. भाद्धहेमाद्वि- the srg section of the वतुषं्गचिन्तामणि. भआद्धाङ्गतपंणनिणैय by teres (Baroda O. 1. 303 ). भ्राद्धाङ्गमास्कर by विष्णुहार्भन्‌, son of यज्ञदत्त, who became a संन्यासिन्‌ and was styled stqyiaerar ; - based on ककं ; for माध्यन्विनिहाखा ( Ulwar cat. extract 359 ). भाद्ादरहो by महेभ्वरमिभ. भाद्धादिविधि- भआद्धादिषिवेककोष्ठदी by रामरृष्ण. आद्धाधिकार by विष्छदत्त. आद्धाथिक्रारिनिणय by गोपालन्थायपश्चा- aa(N. vol. III p. 60 ) भाद्धाञुक्रमणिका. भद्धापराकं, भ्राचालोक 1. in आखाररत्न of लक्ष्मण. Earlier than 1600 A. 9. आद्धारोखीयव्पण by देवराज. List of works on Dharmasasira avaeq. Ano. (N. vol. V. p. 96. ) aTargaet by antRrag surnamed Kala. Sec. 170. श्राखावयोत 10. in etera’s गङ्गाछत्य- विवेक. It is probably a portion of मदनरत्न. आद्धोपयोगिषचन by अनन्तभदु. आवणकमेसपेवशिप्रयोग- ४ Wey rite. भावणवावशी. वणी ( आश्वलायनीय ). yy ( काण्वहाखीय ). भावणीकम ( बाजसनेय ). 5, ( हिरण्यकेहि ) by दीक्षित. भवषणीप्रयोग by कमलाकर. ्रावणीहोमपद्धति ( आभ्वलायनीय ). भरावणेोत्समकमै. भीञद्धिक- ्रीकरनिबन्ध 17. in स्सुतिसार of हरि- ara. श्रीधरसष्ठच्चय m. in मलम।सतत्व by रघु °. श्रीधरीय ८0. 10 नि. सि. प्रयोगपारिजात. Vide sec. 81 p. 337. भ्रीनिवासदीश्षितीय by श्रीनिवास, son of गोषिन्वा्यं of कौशिकेत्रि. On वेखानससूज्र ( Tri. cat.. of Madras ` Govt. mss. 1919-22 p. 5179 ) गोपीनाथ भीपतिरल्नमाला "11. in समयमण्ख. भ्रीपतिष्यवहारनिणय m. in fafayaea of ` aye ( Jivananda vol. I. p. 21 ). भीपतिव्यवह्ारसश्चश्खय 111. in संस्कार- wer of शु, Probably the same as above, ह, B, 82. 649 श्रीषतिससच्वय 111. in ज्योतिस्वर्व of wz? (vol. 1. p. 582). श्रीस्थलभ्रफाङी by fasrerag. Peterson's 5th Report No. 154. श्रुतिचन्तरिका. श्चतिमीमांसा by चसिहवाजवेयी. PACU ALICE भ्रोतस्मातकर्मप्रयोग by aftr. भ्रोतस्मात॑क्रियापद्ति. श्रोतस्मार्तविधि by arereear. श्लोककात्यायथन M. 1n अपराक. श्चोककालनिणय. श्ठोकगोतम 111. in कालविवेक of जीषूत ०; अपराकं, काटमाधव. श्चोकचतदंशी ( धमौनुबान्धि ) by छष्ण- होष. C. by रामपाण्डित रोष; pr. in सरस्यती- भवन scries ( No. 22 ) श्लोकतर्पण by लोगाक्षि. श्चोकसंग्रह- on 96 श्राद्ध, श्चोकापस्तम्त 111. in आचारमयूख. भ्वश्रुस्तुषाधनसवाद्‌ ( Burnell’s Tanj. cat. [. 1432 ) decides chat if a man dics childless, leaving a widow and mother, each takes half of his estate. SATABA THT ष्वेताश्वदानविधि by कमलाकर. षटकम चन्द्रिका by चरुक्ररितिम्मयज्वन्‌, son of लक्षछषणभटू. He was called रामचन्द्राश्रम on becoming a सन्यासिन्‌. वटकमचान्द्रका Mm. in weeyrarey of Ue GF 650 History of Dharmaidstra वट्कमेदीपिका Ano. Collection of षण्णवतिभ्राद्निर्णेय by fares, son of rituals for the worship of अ्यम्बकः, पाथिवरिवलिङ्ग, and connected matters ( N. vol. IX p. 273 ) षटकमदीपिका by छष्ुन्दलाल. पटफमीषैचार ( part of स्षृतिरतन-महो- दधि ). षट्‌फमविषेक by हरिराम. पट्‌ कमेदयाख्यानचिन्तामणि by नित्यानन्द. Discourse on the sentences used at wedding and five othsr sacra- ments, for students of agpaq. Based upon शणविष्छु. N. vol. Ill. p. 27. qafasreaa. Vide sec. 53. षटुषदौी of विहलद्रीकषित ( C. P. cat. No. 6029 ). वदूपारायणबिधि. षड़हीति or आहोचनिणैय by कौशिका- दित्य (i.e. आदित्य of the कोकिक- ara). The first verse is ‘ अथा- नेकर्षिवाक्यानि संगत्यादाय केवलम्‌ । wet कोशिकादित्यो fare - निणयम्‌ ॥ . ` It 15 in 86 verses on impurities on birth and death and in five पकरणऽ on सूतक, WUT, असगोत्राशौचः, सस्कारा- ¦ होच 2110 आहोलापवाद. Aufrecht (II. 7. 82 ) is wrong in identi- fying it with अभिनवषडङीति. (.. अधघषोधिनी by लक्ष्मीच्सिह. C. शद्धिचन्द्रिका by नन्दपण्डित (pr. ` in Ch. 9. series with text ) वडरीति by aga. wattage om. by egfrqo and «WT. AT. —— गोविन्दञ्चरि. The 96 srgs are bricfly set out in one verse ˆ अभायुगमनुक्रान्तिधूतिषातमहाङयाः । आन्वष्टक्यं च yea: बण्णवत्यः धकी- तिताः ॥ *. Mentions कमटाकरमटु, नीलफण्ठभटु, दीपिकाबिबरणः, प्रयोग- रत्न, भ्राद्धकलिकाः कलिकाबिबरण of विभ्वशरूपाचायै ; ( ms. in Bhadkam- kar collection ). Later than 1650 A. D. षण्णवतिश्राद्धपति by रघुनाथ, son of aria, son of zeae. Refers to amrauatz 25 his uncle. About 1§ 50-1625 A. D. वण्णवतिश्राद्धपयोग. पष्टिप्र्तिंश्ान्ति ( ceremonies on atta- ining 60 years ). Vide Burnell’s Tanj. cat. pp. 138b, 1579. पोडहाकभकलापनिणयय. षोडराकमेपद्धति by ऋषिभदु. षोडशा कर्मपद्धति by गङ्गाधर. षे उरा फमप्रयोग on the sixteen संस्कारऽ, स्थालीपाक, पुंसवन, अनवलोभन, सीमन्तोक्नयन, जातक, were, पञ्चगव्य, नामकरण, निष्क्रमण, कणेवेध, HAMA, चोलकर्म, उपनयन, गोदान, _ समावतेन, विवाह. Mentions प्रयोग- सार, प्रयोगपारिजात, ater ; ms’ (in Bhadkamkar collection ) dated Sake 1695. After 1500A.D- चोउशपिण्डश्रानप्रयोग Ano, ; mentions wacacadtg. (प. vol. 7, pp. 310-311 ). वोडदामहावानपद्धति or दानपृ्ति. by, रामदत्त of the शोपा minister of king afirg of fivferey,,of the Lidt of works ‘on कर कार्णादषंशा, with the help of wq- esta, his family priest. He was a paternal first cousin of चण्डेष्वर and so flourished in first half of 14th century. Greereerarataty by कमलाकर, son of राच्द्कष्ण, Sec. 106. GSNATAT. बडषशासस्काराः (according to आश्व- कायन्य ). बोडशसस्काराः by कमलाकर. बोढहासंस्काराः by चन्द्र्ुड. An abri- dgment of his सस्कारनि्णय. बोडकासस्कारपद्धति or संस्कारपद्धति ( Bik. cat. p. 463 ) by आनन्दरामदीक्षित. वोडहशासस्कारधयोग. षोडशसस्कारसत by रामेश्वर. बोडहोपचारप्ूजापद्डति ( for worship of विष्ण). सवत्सरकत्वलता Of ants, 2 devotee of freezer, son of बह्भाचायं ; in 12 qws in verse. Begins with कृष्णजन्माष्टमी festival in भाद्रपद्‌ and then describes festivals in other months. D. C. ms. No. 201 of A 1882-83. MAAS OF सवत्सरकोस्तुम 01 संवत्सर- दीधिति-721\ of स्सृतिकोस्तुभ of अनन्तदेष. Vide sec. 109. सबत्सरष्त्यप्रकाश्- part of the qey- ` धन्तभास्कर by भास्करशाम. संवत्सरकोश्ठदी by गोषिन्दानन्द्‌, Sec. 101. संषत्सरदीधिति- 21८ of the स्पतिकोस्तुभ of अनन्तदेव. संबत्सरानिणयप्रतान by पुरुषोत्तम. 661 सवत्सरप्रकारा. waaay 11. by शूलपाणिं in दुर्गो - व्सवविधेक, ्राद्धक्रियाकोयुदी, निणेया- सृत 2110 in qerasfrava( II. p 51) and srferer ( II. 327 ) as हला- gas. Aufrecht ( cat. I. p. 681 ) wrongly ascribes it to गुलपाणि. Vide p. 394 above. Vide N. ( new series (I. p. 390 fora सवत्सरप्रदीप. सेबत्सरप्योगसार oof भीकृष्णमदाचायं, son of नारायण of the बन्यघटीय clan. सवत्सरोत्सवकाटनिणय by निर्भयराम. संवत्सरोत्सवकालनिणंय of पुरुषोत्तम on the same subject as preceding. Expressly says that it was com- posed to clear up-the पद्धति of व्रजराज. In prose. D. C. Ms. No. 177 of 1884-86. Earlier than 1750 A. D. wadeata Vide sec. 55; pr. Jiva- nanda Sm. part I pp. 584-603 and Anan. Sm. pp. 411-424. संस्कर्तृकम by वेयनाथ. Probably a portion of the vaftamrns. सस्कारकमलाकर oor सस्कारपद्धति by कमलाकर. Vide sec. 106 (vide BBRAS cat. p, 236 and I. O. cat. p. §14 ). संस्कारकल्पद्रम by surarratizre, son of ge@argrere- In three काण्डः on गणेहापूजन, सस्कार and स्मातो- धानं ; names वाद्देव 5 भाष्य on (पार- स्कर ) wer. Speaks of 25 संस्कारऽ. Ulwar cat. extract 364. संस्कारकोषदी by fiftrz, son of TEE. सस्कारकोस्तुम or सस्कारदीधिति- part of wafrarera of अनन्तदेष. Vide sec. 109 (pr. by Nir. P. and at Baroda with Marathi translation ) सस्कारगङ्गगाधर 07- धरी by गङ्गगधरदीक्षित. On सस्कारऽ 0{गभौधान, चोल, aaa, वेदव्रतचत्टय, केशान्त, व्रतजिसर्म, विषाह. (D.C. ms. No. 610 of 1882-83 ). सस्कारगणपति- 0011. ON पारस्करण््य- aa by रामकृष्ण. Vide under पारस्करग्रह्य above. सस्कारचचन्द्रचूडी of चन्द्रचूड. Vide सस्कारनिणय below. सस्कारचिन्तामणि by रामरृष्ण of Be- nares (C. ए. cat. No. 6073 ). Probably the same as सस्कार- गणपति. सस्कारतचरव of रध्रनन्दन. Vide sec. 102. C. by छष्णनाथ. संस्कारदीधिति- vide संस्कारकोस्त॒भ. संस्कारदौीधिति ( pr. at Benarcs ). सस्कारनिणय. (1) by चन्द्रचूडभदु, son of उमण्ण- wg, son of waz. Based on आपस्तम्बगरह्य. Ircats of संस्कारऽ from qarara. Names sarftrf¥- बन्धः, माधवीय, हरदत्त and छददौन On आपस्तम्ब, पयोगरत्न. One ms. C1. O. cat. p. 98 No. 467 ) is dated Sake 1607 ( 1685 ) Between 1575-1650 A. D. (2) by तिष्याभदु, son of रामभदटु, surnamed गह्वर; for आग्वलायनःऽ. History of Dharmatasira In 1776 a. Dp. he composed 115 सग्रहदीपिका on आश्वलायन- WATT: (3) by नन्दपण्डित- a part of स्ब्ुति- सिन्धु. Vide sec. 105. weprcatag by नरहरि (CC. P. cat. No 6076 ). Pr. at Benares in 1894. सस्कारषद्धति by असूतपाठटक, son of सखाराम (for माध्यन्दिनीयऽ). Men- tions हेमाद्रिः धमीद्धिसार, waht qt, पयोगरतनः कोस्तुभ, send, गवाधर. सस्कारपद्धति by आनन्दराम यार्िकर. संस्कारषद्ति by कमलाकर. Vide सस्कार- कमलाकर above. सस्कारपद्धति by गङ्काधरभद्ु, son of राम. Vide सस्कारगङ्गाधरी. सस्कारपदति by नारायणभटु. संस्कारपद्धति by भवदेव. The same as छन्दोगकमीवुष्ठानपद्धति. Vide sec. 73. C. रहस्य by रामनाथ. Composed in fake 1544 ( 1622-23 A. D.). N. VI. pp. 237-238. सस्कारपद्दति by शिङ्गय. सस्कारषक्रारा, (1) a part 0रप्रितापनारा्सिह. (2) 2 partof क्ीरमिन्नोदय by भित्र मिभ. सस्कारपदीष. संस्कारपदीपिका by विष्णरामेवीकषित. सस्कारभयोग. सस्कारभास्कर, (1) by खण्डभदटु, son of भयरेश्वर srarfya. Based on ewe and List. of works on Dharmatisira गङ्गाधर. Divides सस्कारऽ into ater ( गभौधान and others ) and दैव ( पाकयज्ञ and others ). D.C. No. 611 of 1882-83. (2) by ऋपिबुध or- wz, son of गङ्गाधर, son of fasqary, sur- named शोच ( शौचे ). Pr. by Venk. P.; follows कक, are- देव and हरिहर on पारस्करग्रहय and mentions प्रयोगदपंण. Vide BBRAS. cat. vol. II p. 236 No. 739. avert by नारायण. Same as बह्मसस्कारमशथरी. स स्फारमयख, (1) by नीलकण्ठ. Vide sec. 107. In many mss. ascribed to his son ergs. Pr. at Gujrati P. and by Mr. J. R. Gharpure. (2) ,, OF संस्कारभास्कर by सिद्धेश्वरः son of araraz, son of शङ्कर. He was a nephew of नीलकण्ठ. Flourished between 1630- 1670 A.D. Treats of 25 सस्कारऽ and gives at the end of the work 2 complete list of गोत्रऽ and wavs. सस्कारमातेण्ड by भातेष्डसोभयाजी ; contains two chapters on स्थाली- पाक and aaaye. Pr. at Madras. सस्कारष्ठक्तावली of तानपाठक- सस्काएरत्न by खण्डेराय, son of gftag, son of नारायण ; m. in his कत्य- wa. Later than 1400 A. D. His family was patronised by feat king. - 658 सेस्काररत्न from the अनूषविलास or धमौम्बोधि of मणिराम. सस्काररत्नमाला. (1) by गेपीनाथभदट ( pr. at Anan. P. and in Ch. S. series ). (2) by atirgrag. सस्काररत्नाकर ( पारस्करीय ). संस्काररत्नावलि of चुर्सिहभटू, son of faguz, of कण्बहाखा and resi- dent of sista. सस्कारवादा्थं ( deals with the proper times for such सस्कछारऽ 25 जातकम &c. ). N. vol. 1. p. 140 सस्कारविधि or गृह्यकारिका by tae. aeenaifa- 2 portion of the गोविन्दा्णंव compiled by Sreqférg. सस्कारसागर by नारायणमषु (on स्थाली पाक). संस्कारसार- part of the वृर्सिदपसाद Vide sec. 99. सस्कारसोख्य. सस्काराशृत of सिद्धेश्वर, son of कामो az; vide सस्कारमवूख above. Re- fers 0 दैतनिणयपरिशिष्ट of 11 father. सस्कारोदथोत- a portion of the fxa- करोदयोत. संस्थापद्धति or सस्थतियनाथ by वेथनाथ, son of शत्नेभ्वर, son of केव ; in 4 मानऽ. Ulwar cat, extract 63. On the rites performed in आव- सथ्य fire according to कात्यायन गह, संहितादीप m. in संस्कारमग्रख of सिद्धे FITo “634 संहिताभकीष m. in नि. सि. An astro- logical work. सहितासारावलि m. in सस्कारमशूख सहिताहोमपद्धति by भेरवभदु ( Baroda 0.1. 335 ) सकलकमचिन्तामणि. सकलदानफलाधिकार. सकलवेवताप्रति्ठा, सकलएराणसखछस्वय m. by अललाडनाथ, ee ae PSSST raasis- सङ्करश्ततिथिनिणय. सकल्पकोष्ठदी of रामङ्ष्ण (CN. IV. p. 222-23). संकल्पन्धिका by «targa (N. I. p. 166 ). सकल्पभाद्धपयोग. सकल्पस्सृतिदगंमखन by चन्द्रहोखरशर्मां of नवद्वीपे ( about the सङ्कल्पऽ to be made in the beginning of all काम्य rites). Divided into four parts on तिथि, मास, काम्य- कर्मणिसङ्कल्प, वरत. N. vol. 11. pp. 329-330. सकषटहरदुर्थीव्रतकालनि्णय. सेकेतकोसुदी ( probably a purely as- trological work ) by erewaren- चायं. संकेतकोश्चदी by शिव. सकेतकोष्वी by हरिनाथाचाय m. by रधु ° in ज्योतिस्तत्व सक्रान्तिकोभ्रदी by सिद्धान्तवागीहाभदा- arg; ms. (N. vol. VIII. p 198 ) dated Sake 1340 (1618 ^. 2.) Pitttoty of ‘Dhar initisira सक्रान्तिनिणय by गोपालदहार्मन्यायपश्थानन in 3 parts. सक्रान्तिनिणय by बालकृष्ण. सक्रान्तिनिणय- a portion of the egfy- WING: सक्रान्तिनिणय Ano. ; mentions भीम- पराक्रम, दीपिका, कत्यचिन्तामणि. सक्रान्तिबिवेक by शूलपाणि. Vide sec. 95 at p. 394. चि. VI. p. 205. सक्रान्तिव्यवस्थानिणय. Ano. (N. II. ?. 313 ). सक्रान्तिहान्ति. सक्रान्त्युयाषपन. सं्षिप्रनिणयसिन्ध. Briefly describes religious rites from चेत्र to फाल्छन. Expressly says that it is based on नि्णयसिन्धु ; ms in Bik. cat. p. 454 is dated Sake 1514 ( 1592 A. D.), which is a misreading, if निणयसिन्ध of कमलाकर 15 meant. संक्षिप्तशाञ्चाथपद्धति. संक्षिप्तसार- 111. in एकादरीत्व of eyo सक्षिप्रहोभप्रकार by went: संक्षिप्ताह्विकपद्धति by चण्डीदास, son of हुगादत्त, written at the desire of रणवीरसिंह of काश्मीर. संक्षेपतिथिनिणयसार by गोक्रुलनित्‌, son of हरिजित्‌ in 1633 ^. D. सक्षेपप्ूजापद्धति ( Ulwar cat. 2412 ) by रघुनन्वनटक्कर. awarextate ( Ulwar cat. 1513 ). सक्षेपसिदिस्यवस्था सक्षेपाष्धिकचन्दिका by दिवाकरभदुः Same as आद्धिकचन्दिका of THATHT above List of works on Dharmatastra सश्यापरिमाणसग्रह Of केशषकवीन्द्र, who wrote in Benares and was the principal Pandit in the parisad of the king of adteafe ( modern Tirhut ). Dilates upon 11८ weights, numbers and measures required in eq rules(such as size of tooth brush, number of sacred threads for ब्राह्मणऽ यज्ञो- पीत ). N. vol. ४ pp. 161-162. wag 01 रघ्रुतिसग्रह. Vide sec. 54. संग्रहचिन्तमणि (C. P. ध्म. 6153 ). संग्रहवैयनायीय by वैयनाथ. संग्रामसाहीय- vide विषेकदीपक above. सञ्चरितपरित्राण by वीरराघव of वाश्रल- मोन्न on the duties of वेष्णवऽ. Mentions स्पूतिरत्नाकर, सख्वरितरक्षा by वेङ्कटनाथ on ergraa- धारण, ऊध्व॑पुण्डूपारण and भगवन्नि- वेदितोपयोग ( 3 प्रकरणऽ ). सख्चरितरक्षा by रामाबुजा चाय. C. सच्चरिवसारवीपिक। by himself. सच्यरितद्धानिधि by वीरराधव ( atu); who bows to several teachers of the f&frata system, viz. नाथः watts, याग्रुनश्ठनि, रामारजः रङ्गराज, वेदान्तदेशिकः, TET, भी निवास &c. | सच््राह्विक सजजनबह्लमा by जयराम- a com. on पारस्फरग्रह्यसून्च ; 111. in छहूतेदीपक of Hea. सत्फनकल्पव्रम. क WHT ATT. No. सत्कर्चिन्तामणि ACHAT. सक्कियाकत्पमशरी (Madras Govt.mss. | cat. vol, V p. 2212, vol. VI. p. 2308 ) सत्किथासारदीपिका by atareag for वेष्णवऽ. He wrote gituPpfrere. also. Flourished about 1500- 1565 A.D. Names भवदेव; अनि- रुद्ध, भीम, गोषिन्दानन्द and नारायण. सत्यव्रतस्शृति 171. in काठविवेक of जीमूत ०, अपराकं, FETS, भाखतस्व. सत्सप्दायपदीपिका or संप्रवायप्रदीष- an account of the principal gery ` teachers. सत्सप्रदायप्रदीपिका by गदाधर, सस्स्पृतिसार by जानकीराम सामो on तिथि, प्रापशित्त &c. N. (new series) . vol. I. 7. 210. सदाचार सदाचारक्रम by रामपति, सदाचारक्रम attributed to वसिष्ठ. सदाचारचन्द्रिका ८ 0. C. ms. No. 108 of 1869-70 copied in स्तवत्‌ 1787 ara i. e. February 1731 A. D.). Inculcates छष्णमक्ति. Mentions रूपगोस्वामी, सनातनगो- स्वामी, रामा्यनचन्द्रिका, हरिभक्ति- विासटीका, हरिभक्ति्ठधोदय and its दीका. सदाचार चन््रोदय- vide आचारचन्द्रोदय alias मराधवप्रकाश. सदाचारनिणैय by अनन्तभटु. ` सदाचारघकरण by शङ्कराचायं ( for बोगिन्‌ ). सदाच्वाररहस्य by अनन्तमदु, son of area, composed at Benares at the desire of aarafire, son of अभरेहा, son of जयसिंह. About 1715 A. D. (vide Stein’s cat. p. 317-318 ». सवाखारबिवरण by शङ्कर. सदाच्चारसग्रह by गोपालन्यायषश्चानन . सवाचादसंग्रह 0» वेङ्कटनाथ. Vide under स्सुतिरत्नावलि. सदाचारसग्रह by राङ्करमदु, son of नीलकण्डमदु (1. O cat. p. 590 No. 1800 ). Probably a spurious work. In N. vol. I p. 103 author’s name is wanting, though the first verse is same as in I. O. cat. p. 590. सदाचारसंग्रह by श्रीनिवासपण्डित in three काण्डऽ On आचार, व्यवहार and safes. सदाचारसमधि. सदाचारस्यृति by आनन्दतीर्थ. verses. C. by चहरि, pupil of मध्व. Ba- roda O. I. No. 1884. C, by warara. Baroda O, 1, No. 2619. सवाखारस्शृति by नारायणपण्डित, son of विश्वनाथ, In Bik. cat, p. 449 the work is styled °स्मृतिटीक्ा- So also in Stein’s cat. p. 107. सदाचारस्थृति by राघषेन्प्रयति on sree (C. P. cat. 6193 ). wararceata by भीनिवास (~. ?. cat. 6192 ). In 40 History of Ditirmabietra सदाचारस्शतिव्याख्या क्षीरसिन्धं (Baroda Oriental Institute No. 1880 ). Mentions प्रयोगपारिजित. TARA mM. in अहल्याकाम्ेबरु. सद्धमंचिन्तामणि 111. in आचारमण्ख. सद्धमतखाख्याद्धिक by हरिप्रसाद, son of गङ्गेश of मथुरा. In 62 verses. He wrote आचारतस्छ also. सदडृ्षरत्नमाला. सनत्छुमारसदिता 111. in ज्रिस्यलीसेह and नि. सि. संतानदीपिका- gives _ astrological reasons for a man’s being issue- less. सतानदीपिका by केशव. सतानदीपिका by महादेव. सतानदीपिका by हरिनाथाचाय. सद्भरतिका COM. ON हारछता १, ४. सध्याकारिका by सवैश्वर, son of ङीला- धर. संध्यात्रयभाष्य by परशुशम ( Baroda 0. 1. 6463 ). Also called दज कल्पलता. सेध्यादिबद्यकमेन्‌. संष्यात्िणय. संध्यानिर्णयकल्यषह्ली by कष्णवण्डित, son of रामपण्डित and लक्ष्मी in four segs. Hultzsch R. I. No. | 442 extract p. 80. संध्यापद्धति m. in आह्धिकततत् of ry 9. सध्याप्रयोग N. vol. X. p. 343. संध्यारलनप्रवीप by आशाधरभह in 3 ferns. Baroda O. 1. No. 29. संध्याबन्दनमाष्य 0 संध्याभाष्य 0 आनन्दतीर्थ. List of works on Dharmoatastra सथध्यावष्वनभाष्य by छठष्णपण्डितः son of शचववैवक्ञ, in four chapters ( BBRAS. cat. p. 237). कध्यावन्दनमाष्य by छष्णपाण्डित, son of राममह and लक्ष्मी, and pupil of ggrarata and ger. Hultzsch’s R.I p. 58. This is also called संध्यावन्दनपदति, Pr. in Anan. P. संध्यावन्दनमाष्य by atusqry, son of Rrearg and कामाम्बा (for आण्व- wradtas ); composed at request of atgfte, son of arg. संष्यावन्वनमाष्य by तिमेलटयज्वम्‌ or तिरुमल ० ° सथ्यावम्दनमाष्य ०$# नारायणपण्डितः, who composed 60 works. संध्यावन्दनमाष्य by रामाभ्रमयति, pu- pil of महादेव ; composed at Be- Maresin ere 1574 ( 1652-53 A. D.). संध्यायन्दनभाष्य by विद्यारण्य ( on ऋग्वेदिसन्ध्या and तैत्तिरीय संध्या ). सष्यावन्दनभाष्य by वेङ्कृटाचायं ( on ऋक्संध्या ). सथ्यावन्वनमाष्य by sara, pupil of alee. Stein’s cat. p. 256. Seareeqararea by हाङ्कराचायं ? संष्यावन्दनभाष्य by ewer ( Ulwar cat. No. 1514 ), सथ्यावन्दनमाष्य by भीनिवासतीथै. सश्यावन्यनमन्ञ- there are several works with this title for the followers of the different Vedas. wearreseureat बह्मप्रकाशिका by षन- wrftsfiter, pupil of मदोजि. Stein’s cat. p. 256. About 1650 A. D. H. D. 83, 657 संध्यारत्नप्रदीप by आश्ाधरभड् ( Barodz O. I. No. 29 ). सध्यावन्दनविवरण- from the कल्पलता. — by शमानन्द्‌- ara. चिज- सध्याख्जप्रवयन by हलायुध. सन्यासक्मकारिका. सन्यासग्रहणपद्धति by आनन्व्तीथ, son of जनादंनमदु- सन्यासग्रहणपदति by शङकराच्ायं. सन्थासग्रहणपद्धति attributed to sag. सन्यासग्रहणरत्नमाला by भीमाशङ्कर- area ( Baroda O. I. 12305 ) सन्यासग्राह्यपद्धति alias सन्यासप्रयोग alias ewaaht ascribed to दाङ्कराच्यायै ( on rites when a person enters order of सन्यास ) सन्यासदीपिका by अच्चिहोनिगोपीनाय ( Baroda O. I. 10057 ). सन्यासर्दौपिका by सचिवानन्वाभम pu- pil of aferersret ( Ulwar cat. ex- tract 363. सन्यासधममसग्रह by segarsre. सम्यासनिणय by पुरुषोत्तम. सम्यासनिणेय by agarard in verse. C. by same. C. विषरण by पुरुषोत्तम, son 01 पीताम्बर. D. C. ms. No. 175 0 1884-86. ¢. by रघुनाथ, pupil of विहवीकषित BBRAS. cat. vol. II p. 327. C. by विहलेश. SHIT TTA by Sea. aruratafy m. in नि. सि., are weararas by अच्युताभम संन्यासपद्धति by आनन्दतीर्थ, the founder of the arewna ( 119 7199 A, D. ). Stein’s cat. p. 318 for extract. सन्यासपद्धति by निम्बाकंशिष्य. सन्यासपद्धति by बह्मानन्विस्‌. Baroda 0. 1. No. 1676 is a संन्यासपद्धति following ब्रह्मानन्दीयपखति, संन्यासपद्धति by saga ( extracted from प्रतापनारर्सिंह ). सन्यासपद्धति ascribed to राङ्कराचायं (I. 0. cat. p. 521 No. 1642). संन्यासपद्धति ascribed to हौनक (N. vol. II. p. ror). सन्यासभेदनिणंय. सन्थासरत्नावलि = by पश्मनाभभटारक ( according to माध्व tenets ) सन्थासरीति सन्यासवरण by agurary. N. vol. X. p. 178. erarataie by Reapeftey ( Baroda O. I. 8512). सन्यासाद्धिक' सम्यासिपद्धति ( 0 वैष्णवऽ ) I. 0. cat. p. 523. सश्यासिमरणोत्तरविधि Stein's cat. p- 107. सन्यासिसन्ध्या ९ ०५। + स नलयचन सन्यासिसापिड्यधिधि by बेदान्तरामानुज तातदवास, on the ascetic’s son _per- forming सविण्डीकरण for his father History of Dharmatastra सम्भार्गकण्टकोखार by senarr (on tho necessity of सपिण्डीकरण for s7q). सन्मागंक०८१। ६ रखण्डन ( Madras Govt. mss. cat, vol. ‘VI p. 2314 No. 3093 }. सपिण्डनिणीय. सपिण्डीकरण. सपिण्डीकरणखण्डन. सपिण्डीकरणविधि, सपिण्डीकरणभाय, सपिण्डीकरणान्तकमे. सपिण्डीकरणान्वष्टका. सपिण्डीभाद्ध by cgay ((. P. cat. No. 6221 ). WUAITHAAATST. सप्तपाकयज्ञरोष. Divided into four stats, each war being divided in- to अध्यायऽ, N. vol. II. pp. 122- 125. सप्तपाकसस्थाविधि by दिवाकर, son of महादेष, ON wane, ately, TIA, आग्रयण, अष्टका and पार्वेण- भाच. Names हेमाद्ि and कौस्तुभ सप्तमटठाम्नायिक- Vide मटाम्नायादिविच्वार, सप्तषिभमरत or- cafe m. in नि. सि, सपर्षिसमतस्सति in 36 verses (I. O. cat. p. 402 ). The seven sages are नारव, afte, कौषिक, tye, TH, BUTT, सपर्िस्सृतिसंगरह सप्तव्यसनकथासष्ठच्चय by सोमकीतिं आचार्यं (N. VIII. ४. 144) सपतसंस्थाप्रयोग by अनन्तदीक्षित, son of विश्वनाथ, surnamed agtradrt- सप्तसंस्थाप्रयोग by areeer, son of -Liet of works on Dharmatastra सत्रसंस्याधयोग from the राजघर्मकोस्तुभ of ayers. सप्तसस्थ!भयोग्‌ from the प्रयोगरत्न of नारायणमद्. सत्रसुत्रसन्यासपवातति . Rules for ordi- nation of sarhnydsins and for the ten orders ( तीथ, आभ्रम, अरण्य, गिरि, पवेत, सागर, सरस्वती, भारती and पुरी ) and account of the ten great teachers from ser to हकराचाये and the latter’s disciples. N. vol. VI. p. 295. समापतिलक्षण समयकमलाकर by कमलाकर. समयकल्पतरु by पन्तोनीभद्रु, son of क्ष्मणमदु. Vide Bik. cat. p. 451 ( which gives only पएकादज्ञीनिणेय out of it). समयनय by विभ्वेभ्वर, son of दिनकर, for हभ्भुराज ( the Maratha king Sambhaji )in 1681. समयनिणय by saeraz on times proper for religious rites; ms. ( पि. vol. VIII. p. 205 ) dated Sake 1602 ( 1680-81 A. D. ). समयनिणैय- the sth part of the प्रताप- मार्तण्ड by रामषष्ण, son of माधव, son of त्रारायण of the पराहारगोज्. Composed at the order of king प्रताप( sata). About 1500- 1525 A. D. समयप्रकाश by छ्ुन्दलाल. समरयप्रकाहां by रामरचन्द्रयज्वन्‌, Vide N. vol. VIII. p, 213. समयधकाहा by feurgrat described as स्वरादसन्राडग्निचित्स्थपतिमहायाज्जिक. 659 It isa part of a digest called क्ीर्तिप्रकाहा ; composed by order of atte, son of कनकसिंह, born in गोर family. His जिरुद्‌ऽ are ' कोवण्डपरह्यराममानोख्त which are the same as those of मदनसिंहदेषव under whom मदनरत्न was com: piled. It is probably this work that is mentioned by strepfgar- कोष्ठदी, मलमासतस्व of tye 25 समयप्रकाह. । समयप्रदीष by विहलदीक्षित (^. ?.. cat, 6284 ). समयपदीप by भदत्त. Vide sec. 89. ^. जीणोदार by मधुखदनट्ठर. समयप्रदीप by हरिहरभटाचायं, compos- ed in Sake 74871 ( क्षे मरीमङ्गल- वेदचन्द्रसख्यागते) 1. €, 1559-60 A.D. Doubtful whether he was father of ego. पि. vol.III. pp. 55-56 and Baroda O, I. No. ro120. It deals with astrological gas for religious rites. समयमनोरमा ( (. P. cat. 6286 ). सम्यमरख 07 sronge by नीलकण्ठ, Vide sec, 106. Pr, by Mr. Ghar- pure. anarge by छष्णमटु. सभयरत्न by मणिराम. समयालोक by qaanrag. Vide दुगा - TATE: समयोववयोत- part of मवनरत्न. समरसार by रामचन्द्र, son of संवासः. Deals with astrological calcu- lations from names of bellige- rents &c, C, by भरत younger brother of author. Stein’s cat. p. 174. C. by शिषवासः, son of सूयंवास and feerratarr. He calls the author his शुरु. N. II. pp. 204-206. समस्तकालनिणयाधिकार. समानप्रवरग्रन्थ- Stein’s cat. p. 107. समावर्तनकालपायश्रित्त. समावर्तनप्रयोग by स्यामडन्वर. सद्धदायप्रकरण by जगन्ञायस्रि. सद्यद्रकरभाष्य ON भाद्र mM. in आद्धि- eres, भाद्धतश्व of रघु ०. सद्धव्रयानमीमांसा. सप्रदायप्रदीप $ गदष्ठिवेदिन्‌ ; com- posed at डेन्दाषन in सवत्‌ 1610 (1553-4 ^. D. ); in five प्रकरण ; gives षरभ्यरा of विष्णुभक्तिमा्मं from एरुषोत्तम, बह्मा, नारद, छष्णद्वेषायन, gre; speaks of the तिरोधान of the path and then of agra, his son fage, his sons गिरिधर and others who were living when work was composed; men- tions the five things ( बस्तुपश्चक ) on which बहुभ dwelt ( viz. शुरु- सेवा, भागवताथै, भगवत्स्वरूपनिणय, मगवत्सेवा, नैरपेक्ष्य ) ; narrates stories 0 फछुमारषाल and हेमचन्द्र, शङ्कराष्वा्यं and gaz, मध्वाचा्यं, शमातुज and निभ्बादित्य and of birth of बह्म while his parents were running away from वजि. D.C. ms. No. 176 of 1884-86. सबनल्धगणपति by गणपति रावल, son of uftergeafe, on auspicious times for marriage, forms of marriage etc, About 1685 ^. D, History of Dharmatistra awersetait Ano, ; on prohibited degrees of relationship in marriage सबन्धतरव 771, in नि. सि. संबन्धनिर्णय $ गोपाङन्यायपथ्चानन- warard on relationship that allowed or disallowed marriage between the parties (such as सपिण्ड, समानोदक, सगोत्र, समान- प्रवर, बान्धव ). संबन्धप्रदीपिका by विद्यानिधि (Baroda 0. I. 10106 ). संबन्धरहस्य 1. in स्सुतिरत्नावी. सथन्धविषेक by भवदेषभटु m. in sargava and संस्कारतस्ब. Vide sec. 73. संबन्धविवेक by गूरपाणि ; m. bye in ह्यदधितच्व, who mentions a परिशिष्ट thereto in Wepre. Vide sec. 95 and N. (new series } vol. I preface p. X. संबन्धविवेकपरिशिष् धनय m. in उद्वाहतच्च and संस्कारतश्व ( p- 891 of age). This is probably a परि fare to waga’s work. सबन्धव्यवस्थाविकाषा 07 उद्वाहव्यषस्था (NII. 7. 334, different from उद्वाहव्यबस्था above ). सरटपतनशान्ति. सरला (seems to bea भाष्यं on गो- fuawar ) m. by रद्र ० in उद्वाहतशव, एकादक्षीतस्व and & न्वोगदषोत्सगेतस्व. सरस्वतीवशश्चीकी. सरस्वतीविलास by धतापरु्रदेव of the गजपति dynasty of Orissa. Vide sec. 100, List of works on Dharmatisira सरोजकलिका by भास्वत्कबिरत्न, Con- tains dissertations on topics of aa such as भाद्ध, agra, gfe, atx for purposes of marriage. Mitra regards it as ancient, as it names no work (N. vol. VI. p. 39). सरोजद्न्व्र or स्सृतिसार by ssorag. Ulwar cat. extract No. 370. Peterson seems to be wrong in saying that सरोजचचन्दर is the author ( Ulwar cat. No. 1537 ). arate. स्व॑तीर्थयाश्राधिधि by कमलाकर. सर्ववेषताप्रतिष्ट ॥२।।९२अदह्‌' स्वदेवपतिष्ठाकमे. सर्वदेषघ्रतिष्ठाप्रयोग by anraran. N. ( new series ) vol. III p. 219. सषदेषपतिष्ठाविधि by a son of राम- ` खन्दरदीक्षित. स्देवसूर्तिपतिष्ठाविधि. सवंपमपकाहा by शङ्करभदु, son of नारा- यणभदु. Vide धमेपरकाहा. स्व॑धर्मपकाशिका of aga in 426 verses On wreak in various months and तिथिऽ and connect- ed festivals and rites such as मवनोत्सब 00 ` Sergreett, क्षीराग्धि- हायनोत्सबं on आषादशाङ्कद्ादकशी, Surana, चखातमौस्यवरतधिधि ( 0. €. ms. 331 of 1887-91 ). स्एुराणसार by शाङ्करानन्व्‌. सर्वएराणार्थसंग्रह by वेङ्कटराय. स्वपायश्ित्तप्रयोग by अनन्तदेष. सर्वप्रायश्ि्षप्रयोग by बारशाभिव or वेद्गक्ुरि, son of शेषमहु, son of 661 नारायणम कागलकर. Wrote under Tanjore king, Sarabha, son of Tulaja. सर्घप्रायश्रित्तलक्षण. स्व॑त्रतोयापन by भनन्तदष. सर्वत्रतोथापनभयाग स्वंशान्ति. | सर्षशान्तिप्रयोग- quotes tafe ( Bik. cat. p. 459 ). wagrearaiud by कमलाकर. Vide BBRAS. cat. p. 238 No. 744 ( ms. dated Sake 1637 ) and Bik. cat. p. 459. स्ंसंस्कारसंग्रह m. in नि. सि. सवंसारसंग्रह by wari. 1600-1650, सर्व॑स्यृतिसेग्रह by सर्व॑क्रत॒वाजपेययाजिगर. सवांग्रयणकाटनिणैय. सवोद्भुतश्ान्ति, सबोरिष्टशान्ति. सवौपयुक्कारिक्ा- Ano. ; in 14 verses On Ars, C. Ano. ( by one familiar with Marathi as he translates कोच्रषं as पाकटड, AAAS 25 जोधट्छा, राजमाष as saat). Ms. in Bhadkamkar collection. The colophon at end says that कारिकाऽ follow wanes work. The first verse on ftresertur- निषिखदिन is भोभेके “oye मचागहनि- शासत्तम्यनङ्गाह्वया नन्वाजन्मविनेषु स- Arges नो तर्पणं स्याः नोद्ाहच्रत- चोलक्षदधिषु समाधौर्धैय५।९ क्रमाण्नो दुष्येत्‌ शतो कहारयगयापण्यगइतीर्धा- fag’. Between 66% aurea or सत्तीविधान ascribed to गोविन्दराज (1. 0. cat. p. 578 No. 774 ). In 66 verses. USAT: wearer on ceremonies per- formed when a wife burnt her- self on her husband’s pyre. संहाराधिधि or सहगमनविधि- D. ^~ Ms. No. 183 of 1884-86 is dated waa 1686. Wersaraagy by कमलाकर. weaavetiary ( Ulwar cat. 1528, extract 365 ). स्ल्नष्वण्डीरातचण्डीषिधान. सहल्नश्वण्डन्ादिविधि by कमलाकर, son of शामरृष्ण. Refers to निषीयसिन्धु as his own work (N. IX. pp. 203-204), About 1612 A. D. सहल्रभोजनविधि, Stein’s cat. p. 107. aeeasaareareat by भास्करराय, son of aedteraatfera ( Ulwar cat. extract’ 28 ). The original 5025 are atuyaa’s. सहानुमरणविवेक by अनन्तराम विया- बागीरा, son of रामचरण म्यायालङ्कार. Mentions छद्धितत्व, विवावमङ्गगणव. About 1800 a. 2. (N. vol. VII. p. 223 ). ayaa by हरि on आचार, N. vol. VII. p. 281. सावत्सरिकथभाद्ध. सांवत्सरिकेकोदिष्टभाद्धप्रयोग according to gag. N. II. p. 66. सौगर- several works are so called १12. अद्धुतसागर, दानसागर, eale- सागर, । Hidtory of / . / WIAA सागरसंहिता m. by terfx 71. p. 852. aifrerary rules for funcral cere- monies of agnihotrins, सांख्यायनगद्यसञ्- vide ararataeras. सांख्यायनणख्ष्ासग्रह by वासुदेव. Vide eirgrat? ; (pr. in Ben. S.series). साधनवन्द्रिका by फेहाषेन्द्रस्वामी on observances of gears. साधनीष्ठावकषी ( Burnell’s Tanj. cat. p. 110 b). साधारणप्रायश्ित्तसग्रह. साधारणतव्रतप्रविष्ठाप्रयोग- according to agagq ( N. II. p. 632 ). सापिण्डामशरी by arrer. सापिण्डश्चकल्पलता or- लतिका by सदा- शिवदेव alias आषदेष, son of श्रीपति, son of नीष्कण्ड, in 24 verses ( or 25 in some mss. ), 01) - सापिण्डन्च for marriage. He was a resident of tarzaaz ( D.C. ms. 613 of 1882-83 copied in Sake 1760 ). The author was pupil of चिल. The work takes affug to mean connected by particles of the same body. Vide N. (new series ) vol. III preface pp. णा IX and p. 222 where the verses are said to be 36. C. by नारायणव, son of रामरृष्ण, son of सदाशिषदेव ( pr. in सरस्वती- waa series, 1927, with text), He was the author’s grandson and pupil of नागे. Mentions नरहरि सप्ति, षीरमिन्रोषयः सापिण्डच्च्वीप of his teacher -नागेक्ष, दतनिणेय, Liat of works oh Dharmatistra सापिण्डश्चतस्वपकाहा of धरणीधर, son of varazt ( Baroda O. I. 12783). सापिण्डयदौीपिका by ater. Same as सापिण्ड्धमसरी or सापिण्डयनिणय. सापिण्डच्यदीपिका or सापिण्डश्चनिणेय by भ्रीधरमदु (Bhadkamkar collection). Mentions प्रबरनिणय . Probably it is this that is mentioned in नि. सि. He was the grand-uncle of कमलाकर and so flourished about 1520-1580 ^. D, D.C. ms. 208 of A 1882-83 is called अचुकल्ष सापिण्डद्यनिर्णंय and discusses cer- tain views of श्रीधर about तृतीय कन्यापरिणयन. 7. ^. Ms, 129 of 1895-98 is dated सवत्‌ 1647 (1590 A. D. ). सापिण्डश्चनिणेय by anittraz. Names नन्दपण्डित, अनन्तदेव, गोविन्दाणेव, वाखदेवमदु (ms. in Bhadkamkar collection dated sake 1725 ). सापिण्डच्चनिणंय of भदोजि. D.C. Ms. No. 622 of 1883-84 begins ‘ayy सत्तमीपश्चमीनिणंयः". सापिण्डन्यनिणय by dagen (C. ?. cat. No. 6378-80 ) सापिण्डश्चनिणय by रामभद्र ( Baroda 0. I. 5032 ) सापिण्डच्चनिणेय by श्रीधरभद्र ; 11. by a.m. The same as सापिण्ड्चदीपिका (D. C. ms. 128 of 1895-98). arfvoersate of arrer; 111. in com On सापिण्डयकल्परतिका. Pr. by Mr, J. R. Gharpure सापिण्डधमी्मासा m. in नि. सि. Pro- bably the same as arftiveeetfrar of sfraz सापिण्ड्यविचार by विभ्वेभ्वर alias गागा- ug ( Baroda 0.1. 1947 ). सापिण्ड्यविषय by गोपीनाथमदु. सापिण्ड्यसार by धरणीधर, son of रेषा- धर ( Baroda O. I. 12784 ). सापिण्ड्यभायाविधि. सामगव्रतप्रतिष्ठा by रघ्रनन्दन. साभगन्रषोत्सगततत्व by qe. Vide get- eavrerer above. सामगाद्धिक- vide छन्दोगाह्िक. सामगह्यपरिरिष्ट- vide भोभिलय्ष्यषरि- fare. सामण्हय्ठत्ति by शुद्रस्कन्व. सामषेदीयदहाकम of मधदेष- vide कर्मा- बष्ठानपद्धति of भवदेव, Sec. 73. साम्बदीयसस्कारपद्धति by षीरेभ्वर, son of देषादित्य, N. ( new series ) vol. III. 2. 227). About 1300. 2, सामान्यक्रमहत्ति. सामान्यप्रद्रुक ( part of read ). सामान्यदोमपद्धति. सायणीय- 111. in नि. सि. This is pro- bably the sraftaweurfafy of सायण. खायन्नात्तरषाखन, सारथाहकमविपाक. Composed by the eldest son of e@rgega, son of पद्मनाभ, 2 नागरब्राह्मण and com- piled ip सवत्‌ 1440 (1384 A.D.) at नन्दपद्रनगर under the patronage of कर्णसिह, minister of king दुम सिंह, son of मङ्गलश्पाल. Author says he bases his work on gfy- 604 पाक of मौलगिसृष or atfetire, from which he borrowed matter of the extent of 1200 sgres, while his own work extends to 4900 sgre@ units, the author borrowed 276 श्लोक units from चिज्ञानेहा and $00 from बौधायन. There are 55 च्रकरणंऽ and 45 अधिकारऽ. Vide 1.0. cat. p. 573 No. 1767, Baroda O. 1. No. 9459 and 9082 and Bhandarkar’s Report for 1882- 83 p. 63. There are quotations from शानखण्ड and आच्वारदीपक. The Baroda Ms. 9082 was copied in संवत्‌ 1496 (1439 A.D.) wrerat- com. on छन्दोगपरिशिष्ट- srerer by sftara. wrcaag- vide under चाणक्यनीति, शारसग्रह m. in ag. o., fafa, दीक्षातर्व, मलमासतच्व of Tye, स. सारसंग्रह, Ano, on auspicious and inauspicious days for religious rites in 881 verses. Ms. (I. O. cat. p. 535 No. 1679 ) dated waa 1774 (1717-18 A. D. ). सारसग्रह by छरारिमडु. लारसग्रह by राघवमदु m. in मलमास- wer of रदु ०. सारसद्महदीपिका by शामघरसावदेवदामेन, सारसग्रह by शाम्धदास. सारसष्टश्चय 7). in हेमा््रिदानखण्डे and शूलपाणिः हदगौत्सवविवेक- QCA. . enrages by वरवाश्वायं. erema m. by aque p. 872 (on . Prguerate ). Probably an astro- EXtetory of Dharmatiieira logical work, such as that of कल्याणवमेन्‌, which is mentioned even by Alberuni and so was earlier than 1000 A. D. सारावलि- vide egftrarcrate. सारासाराधिवेक. सरोद्ार ( com. on flere) by aragag. सिहस्थपद्धति- (on merit by bathing in गोदावरी when Jupiter is in Leo). N. vol, X. p. 348. Based on हेमाद्रि. सिखान्तचिन्तामणि 0. by ego in नल मास्तच््ल सिद्धान्तज्योत्स्ना by धनिराम (©. P. cat. 6521 ). सिखान्ततत्वविषेक by कमलाकर. Vide तरवधिवेक सिखान्ततिथि निर्णय by शिवनन्दन (C. P. cat. 6522 ). सिद्धान्तनिणय by रघराम. सिद्ान्तपीशूष by चिज्रपति written for Colebrooke. ` Rrareafaeqg on भस्‌ ( Burneil’s Tanj. cat. 143 b ). सिखान्तमसरी- vide aerftrarensrertt. सिखन्तरशिरोमणि by मोहनमिभ. सिद्धाम्तशेखर 11. in the प्रयोगरत्न of नारायणमदु and मटप्रतिष्ठातरूव of wy°. Probably a aneae work. Earlier than 1500 A. D. सिद्धान्तशेखर by विभ्वनाथ, son of भास्कर, सिखान्तसन्दुर्भ 1. by cgarya in मल- List of works on Dharmaststva 665 सिदधान्तखधोद्धार m. in wefan धीविलोश्चन 111. in आद्प्रयोग of गो- of विश्वम्भर. सीमन्तकर्मपद्ति. सीमन्तनिणय. छरत्यभयगष। by vaiemraftte on आचार, Brera, भाद्ध and अस- त्परिग्रह ( acceptance of gifts from improper persons ), N. vol. II. p. 136.. gaara by गणेभ्वरमन्निव, son of दैवादित्य He was uncle of चण्डे- saz. Vide pp. 370-371 above. Author styles himself महाराजा- पिराज and says he was assisted by वेवादित्यसांधिशिग्रहिक (his father) ; m. by eg° in ह्युखितनत्व and by शत्रघर, About rst half of 14th century. saragitea by feeyeaz alias गागा- wg, son of दिनिकरभद्ु, on 16 सस्कारऽ. Composed about 1675 A. D. ( Bik. cat. p. 475 ). एवरशनकालपरभा by रामेभ्वरशाल्ी. इवशनभाष्य- com. of खद्हौनाचायं on BITRATE ; 111. by waft in चतुर्विहातिमतव्याख्यान, नि. सि.. Ear- lier than 1550 A. D. ¢. अण्डयिा by बह्मवियार्तीथं ; m, in निसि, | एदशंनमीमांसाविचेक ( Baroda 0. I. 4085 ). Justifies तत्त्चक्राविषश्जा- पुषधारण by वेष्णवऽ ; ms. copied in सवत्‌ 1834. ottairer. ` H. De 84 area and in satreferer, in येष्णवधरक्रिया. avfifrarad by वैविकसार्षमौम. खधीषिलोनसार. छन्दरराजीय 11. 10 प्रयोगचन्द्रिका. घुप्रभा- com. by अनन्त, son of सिद्धे- भ्वर, on "16 छ्ुण्डमातेण्ड of गोविन्द; composed in 1692 A. D. बोधिनी प्रयोगपदति- pr. in Kadi S. series ( छष्णयज्जर्षेदीया and are वेदीया ). छखवोधिनी ( होमपति ) by अनन्तभदु onthe pacification of the aamgs. छबो धिनी (com. on freregiet ) by अनन्त, son Of saerer. 16810 1660 A. D. छबोधिनी by महादेव. छबोधिनी by रत्नपाणिहाम॑न्‌, son of सखीवेश्वर. Compiled under orders of शद्र्सिह of भिथिला. A wafa digest on ten ees, ATE, daily religious duties. ( N. VI. ?. 47 ). gatfret com. on the भिताक्षरा by विष्वेभ्वरमदरु. Vide sec. 93. Text on व्यवहार and translation pr. by Mr. J. R. Gharpure. बोधिनी ( परयोगपद्ति ) by शिषराम, son of fewta, for students of सामवेद. Mentions his own gar- चिन्तामणि. About 1640 A. D. gaeguiran- Vide sec. 29 and. Tri. cat.of Madras Govt. mss. for 666 . 1919-22 pp. 5160-62 for a prose garqueay. उमन्तस्छति m. by मिताक्षरा, अपराकं. सूतकदीपिका- vide under Preregrat. सतकनिणय (also called syeetsn- qarey on the margin). The first verse is नाम्नःप्राग्दन्तजातेरुपनय- नविषेराद्रवोहनिरान्रं &c.’; ms. in Stein’s cat. ( p. 319 ) is dated Wag 1466 (1409-19 ^. D.). प्रतकनिणय of waif, son of exatar (in Bhadkamkar collection ) Mentions माधव, हरदत्त; firqregat. सतकसार, चतकसिद्धान्त by देवयाजिक. सूरसक्रान्तिदीपिका by जयनारायणतक्ष- TATA. सरिसतोष m. by age in एकादुक्ीत् and तिथितस्व, चुयंनमस्काराविधि. सूर्यघकाहा by हरिसामन्तराज्, son of eo. A comprehensive digest on qaterre. Bik. cat. p. 475 contains only त्रतखण्ड. by दिवाकर, son of भारद्वाज महादेव, on the in- stallation of सूर्य, fire, sete, हुगौ and fay in a temple. auretarrratt by महादेवमदु. सुर्याष्यंदानपद्धति by माधव, son of रामे- vag. About 1520-1580. . सुयौणवकर्मविपाक ( Ulwar cat. ex- tract No. 293 ) pr. in Bombay. द्योवयनिबन्ध m. 1 धर्मपति of नारायण. History of Dharmasisird सेठयात्राषिधि. सोवङकुम्मभाख. सोमनाथीय by सोमनाथमद, son of चरभद and younger brother of of the नित family. . सोमबारत्रतोथापन. सोमवारामाषास्यत्रतकालनिणभय. सोमदोखर ( निबन्ध ) m. in मलमास rer of रषु ०. सरस्वतीधिलास 7. 422 ( Mysore ed.) quotes rarer 00 दायभामः. सोमाग्यकल्पदरम by अच्युत ( Baroda O. I. 1903. ). ज्ीधननिणय. ज्लीघनप्रकरण. जीषमेकमलाकर of कमलाकरभदु, m. in विषादताण्डब. जीधमपदति by भ्यम्बक. ज्ीपनरुदाहखण्डनमालिका by राधयन्त. जीधूद्रविन्वयां. curators ( भपस्तम्बीय ). » ( आग्बलायनीय ), स्थाटीषाकनिर्णय. स्था्छीपाङ्प्रयोम ( आभ्वलायनीय ). स्थालीपाकथ्रयोग by कमलाकर. N. (new series ) vol. III. p. 236. स्थालीषपाकपयोग by नारायण. स्थावरप्राणप्रति्टा. , स्थिरलिङ्खरतिष्ठा. स्नानविधिदज्रपरिशिष्ट 07 erage 0 जिकण्डिकासन्र by कात्यायन, C. श्नानसूजपञति by कक, , Liat of works on Dharmatiietra C. wrraqratter by भोपीनाथ, son of महादेव, CC. by senara C. by कान afirwaneqentrear- भनि ¢. by firergerra ( Sere? ). ८, by भहवेषद्धिरेविष ( पथ, vol. VII. p. 304 ). ¢, श्नानपद्धति or स्नानविषिपद्धति by या्िकदेव C work his wey C. ererearear and पद्धति by अग्निहोधिहरि्र. स्मातंकमाच॒ष्ठानक्रमविवरण by खण्डक. ( Baroda 0. I. 296 dated wag 1593 ). स्मातंवुहल, स्मातेगङ्गमधरी by गङ्गाधर ( (^. P. cat, No. 6710 ). स्मातोदिनमभणि ( Mysore Govt. mss. cat. p. 75 ). स्मातधौीषिका 4110. ; follows swsrsq- ठायन. Burnell’s Tanj. cat. 1392. स्मातयवार्थस्ह from प्रयोगपदधति of गङ्गाधर. by दपायनाचायं ( Baroda 0. I. 6986 ). स्मातंपरिभाषा 7, in qeeqrarer of छृष्णपषण्डित. ` स्मातप्रदीपिका ( Mysore Govt. mss. cat. p, 75). स्नानखजपखति by हरिजीवनमिभ्र Says that he follows in this | 667 समार्तपयोम by बोपण्णभदु" „` ( दिरण्यकेशीय ). C. वेजयम्ती स्मार्तरयोभकारिका errata by freqrag, son of रामभदु, son of aresag, surnamed गहर. स्मातंपायश्िलप्रयोग or पायभ्निसोखार by दिवाकर, son of म्रहदिष, son of qwepey, surnamed कठि (कषति in Marathi). He was daughter’s son of राब्रष्ष्ण, father of sear wag. About 1660-1680 ^. ». ( BBRAS. cat. p. 238 No. 745). स्मा्तप्रायश्रिश्षषिनिणेय by बेङृटाचायं. स्मातंप्रायश्रित्तोद्धार- same as स्मातं- प्रायश्ित्तप्रयोग and प्रायभ्रित्तोद्धार of दिषाकर. स्मातंमार्तण्डपयोग by मातण्डसोभमयाजिम्‌. स्मातव्यवस्याणैव 07 रषुनाथसावैमे) ५, son of water, composed at the order of king रत्नेश्वरराय, in sake 1583 (i. €. 1661-62 ^. D.). Di- vided into sections on हिचि, सक्तान्ति, ATEN व्रव्यषह्ठाचिः, अधि- कारि, प्रायश्चित्त, Sale, वाय. ( D. C. ms. No. 305 of 1886-92 on तिथि, N. II. p. 76 on gare, N. I. p. 284 on are ). स्मातंसंष्टस्चय of नन्द्पण्डित, son of Quarta. Vide sec. 105 p. 431. Refers to qwatratat as his. eareperata of नारायणदीक्षित. ( @. ए. cat. No. 6717 ) मातीण्डविला, स्माताधानपखति by गोविन्द. . स्मातांघानप्रयोग of पीताम्बर, son of काद्यपाथायं. ( BBRAS. cat. p. 239 No. 747). Mentions waavey. Vide under wrrira. Between 1500 and 1675 A. p. स्मातविष्ठानपद्धति of अनन्तभदु, son of विभ्वनाथ. Also styled अनन्तभद्री. A manual of initiatory rites with the prayers required therein. Vide under sapere. According to आश्वलायन. (1. O. cat. p. 515 ). स्मातापासनपद्धति from the परयोगरलन. स्मार्तो्लास by शिवप्रसाद, son of श्री- निवास of दुष्करषुर ( Baroda O. I. 11958 ). Ms. dated sa 1610. Mentions मद्नरत्न, टोडरानन्द. Bet- ween 1580-1680 A. D. On आधा- ASTS, छदरूतविचार, duties of afiy- wr, on difficult points about श्जस्वला &c. स्सृतिकद्न्ब by wag agg. Hultzsch R. I. No, 657. स्तृतिकल्यत्रम by gay इंन्वरनाथ. C. by author. Stein’s cat p. 108. ह्यृतिकोरादीपिका by तिम्मणमदु ( Ba- roda O. I. 2008 on आद्धिक only ) स्यृतिकीषठदी by देवनाथटक्कर. A digest ON चातुषैण्य, आचार, आद्धिक, संस्कारः WS, AA, दायभाग, वरत, वान, उत्सगं. ( प. vol. ४. p. 237 ) श्थृतिकोद्चदी by मवनपाल. Sec. 93 pp- 383-384. Also styled syq- पमोत्यलयोतिनी, Eietory of Dharmaéistra wafretedt by cergeragrand (N. VI. p. 140 ). eaftreratrater by छत्णनाथ. eafrarera of अनन्तदेव. Sec. 109. Divided into 12 दीषितिऽ, eafrerega by वेङ्खटा्रि, Vide areira- निणेय. स्धृतिग्रन्थराज by atta. . eatery 11. in संस्कारमयुख of सिद्धे- श्वर. eaferaex by भवदेबन्यायालङ्कमर, son of हरिहर, composed in 1720-22 A. D. and divided into 16 gars on fafa, wa, सस्कारः, ARF, ATE, आचार, sfrer, इृषोत्सग, परीक्षा, प्रायश्रित्त, व्यवहार, गहयज्त, Fara, मलिम्हुच, दान, हद्धि. Mentions भीदत्त and सवत्सर्पदीष, Imitates रघु ०. स्घतिचन्द्रिका =o by आपदेषमीमांसक. On काल, मलमास, aa, आदिकः विषाह 2110 other संस्कारऽ, सीध, आश्रमधर्म, Aaah, ANA, भाच. CN. VI. 301 ). स्छृतिचन्त्रिका by कषर ( m. in वृत्तक- चन्द्रिका ). सधृतिचन्त्रिका by केरावादित्यभटर ( Bik. cat. 465 ), This entry is wrong, as the introductory verses and the verses at the end show that this is the same as देबण्ण- मदु work, `. स्दृतिखन्द्रिका by देवण्णभद्रु, son of केदावादित्यभदु. Sec. 85 (pr. by Mr. Gharpure and in Mysore G, O.L. series ), List of works on Dharmatist: a eafrafer by eratragrard (N. IX. p. 137 ). श्वतिखन्द्रिका by बेविकसा्मोम. स्थुतिखन्दरिका by हाकदेवमिभ्र, son of frsaferst. On विथिनिणय, चि, आहोख, व्यवहार. (1, 0. cat. 0. 471 ). + Ano. (N. vol. VIII. p. 153), eqfrarnaa by मणेकशाभद (^. ?. cat. No, 6723-24 ). eaferacot by warefterge. eafafirrnraiin by गङ्गादित्य or ay az, son of गोपीनाथमिभ. Men- tions कल्वतरु, कामधेनु, हेमाद्रि, मद्‌- नरत्न, and is mentioned in चुसिंह- प्रसाद्‌ (I. O. cat. p. 444 on व्यव- हार, which is and परिच्छेद ) About 1450-1500. स्थुतिच्िन्तामणिसगह ( Tri. cat. of Madras Govt. mss. for 1919-22 Pp. 4978 on आधिक ). eqreeren® or- मणिसेग्रह of वरदा- ard, of the arcersitz. vafteres of egaraa. It is the name of his digest containing 28 awers. Sec, 102. स्शृतितस्वपक्राह by भीदेष. स्पूतितस्वविनिणेय or व्यषस्थाणव by राम- भद्र, son of श्रीनाथ आचार्यचूडामणि. Mentions steqnt. 1500-1550 ‘a. D. N. ( new series ) I. p. 413. wulterenfate 0 वर्धमानम्ामहो- पाध्य।य, son of wyer and भौरी and judgeat the court of Ax of मिथिला. About 1450-1500 A. D. On sre, भाद, gf and व्यव- gre. N, vol. ४, p. 184., 8 व प फिगर (69 eqfameratz ( 2. 0. cat. vol. IJ No. 440). eafarrerrga of वर्धमान, son of ater and भौरी. N. vol. भा. p. 12 contains हान्तिकपोशिकाशलिः Dealing with rites for propitiat- ing adverse deities and por- tents and for consecrating works of public utility. N. VI. p. 57 is styled त्वासृतसारोखार (व्यव- हाराजलि ) and in the conclud- ing verses बधमान says that he composed four ggAS ON आश्र, are, Ufa and व्यवहार, So स्यृति- aeafeae and ‘aware? are the same. It was completed under राम, son of मैरवेन्द्र. @ eafaqin 11. in भखकल्पलता, खर्सिंह- Tag, चद्रकमलाकर, विधानपारिजात. Earlier than 1500 A. ४, स्थृतिदुर्षण ( Baroda 0.1. No. 10916 is an, incomplete ms. in 598 verses ), Names 36 स्त्रतिक्छारऽ, कृटिषज्य ( such 25 पुनर्विवाह ). स्थृतिदीपिका 11. in सं. at, deer age of सिद्धेश्वर. Earlier than 1650 A. D. स्पृतिदीपिका of arate उपाध्याय on times for भद्ध and other rites (N. vol. V. p. 157 and VIL. 125 ). स्यृतिदुर्गमखन by watrec- vide gt- Wat. स्यृतिनषनीत of gvatfkara, son of नारसिंह, pupil of wreex and भीनिवास्‌, 670 स्थतिनिवन्ध by चुसिंहभदु. An exten- sive digest on चर्मलक्षण, वणोभ्म- घम, विवाहाविरंस्कारः सापिण्ड्यः आद्धिक, were, भाद, दायमागः, जायज (प. VIII p. 174 ). स्दतिपरिभाषा by वर्धमानमहामहोपाध्यायः contains general rules regard- ing ceremonial observances and proper seasons for them and on श्नाम, mem, तिथिदेध, वान &c. Names स्शतिमहाणव, हरिहरमिथ ; m. in qereefrerer of रश्च ०. About 1450-1500 A. D. eqftsrerer by wrestag or हरिभास्कर- wg,son गआयाजिभटु (or आपाजि-), son of gftag ( Bik. cat. p. 467 » deals with portion on srg ). स्सुतिपकाल्ल by बाददेव रथ (one facsicule pr. in B. I. series) on कालनिखूपण, Wa, सक्रान्ति. Mentions बाधवाचायं and वियाकर- वाजपेयी. Later than 1500. D. eagfasfiq m. by tenfk ( sree p-355)- । स्लतिप्रदीप by चन्प्रहोखरमषहोमहापाध्याय on तिथि, sqatre, भख. ष्शविपकीपिका- vide धर्मदीपिका of TAU ATAT TET. स्पृतिप्रदीपिका m. by waif in his com. on खहुविहातिमत. स्यतिध्रामाण्ययाव. स्सुतिभास्कर 11. by स्वति ०, प्रयोग- पारिजात of afte, धर्मपति, aftre- प्रसाद. Madras Govt. mss. cat, vol. V. p. 2043 Nos. 2786-87 |. contains portions on यतिच and awe from a स्दृतिभास्कर, History of Dharmatastra स्दृतिभास्कर by नीटकण्ड (N. vol. ४. p. 108 ). From the introduc- tory verses it appears to be the ariftaage of नीलकण्ठ. स्थृतिषूषण by कोनेरिभदु, son of केशव. A digest of rituals for anew followers. स्सृतिमशरी by कालीष्बरणन्यायालङ्कर. श्यृतिमरी by गोषिन्वराज. Sec. 76 Pp. 311-313. स्सृतिमखरी by रतधरमिश्र. स्ुतिमशरी Ano. (D.C. ms. No. 184 of 1884-86 on भख). eqiaaa m. in srerqet, स्वृतिसार of gftara, छन्दोगाद्धिक of भवस. Earlier than 1300 A. D. स्दुतिमहाराज by geo ( Baroda 0. {. No. 8023 ). It mentions wearer. Begins with गोवान and ends with मूर्तिप्विष्ठापन, It is styled gaqagtt also. स्सृतिमष्ाणव or स्वृतिमहटाणवपकाष्च m. by हेमात्रि, Vide महाणैव ard p. 308 above. eqfeatrat by परमानन्दघन, pupil of चिदानन्व्रह्मेन््रसरस्वमी, स्पृतिमीमांसा by जेमिनि, m. by अपराकं p. 206. A eafeeftatar is m. in कालविचेक of जीमूतवाहन, in the स्सुविरत्नाकर of बेदाचायं, by हेमाद्रि in तरतखण्डः and परिशोषखण्ड and by aftresrare. स्सुतिष्ठक्ताफल of चेयनाथदीकषित. A very popular egfe digest in southern India. Printed several times in Southern India at. Chidamba- List of works on Dharmatéstra 671 ram, 1908, Kumbhakonam &c. ' On बणौभमधर्म, आधिक, aes, UTE, व्रव्यष्यावि, swaaa, व्यवहार, काल. About 1600 A. D. स्वृतिद्धक्ताफलसंग्रह by चिदम्बरेभ्वर. स्पूतिद्ठक्तावद्ी of छष्णाचायं, son of कुमारकसिंहमदुः son of विजयीन्द्रमदु ; in IO चकरणऽ* eafacer 111. by काला वी, स.को ., सस्फा- wage of सिखेभ्वर. स्यृतिरत्न of रुनाथमवु. Ms. (N. VIL p. 253 ) is dated क्के 1699. स्बूतिरललकोक. श्चतिरलमहोदधि «by भीपरमानम्दघन, pupil ` ग चिदानन्दब्रहमस्त्रसरस्वती ` Contains बदकमविच्ार, आचार, sire &c. Quotes माघवीय ( Vide Madras ‘Govt. mss. cat. pp. 2055-57 Nos. 2802-4 ). स्छतिरत्नविवेक m. by चण्डेन्वर and by exar in his भदखविवेक. Earlier than 1300 A. D, शवूतिरस्नाकर by तात्या्यं ( Baroda O. I, 9919 ). eqitecarat by arsrrutare स्छृतिरत्नाकर by agit (on sraftae and sirgtra ). Vide Mad. Govt mss, cat. vol. V. p. 2059 No. . 2806. स्शृतिरत्नाकर by figs, son of केशवः a resident of विदुरएर. Burnell’s Tanj. cat. p. 135a. From the place of residence and contents, it appears that this is the same as the preceding. सुतिरत्नाकर by freypag, son of aare, residing at frgeqz; on आद्धिकः, 16 © संस्कारऽ, संक्रान्ति, ग्रहण, दान, तिथि- .. निय, प्रायश्चित्त, आरोच, नित्यनेमि- सिक ( vide D, C. ms. No. $2 of 1866-68 ). Bik. cat. p. 467 gives freq as father’s name. eaferearec by वेङ्कटनाय, son of sft- Twarurare, son of areadraga, surnamed चैविकसार्षमोम. portion pr. Lak§mivenkateSvara Press at Kalyan. Mentions विज्ञानेभ्वर, स्यति ०, अखण्डादश, माधवीय, eqfrarcageay and इति. हाससष्ठश्वय. Also called aqrar- संग्रह. | स्सृतिरत्नाकर by tqrard in 15 chap- ters on नित्यनेमित्तिकाष्ार, भर्माधा- मादिसस्कारः, विथिनिख्पण, sara, शान्ति, तीर्थयात्रा, भक्ष्यामक्य, बत, crafter, आशो, अन्तयेिफर्मं ; written under patronage of कामरूप king. Quotes भषदेक्ष ( on araPae ), atarearg, स्वृतिमीमांसाः स्थुतिसद्ठस्यय, आ्ारसागर, वान- सागर, महाणव. It is this that is probably m. in यज्ञर्वेदिभाखतस्व of ge. Between 1250-1500 A.D. I. O. cat. pp. 473-474, N. VII. 45 (the colophon says that the sraftaw section is the 18th परिष्डेद ). स्पृतिरत्नावलि 1. in रुर्सिहप्रसाद्‌, अन्त्ये शपति of नारायणभटु, नि. सि., ह्वविचन्दिका of नन्दपण्डित. स्पृतिरत्नावछि by ayagaahirr, son of महेश्वर. (Bik. cat. p. 467 contains wz portion only ). 673 eafacerrafs by रामनाथविथावाश्वस्यति. Composed in 1657 ^. D,; vide under arrarrfwae. Stein’s cat. p. 109. wafecerafes by वेचुरास. N. VII. p. 228. श्यूतिरहस्य. स्थुतिधिवरण by आनम्दतीथ. Same as सदाश्ारस्सृति. श्डतिषिषेक by मेधातिथि. Sec. 63 Pp. 274-275. eylatets by शूलपाणि. Sec. 95. श्दतिव्यवस्या by चिन्तामणि न्यायवागीशा- agrard of गोडदेहा ; ms. of gaat विव्यवन्था (पप, 1४. 130) dated Sake 1610 ( 1688-89 a. 2.). स्वूतिष्यवस्थाणव ( 8. 0. mss. cat. vol. I. No. 433 ). स्यतिशोखर or कस्तुरिस्दति by कस्तूरि, son of arg, on आचार. ( Bur- nell’s Tanj. cat. 136a ). eaftiearcerasa, Probably — the same as संस्कारकोस्तुभ of अनन्त- aq. श्यतिसदेषप by atrra on siete, सहमरण, Weerara. N. ( new series) vol. II. p. 225 and vol. I, p. 414. स्यृतिसंक्ेपसार by रमाकान्त्यक्रवर्तिनू, son of सश्नच्चवनतकंबाभीश्, On sare, उद्वाहकाल, गोज, TAT, सपिण्ड, समा- नोवक &c. N. ( new series ) vol. II. p. 225. walerase 01 सग्रह. Vide sec. 54. kp History of Dharmaéisira (1) by छारि भारावण, m. by his son in eqardann. (2) by दयाराम. (3) by नीलकण्ठ ( D. C. ms. No. 373 of 1875-76). (4) by शममद्रन्यायालङ्कारमटाचावं 0 Bi (iy On अनध्यायः, तिथि, भ्राय- Raw, छदि, gare, सापिण्ड्य. Also called हयबस्थाषिचेष्यन or ल्यवस्थासद्मष. (5) attributed to सायण and माधव. ealeraae by वाचस्पति. श्यूतिसग्रह by वियारण्य ( Hultzsch R. I. No. 591. ). स्सृतिसग्रह alias वियारण्यसंग्रह (in margin )- a large work in 7000 ग्रन्थ ( Baroda O. 1, 11248 ). स्थुतिसंग्रह by वेङ्कटेहा. Is it same as स्मृतिरत्नाकर of बेङ्कटनाथ ? श्यतिसग्रह by रवतत. स्मृतिसग्रह- same as परमेभ्वरीवासाभ्धि. स्सृतिसंग्ह 0 व्यवहार (Cal. ऽ. College ms. cat. vol. Il. p. 137 No. 141 ). स्पूतिसग्रहरत्नघ्याख्यान- ४ com, on चतु- विरातिमत by crereen, son of नारा- यणमहु (1, O. cat. p. 475 )e Seems to be the same as wgrhws com. on qafwarftrenr. eaframmarc of मेशपश्चानन, founded on रचनम्दन'ऽ eqiterer. N. VI. p. 235. . egftrageaa ( 1115, in Bombay Uni versity Library) in about 500 List of works on Dharmatastra verses On आधिक, हो, स्नान, पकादुक्षी &c. Quotes गरुडपुराण. स्वुतिसष्टर्यय (from आचारतिलक or छष्वाश्ारतिलक ) 17 327 verses on दुन्थाबन, जान, सध्या, daily duties, भाद, पकादह्ी &c. ( Ba- roda O. I. No. 7331 ). स्वतिसष्ठस्वय of विश्वेश्वर, It is said in JBORS. for 1927 parts III- IV p. VIL that it is this work that is m. in erafars of sia, हेमाद्रि ( कालनिणय ) III. 2. 686, दिव्यतत्व of रष्ु०, तिथिधिवेक of wore. स्यृतिसरोजकलिका by विष्णहामेन्‌ in 8 sections ( खण्डऽ ) ON स्नानः प्रजा, तिथि, भद्ध, सूतक; वान, यज्ञ, भाय fra. Enumerates 28 स्मृतिकारऽ by name ( vide Tri. cat, Madras Govt. mss. for 1919-22 p. 4360 No. 2997 ). स्डतिसरोजष्ठस्दर or स्दृतिसार. Vide सरोज्ठन्र. स्दतिसर्ष॑स्व by नारायण of छृष्णनगर inthe Hughli District. (1 O. cat. p. 448 ). Earlier than 1675 A.D. He speaks of a क्षयमास as yet to occur in sake 1603 ( 1687 A, 9.) water by gaeag ; vide गोषिन्वा- tre ; 10. in a@antr’s दुगौत्सवविवेफ, ofaeraat of at&eqrieq, धराय fame of tgo. स्पृतिसागरसार m. in प्रायश्ित्तसश्रह of वारायणभद्रु and in अलनासत्च्व of vy° BB. 85, 673 स्सतिसार by केशवहार्मन्‌ in 1359 verses on 1165 0 be performed on several ferfiys. eafrate by नारायण. स्सुतिसार by ater. On impurity due to birth and death. N. vol. IIL. ` 7. 48. स्मृतिसार by छकन्दलाल. स्मृतिसार by यातिफेदेव in 311 verses culled from ¢gf&s on azar, are, यज्ञेपवीत, मलमास, ara स्नानः Oe, सापिण्डच्, sare D. C. ms. No. 181 of 1895- 1902 15 dated संवत्‌ 1652 (1595- 96 A.D. ). स्शृतिसार by यादेन्द्रभदु on the per- formance of festivals and rites oncertain तिथिऽ such as छृष्ण- जन्माष्टमी, रामनवमी, and on दुरगो- त्सव, ATT, आशशोच, पायभ्रित्त ; m. in wasafer. I. 0. cat. p. 477; N. vol. IV. p. 213 ( ms. dated Sake 1619 ). स्थ्रतिसार by भीष्ण. valerate by हरिनाथ. Sec. 91. The work is also called स्इृतिसारसच्रु- स्वय. eqfrare or आदहोचनिणीय- a com. on a work by वेङ्कटेश. eaftrareter by छष्णनाथ- स्छतिसारपरदीप m. by शखनन्दन. +=" by विारतनस्मातमहा- चा स्युतिसारसग्रह by sverag eufrarcame by चन्द्रशेखरषाखस्वति eqftrarceae by परुषोत्तमानम्द, . pupil of qurgayeray, on onfige, 624 कय, स्नान, fxguy, BACT, भद्ध; विरजाहोम, सीसन्यासविधि, प्षौरपर्वनिर्णीयः, पतिपार्वणभाय. स्दतिसारसद्ह by महेशा. Vide व्यवस्था- VITAE: eqitarcang by anfreaa. Seems to be same as र्तुतिसार with additions. Here the verses are 459. Vide D. C. ms. No. 344 of 1886-92. स्दुतिसारसग्रह by वाश्यस्पति ; men- tions rye (I. O. cat. p. 450 ). स्दतिसारसग्रह by frarareqara. स्बतिसारसग्रह by विश्वनाथ. Mentions विज्ञानेन्वर, कल्यतरु, frarscraft ( Tri. cat, of Madras Govt. mss for 1919-22 p. 4264 No. 2944) euftrercesre by बेड्ेश- eqtrarcare by tear egftarcageag on domestic obser- vances ; gives extracts from 28 sages on ure, WMA, आवारः वन, द्न्यह्ठाखि, पायश्ित्त. Vide I, O. cat. p. 477 No. 1556 and Ulwar cat. extract 372, where it is said to have been compil- ed by wasterrere@r (2 lover of weer ). euitarcageaa by हरिनाथ. Same 25 स्वुतिसार above स्वतिसारसर्थस्व by yay. Same as आकोनिणेय by Speer eaftrercarre m in fefuerey of tye. श्दतिसारावलि m. in नि. सि. स्दतिलारोखार vide अक्रनारायणीय- निचन्व, Pr. at Benares. History of Dharmatisiva स्तिसिखान्तसप्रह by इन्दव उपाध्याय, स्थुतिसिखान्तद्धा by राम्यन्द्रहधः 2 com. on अचपशचषदछि. eqiaraey by नन्द्पण्डित. Vide sec. 105. स्थुतिसिग्धु by भीनिवास, pupil of wee ( Burnell’s Tanj. cat. p. 1352) for Qearqs. स्युतिष्ठधाकर or wtserfrare by site- erg, son of gurer. N. vol. IV 7. 271. eqitguret of शङ्करमिभ. About 1600 a. D. ( JBORS. for 1927 parts III-IV p. X). स्यत्याधिकरण. स्दत्य्थनिशय ( on व्यवहार ). स्युत्यथेरत्नाकर 21125 स्चत्यथंसार. श्षत्यथंसागर by wenft शृसिषाच्वार्य, son of नारायण. Based on मध्वाचार्यः सदाचारर्सुति ; divided into four तरङ्घऽ on आद्धिकः काल, sere and इखि ( Vide Bhandarkar’s Report for 1883-84 p. 52 and BBRAS. cat. p. 239 No. 748 and Aufrecht’s Oxf. cat. 285b). He says weararg was born iu Sake 1120. Mentions maeret and स्युतिकौस्तुम, Later than 1675 A. D. earrdare by atepusreard (C. P. cat. No. 6732 ). | स्त्यथेसार by धन्वा. eqaradare by भधर, Sec. 81 eqantarcageer (Baroda O. 1 4088 ) summaries of the views Liat of works.on Dharmabictra of 28 sages are given on ere, आनन, दन्तधावने, &c.; ms, dated waa 1743. The 28 sages are मह, ` याज्ञवल्क्य, fivariirr, अरि, कात्यायन, वसिष्ठ, ध्यास, उशनस्‌, बौपायन, वकष, शङ्ख, fete, आपम्तम्ब, अगस्य, हारीत, विच्छ, गोभिल, SAY, मुस्वाय्व, शुरु, नारद्‌, TTR. गग, गोतमः, यम, शातातप, अङ्गिरस्‌, संवते. eqrrare ( 8. O. mss. cat. vol. I. No, 449 ). स्वत्वरहस्य 07 स्वत्वविथार by अनन्तरम. On ownership of property. स्वत्ववाद्‌ (Tri. cat. Madras Govt. mss. for 1919-22 p. 4782 ). eaaafrarc N.( new series ) vol. II. p. 226. crracnaeuTirregere by रद्नाथसाव- मोम, in 6 पारिण्डेवुऽ on विभागनिख- : qq, ज्लीधन, ज्लीधनाथिकारि, ATA चनाधिक्ार, exter on स्व्गेवाद, प्रतिष्ठाबाद, सपि- udretorars. N. (new series) vol. II. p. 229. लगंसाधन by cyaeqragrard. Ap- pears to be different from the great श्बुनन्दुन. On भाखाधिकारि, araerarte, आहौष्निर्णय, ठ्षो- सर्ग, Reng, पाण 6८८. N. (new series ) vol, I. p. 417. स्वस्तिवा्नपखति by जीवराम. इतुमत्पति्ा. हयहीषपश्चरान्न a वैष्णव work con- cerned with the consecration of images of gods and building temples; m. by cy®, नि. सि, and yergy in gurorater. 676 इरितालि्ात्रतनिथैय. इरितोवण by देवान्तवामीश महुवा. sftitaties ( on एकादक्ी fast ) by खण्डमारुतस्वामिन्‌. हरिविनतिलक by वेवान्तवेशिक C. ( vide cat. of Madras Govt. mss. vol. VI. p. 2368No. 3153). According to it the author @qrat- देशिक flourished after eqitwo, हेमाद्रि, कालाद and काठनिणय and held that the views of all these were अहा and आद्र. aftgerraty by आनन्बती्ं भार्गव. Stein’s cat. p. 109. इरिमक्ति m. by cy? 10 भाह्धिकतस्व and qerqerrere®: इरिमक्तिकल्यलता by freggét m. in छृष्णभक्तिकल्वषही by छष्णसरम्बती divided into 14 eras. हइरिभक्तिदीपिका by aire. N. vol. V. pp. 189-190. agvorrarcater ) by भुवनेश्वर, son of tara, in 12 crerats } composed in सवत्‌ 1884. हरिभक्तिरसायन. | हरिमक्तिरसायनसिन्ध. हरिभक्तिरहस्य. हरिभक्तिटता. हरिभक्तिविलास by arareag, pupil of प्रबोधनानन्दु. He was ordered to write this work by चेतन्य ; vide under भगवद्धक्तिविलास. Compos- ed about 1562 A. D.;m. by रनन्वन. इरिमक्तिविष्टास (wy) by खूपगोस्वामिन्‌. ८. ए (1तमभोस्वाभिन्‌, mm. i 676 वेष्णवतोषिणी. Vide N. vol. VI. Ppp. 190-93 for an account of his family. , हरिभक्तिसार. afte. C. m. by सदाचारचन्तिका. uieenirere by नन्दपण्डित, divided into कोतुकऽ On आहिक, काटनिणय, दान, सस्कार. Vide sec. 105. हरिवासरनिणेय by sagetar ( Baroda O. I. 8793 ) हरिहरदीकषितीय. iterate by हरिहर, The same as is appended to his भाष्य on पार- wrauan ; 11. by हेमाद्रि, arg- सौख्य of ठोडरानम्द, उद्राहतस्व and other वच्वऽ of ayo. Vide sec. 84. इरिहरभाष्य on qrcencuer by हरिहर. इलायुधनिवन्ध m. in आचारादङा of हलायुधीव m. in आयारमरख, Pro- bably the ज्राह्मणसर्वस्व of हलायुध. urecaat by अनिरुद्‌. Sec. 82. C. सन्द्मदतिका by अण्युतचचक्रवर्तिन्‌, son of yiterawerard- C. विवरण m. by नन्दुषण्डित in आद्धकल्पलता. हारीतस्सृति. Vide sec. 11 and 56. C. m. by हेमाद्रि; vide p. 71 above. C. by तकनलाल. हागीतस्यृति ( Baroda 0. I. 8185 ) in four अध्यायऽ on नित्य and नेमित्तिकं rites of wars and sqreres, eight नारीधमंः, TIA, जीवपरमेभ्वरस्वरूप, मोक्षसाधन, ऊ्ध्वपुण्ड्‌. There is व्यबहाराध्याव also. दिरण्यकामयेचुषान. History & Dharmaiasiva दिरण्यकेशाह्धिक. हिरण्यकेष्ि ( सत्याषाह ) ग्ह्सश्र in two stays, each divided into पटलऽ (ed. by Dr. Kirste at Vienna, 1889 and tr. in SBE. vol. 30 ). C. प्रयोगवेजयन्ती by महादे. C. by wigaw (cxtracts in Kirste’s edition ). दिरण्यकेशिधर्मसूञ्न. Vide sec. 8 p. 46 above. (. उज्ज्वला by महादेब (7. 49 above ) दिरण्यभाद. हेमाद्रिकालनिणैयसेक्षेप or ware by मटोनजिदीक्षित, 5011 of कक्ष्मीधर. Vide Baroda O. I. No. 5480. हेमाद्िनिबन्ध- the same 25 aqaq- चिन्तामणि. हेमाद्रिप्रयोग by वियाधर. | हेमा्रिसक्षिप by मजीभदु ( Stein's cat. p. 116}, हेमाद्विसवैप्ायशभ्वित्त by area. होमक्रालातिक्रमपायश्ित्त होमनिणय by भातुमहु, son of tages, son of शङ्कर. About 1620 1680 A. D होमपद्धति by ana (part of his) mares ). Mentions ख्यनारायण 5 Ulwar cat. extract 375. होमपद्धति by लम्बोदर. होमप्रायश्रित्त होमलोपपायभ्ित्तप्रयोग होमविधान by दाृष्ण ( कर्गवेदीय ) Baroda 0. 1. 8354 होनसिखान्त ano होरिषस्वृति ४1. 10 स्मतिसारोद्धार 0 विश्वन्धर, APPENDIX B LIST OF AUTHORS ON DHARMASASTRA While preparing this list, great difficulties were experienced in stating all the works composed by an author. In the case of such names as Ananta, Krsna, Gangadhara, Narayana, Ramakrsna, San- kara, which are extremely common, the only method that could be followed, in the absence of materials to identify the authors bearing these names, was to place the same name several times in the list against the work composed by that author. Since the authors themselves very often convey no more information than their own names and since some of the reports on the scarch for mss. do not give even what little information about the author can be gathered from the ms. of his work, Aufrecht also was compelled to follow this method. In order to avoid repetition and save space, I have not repeated in this list the information that was given under the works contained in the list A. Dates are given principally under the names of authors and sometimes under works also. For further information readers will have in many cases 10 refer to the works put down as composed by an author. In the case of authors who have written on several S4stras, their works on dharmagastra alone have been mentioned. Wherever possible parentage has been noted and dates assigned. In a few cases information which became available after list A was prepared has been incorporated here. RE? MMEPGY ee पिक wey a. of अखण्डावदी. जखण्डानग्दुद्धनि, disciple of अखण्डा- safer ; a. of महाविष्डष्रजापखति. अगस्य ६. of अगस्त्यसहिता. ararefirerant a. of आकहौष्वदीपिका. afyra_a. of a aft. Sec. 39 Vide also मध्यमाद्गिरम and बृह बक्गिरम्‌, wae, son of बत्सराज, son of गोविन्द्‌, resident of aaraqyy; a. of sirfixe- हीषक and निणयदीषक ( composed 10 संवत्‌ 1575 i. €. 1518-19 A. D.), महारुग्रवद्धति, शाङ्घखायनाह्धिक or -S(fver. अच्युत a. of सोभाग्यकल्यत्रम- अश्युतश्चक्रषर्तिन्‌, son of हरिवासतकौ- wre; a. of qrramftrarenpaq- wexer (com. on दायभाग of otarenga ), weytraftrer (com. on हारलता of अनिरुद्ध ) wre- विवेकटिष्यनी (m. in his com. on दायभाग ). About 1500-1550 A. D.; ms, of कायभागसिखान्तङ्कुष्ठद्‌- wftxey in B. O. mss. cat. vol. I. No. 205 p. 120 is dated शके 1581 ( 1669 ^. 9. ). sregqararg, pupil of आनन्दगिरिि, a. of एकादकीनिर्णयव्याख्या. sregarara, disciple of षरप्रानन्वाभम or शिवानन्वाभम ; a. of caraa- aftxer, विण्वेभ्वरीयपद्ति ( or यति- धर्मसंग्रह ), संन्यासधर्मसग्रह, सन्यास- पचति. In विग्वेभ्वरीयपति, the ज्ञानाणशव is mentioned and the ms, No, 12548 Baroda O. I. was copied in सवत्‌ 1887 (1830-31 A, D.). History of Dharmatisira अजयपाल M. 10 चद्रकमलाकर. अण्णावीक्षित a. of अण्णादीकषितीय. aftr. Vide sec. 76. अनन्त 2. of farrfeparftrenty. अनन्तदीक्षित, son of विण्वनाथ, sur- named यक्ञोपबीत, Later than 1575 A. D. and earlier than 1750; a. Of प्रयोगरत्न or स्मार्ला- चष्ठानपखति (for आभ्वलायनीयऽ), महारुद्रपति, सप्तसस्थाप्योग. अनन्तदेव, son of आपये. Vide sec. 109 ; 2. of स्दृतिकोस्तुभ ( divided into 12 parts on तिथि, संस्कार &c.), भगवद्धक्तिनिणय or -विवेक, मधुरासेतु, पायश्ित्तप्रवीपिका, अन्तये शिपखति, चध्त्विग्बरणनिणय, दक्तक- पथविघान. अनन्तदेव a. of चलार्चापखति. अनन्तदेव 2. of राज्याभिषेकषद्धति, अनन्तवेव 2. of qaspater अनन्तदेष, son of gaafxafeg. Lacer than 1640 A. D. ; a. of spararer- पद्धति, इृदधिभाद्धदीपिका ( afar wale), Tawar, रुत्रकल्यद्रम, स्व॑तोद्ापन, ठृद्धिभाखविनिणेय. अनन्तदेव 2. of भाद्धकल्पसत्रपयति, a com. on the आद्धसर्न of कात्यायन अनन्तदेव 2. of गायत्रीपुरश्चरणिधि, उत्सर्पति अनन्तदेव a. of कुण्डोदयोतवरन. अनन्तदेव, son of केहाषदेषक, resi- dent of नन्विग्रामः; a. of कालनिणया- wata. Bik. cat. p. 399 gives Sake 1488 (1566-7 A. ०. ) as date but itis not clear whether it is pf composition or copying List of Authors on Dharmatastra अनन्तमहु a. of com. on Fireregret. अनन्तम, son of कमलाकरभटु. About 1640-1670; a. of रामकल्पद्रम, gat- धिनी (com. on firaregrat ). अननम्तमदु, son of नागदेषभटदु ; a. of ग्रहयज्ञविधान, टषोत्स्मप्रयोग. अनन्तमदु, son of argag ; a. of सवा- चाररहस्य (composed at the desire of amrafirg ). About 1715 A. D. अनन्तभद्ु, son of नागेशाभदु or नाग- drag, son of HH, of काण्वकुलः a. of आद्धिकपारिजात, दानपारिजात, विधानवारिजात (composed 10 1625 A. D. ) and other works ending in पारिजात (शान्तिषारिजात), ग्रहयज्विधान, अनन्तमटु, son of नागेषशाभट्ु, son of ayag; a. of आद्धिकसंग्रह. Pro- bably the same as the preced- ing. अनन्तमहु, son of aigug, 2. of पविष्ठापखति. अनन्तभदु, son of सहदेव ; a. of तिथि- निय or firdrafreg (ms. dated 1526-7 a.D. in Baroda O. I. No. 10611). It is this author that is probably mentioned as अननम्तभड in नि, सि. and दूर्सिहपसाद Earlier than 1500 A. D. अनन्तमदु a, of समयनिशय अनन्दमहु a. of सदा खारानिणय. अनन्तमद्ु a. of quaftfire; m. by tyatra 10 तिथितसव ( Jivananda vol. I p. 54 ) and भनन्तभदु, son of यहुभदु . About and quarter of 17th century; a. of 679 तीथरत्नाकर (at the request of अनूपसिह ). अनन्तभदु, son of सिद्धन्वर; a. of कुण्डमण्डपविधान, of com. sar 0 ` erat on कुण्डमार्तण्ड of गोविन्द (com. composed in 1692-93 A. D. at पलीपत्तन, probably modern Pali in the Bhor State ). अनन्तमदर 2. of दानसागर. अनन्तम a. of भराद्धोपयोगिवष्वन. WHA 2. of बोधिनी होमषद्दद्नि ( for nine planets ). अनन्तमटूमहामषोपाध्याय 2. Of कलकः दीधिति ( probably the same as दुत्तकषुत्रविधान of अनन्तदेव ). अनन्वमिथ्र 2. of पाकयज्ञपखति. अनन्सयज्वन्‌, son of ser ; a. of com. on पितुमेषसन्र of गोतम. — a. of व्यबहारर्षण, gfe अनन्तराम a. of Rravpafiret, स्वत्व रहस्य 07 स्वत्वबिचार. Later than 1600 A. D. अनम्तराम, 2. of वेष्णवधमंमीमांसा. अनन्तराम, SON Of रामचरणन्यायालङ्खर, About 1810 a. ०. ; a. of सहान्र- मरणविवेक. अनन्तरामरशाभिनर a. of विबाह्मकन्वा- स्वरूपनिणैय अनन्ताल्वार a. Of जातिसाह्कयंबाद्‌. अनिरुद्धभदू Vide sec. 82; andand 3rd quarters of the 12th century A.D.; a. of fragfrar or कर्मोपदेशिनीपदधति and हारल्ता. अनिरुखमदु महामहोपाध्याय a. of मन्धकोष्ठदी. Said to be a arene. Earlier than 1795 A. D. 680 अवुपरसिंहषेव, son of BU, a Rathor prince. About 1673 ^.2.; ( reputed )a. of अनृषविवेक, srrax- भ्रयोगचिन्तामणि wegeag. About 1030-1050 A. 9. ; 70. in the काटछविवेक of जीशुतवाहन. अपराकं Or अपरावित्य Sec. 79 ; a, of com. called याज्ञवल्कीयधर्मशाल्ञ- निबन्ध. Between 1115-1130 A.D अपिपाल, son 0देहणपालः, son of जिवि- क्रम, son of मकरन्दपाल; a. of अपि- पालकारिका and अपिपालपद्धति (दत्र ` पद्धति). M. by गोविन्वानन्व्‌ and रु ` नन्दन One ms. ( N. vol. V. p. 302) was copied in g® 1442 (1521 A. D.). So earlier than 1500 A. D. In the colophon the work is described as कारित by afrare. अच्पय्यदीकषित ४. of तत्तधुद्राखण्डन ; about 1520-1592 A. D. अष्वयदीशषित ( araz) 2. of प्रायाश्वेत्त- विधि. Probably the same as अष्पादीक्षित native of मोरीमायर. serrate 2. of शिषाचंनचंग्रिका, शेवकल्पद्रम. He is probably the the same as the a. of awaur- खण्डन. अष्पावीक्षित a native of गोरीमार्र ; a. of arareeracftar (composed about ` 1700 A. D.) under Tanjore king Shahaji. merrererting 2. of नीतिठमाषि. afianadtqrarare 2. of न्यायदीपिका. water 2. of रिषा्रनवसखति. -. History of Dharmasistra AAA AETaAeaTWaTA, son of भीमानिकश्ार्मन्‌ ; a. of छतिसार- सष्ठचय 01 छत्यसार ०; प्रायाभ्रितव्यस्या- सार, वादसारसद्धञ्चय (on 18 व्यव- हारपवुऽ); vide B.O. mss. cat. vol. I No. 77 7. 74 for छत्यसारसष्ठञखय, which appears to be only a part dealing with ga and प्रायश्चित्त from the larger work called सार- सष्ठयाणव and No. 319 p. 358 for षादसारसश्चचय. अशृतपाठकः, son of सखाराम ; a. of सस्कार्पस्ति, Later than 1680 A. D. aqarteadiey 2. of arcatadersaeen. अल्पयम 11. in हरिनाथऽ स्सुतिसार. अह्वाडनाथक्षरि, son of सिद्धलक्ष्मण. Between 1250-1500 A. D.; a. of निर्णयाञत (composed at the desire of prince q@aa, ruler of एकचक्रपुर on the Jumna). Vide under निणयामृत. अशावक्र com. of मानवगह्य सुभ and of बोधायनग््य. असहाय Vide sec. 58. About 700- 750 A. 0. ; a. Of भाष्यं ON ANT स्यृति, of भाष्य on गोतमधमेश्ज्र and probably of com. on मनुस्मृति merase 2. of असगोत्रपुजरपरिग्रहपरीक्षा and अ graacurerega ( Bik. cat. p. 600 ) ATaTT ware ४. Of प्रायाभ्विससार. आङ्गिरस 2. of आतुरसंन्य(सविधि. आत्माराम a. of com. on कामन्दकीष ` भीतिस।र. | | List of Authors on Dharmadistra aaa 2. of cafe; m. by विभ्वख्य. arfkerqeta a. of com. on काठक- Waray. छ आदित्यभदु कविषह्यभ, pupil of वबिभ्वे- भ्वराचार्य. Between 1200-1325 A. D.; a. Of काङान्णय or काटादश. आवित्यभद्र 2. Of वतकालनिणैय. आदवित्याचा्यं or कोशिकाित्य. About 1400-1500 ^. D.; a. of षडशीति 07 stretrerferatz. आनन्द son of प्रभाकर of the दुष्पुत्र family ; a. of आदिक. आनन्द a. of घमसप्रदायदीपिका. आनन्दश्न्द्र॒ 2. of प्रायाश्त्तसारसग्रहः बालबोधक (On परायाश्चत्त) प्राय- श्रित्तोघसार (probably same as the preceding ) आनन्दर्तीथं a. of विष्णतच्वानेर्ण॑य. आनन्दतीर्थ son of जनावनभदु ; a. of सन्यासग्रहणपसखति, अनुयागपद्दति,पजा- पति आनन्दतीर्थ ante a. of हरिप्रजापद्धति. आनन्दतीर्थ 2. of प्रणवकल्य. आनन्तीथं a. of सष्यावन्दनभाष्य. आनन्वतीर्थ, the founder of the माध्व sect. Said to have flourished be- tween 1118-1198 a.p. Butthere are varying views. One of his pupils अक्षोभ्यतर्थं is said to have defeated बिद्यारण्य in polemical discussions. If this be correct, then आनन्दतीर्थ must have flou- rished about 1250-1300. Dr. Bhandarkar (in Vaignavism and Saivisth p. s9:)- accepts H. D, 86. 681 1198 and 1276 a.p. ४ the years of his birth and death; a. of कर्मनिणय, छष्णाङ्तमहाणेव, जयन्तीनर्णय, संन्यासपद्धति, सवाचार- स्छति 0 स्बुतिविवरण. Vide Bhandarkar’s Report for 1882- 83, p. 207 for 37 works attribu- ted to him and E. I. vol. VI pp. 261-263 for the age of आनन्वतीयं and his pupils. आनन्दर्तीथं is said to have been the son of मध्यगेह. आनन्दरामयाक्जिक 2. of सस्कारषखति or गोडरासस्कारपद्धति. आनन्द्राय वाजपेययज्वन्‌, minister of Tanjore king Shahaji and Sar- foji ( first quarter of 18th cen- tury), a. of spaqamageraa- frater. आनन्दवन, pupil of agseqaa. Ear- lier than 1650 A. D. ; a. of रमा- चनचन्द्रिका. If it is this. work that is quoted in the तिथितस्व, then the author is earlier than 71550 A. D. आनन्दरामन्‌, son of weeds ; 2. of व्यवस्थावर्पण, ITI. आनन्दानम्द, 2. of यतिनित्यपद्ति. आन्ध्रयति ( probably सरस्वंतीतीथै or नरहरि ) a. of स्मूतिद्पेण. आपदेव, alias सवाशिवदेव, son of श्रीपति ; a. of सापिण्ड्यकल्यलंला or -लतिका. About 1700 A. D. His grandson was a pupil of नागोजिभदु. आपदेव 2. of खेटपीठमारा, तिधि- तच्वसार : आपदद, son o: अनन्तदेव, son of आपदे. He was father of अनन्त- देव a. of eafrernaa and 50 flourished about 1600-1650 A. D. ; 2. Of स्वुतिखषन्दरिका, श्रपयति. आपवेष 3..0f आह्धिक. आपंवेव a. of गोक्रपवरनिणय (ms. No. 1870 of Baroda O. I. dated शके 1673 ). आपस्तम्ब Vide sec. 7; 2. of qeram and waa and पितुमेधसच. आर्याध्वरीन्द्र २. of com. on sar Tare. आर्षेण a. of a eqfit m. in नि. कसि. आहादित्य or sere or आशाधर, son of सक्रधर ; a. of com. on wesrfrq and of com. on grat- गपरिशिष्ट; m. in आचारसार of weer. So earlier than 1600 a.b. आरावित्यश्रिपाटिन्‌, 2. of मन्त्रकोशा. आशाधरभदु 2. of सन्ध्यारत्नपरदीप. भग्वलायन. Vide also लष्वाभ्वलायन and बृहदश्व ० ; 2. of गृह्यसूत्र and ofa स्वति (77. in मिताक्षरा and हेमाद्रि ). इन्द्रणण्टि सूर्यनारायण- see under सूर्य- नाराचण, हष्दरवत्त उथाध्याय, 2. of स्घृतिसिदान्त- aug. । हन्त्रपति, son of रुचिपति and रुक्मिणी and pupil of जेोवालभहु ; a. of भरीमांसापल्वल. | शान, elder brother of gary. Latter half of rath century; a. of दविजाह्धिकपदडति (according to History of Dharmatiieira आह्लणसर्वस्व) 7. in आधतसव, An ferarararart ism. in arene ( vol. II. p. 135 ) दशानना a. of नयज्ञान ( ए. 0. mss. cat. vol. 1. No. 240 7. 262 ). ईभ्बर्यन्द्रदा्मन्‌ a. of व्यवस्थासेतु" ईभ्वरदास, son of ज्योतिषाय ; 2. of apace ( also ०1164 द््तरत्नाकर) Parana 01 हाङ्धेभ्वरनाथ a. of gia SHIH: उक्थ्य a. of efx; m. in wft- खन्द्रिका, adorned m. in नि. सि. TAS 2, Of ज्ञाननाहा, उ्यकर, com. of agegf®; m. in विषाद्रत्नाकर of खण्डेभ्वर ( pp. 455, 583, 590 ). उदयंकर 2. of पादस्करभादसअदस्यथं- संग्रह, उषयसिंह खयनारायण, son of हशाक्तिर्सिंह and king of swraras. Flourish- ed between 1450-1525 A. ०. ; (reputed) a. of सूपनारायणीय ( षति ). austen 71. inthe दायभाग of जीषतवाहन. उषकात्थायतं m. by terfe I 2. = f by मिताक्षरा a. 0 m. by ४ याज्ञ. ए ), by हरदत्त (on नौ. च. @ 23.11}. उपाध्याय 2 com. of ageafr m. by ब्रेषातिधि (on ag 1. 109, IV. 162, V. 43, 1X. 147 and 147 ). sarare ४. of sirgtrefierd. Litt of Authors on Dharmatistra gurafw Earlier than 1575 a. D.; a. of प्रतिक्ािचवेक, wferfrote, WVTU- निर्णय. उमापति 2. of स्वुतिकीपिक्ा (8B. 0. mss. cat. vol. I p. 516, no. 441). उमाहाङ्कर 2. of com. on araarr and of rary: उदानस Vide sec. 17 ; a. of a work on aderrey and of a wear “a 2. of acom. on मनुस्मृति, m. by ब्रेषातिथि (on ag णा. 152). अराविपुश्रक- quoted as a writer on aderrer in the com. on नीति- बाक्याम्‌त. ऋविद्ुप or कविभदु, son of गङ्गाधर, surnamed gry; a. of सस्कार- भाच्कर ऋषिभटु a. of बोडक्ाक्म॑पद्ति ऋष्यशृङ्ग a. of 2 स्मृति ; sec. 40. एकं an author m. in आप. ध. q. 1.6. 19.7. एकराज ( prince Ekoji of Tanjore who ruled from 1676 A. D. to 1684 A. ०. ) a. of प्रषश्चामृतसार OF प्रप्चसारामूत OF शजरओनपुराण. ओश्चाशङ्कर- vide under शङ्कर. ओदुम्बर्षिं 2. of व्रतनिछीय. ओपकायन a. ० स्मृति, 171. by अपरा Cp. "195 ), हेमाद्रि (कानखण्ड ). ओपजङ्कूनि, an author m. in @v.w.q, 1. 2. 33 कण्व M. in आप. ध. | 1. 10. 28 and]. 6. 19. 3. Vide sec, 18 कण्व 2. of स्यति m. in grey on गौ. ध. चु. 23. 3 and rr. कनकसमभापति 2. of गृष्यकारिका ( बौघा- यनीय ), बौधायनस्मार्तप्रयोग. कनकसभापति, son of वैचनाय of मौद्रल- गोत्र 3 2. of शरिकामशरी and com प्रयोगादौ. Lhis seems to be the same as the preceding, since in the ब्ौधायनस्मा्तवयोग the author refers to कारिकामशरी as his own work. Vide Hultzsch’s R. II. no. 972. कपर्दिन्‌ 2. of भाष्य on aregreraer, of कारिकाऽ on आपस्तम्बगृद्य, of com. on आषस्तम्बपितुतरेधसुत्र and of com. on पवरखणड and. on ( आपस्तम्बीय ) अषरसन्न. eftey m. in com. on नीतिबाङ्याचत. atte 2. of स्सुति in 10 अष्यायऽ, कमण्डलभदु m. by Sue in भख , सागर. कतरलाकर a. of आखारकीषिक्ा. Pro- bably same as above. कमलाकर, 2. of प्रवरदुर्पंणय- कमलाकर 2. Of पस्थकन्रलाकर . कमलाकर 2. Of शुक्तिपकरण कमलाकरभदु, son of रामछृष्णभटु, son of areraorag. Sec. 106. First half of 17th century; a. of BAITS, कलिध्मनिणय, कात- वीर्यपखति, गोत्रप्रषरनिणय 07- दर्पण दानकमलाकर, तीथेकमङाकर ०६ स्षतीर्थविधि, निणयसिष्डु, नीति- कमलाकर, पूरतैकमलाकर, प्रायश्ित्त- रतन, बहुष्वाह्धिक, भक्तिर्न, TATE, 684 कमलाकर OF शान्तिरत्न, WCAHS Or aN, संस्कारपद्धति or संस्कारप्रयोगकमलाकर,शास्रतसवकोतूहल Or वर्वकमलाकर. Parts of his works (such as parts of the fatrrfirey and कानकमटला- कर ) are very frequently entered in the catalogues: as separate works, कमलाकरमदु, ४ resident of edu _( Kopargaon ) on the Goda- vari; a. of आच्वारदीष or प्रदीप and आद्धिकप्रयोग. कमलाकरभटु m. by EHS in भाज्‌ ` जाग्र aS भाष्यकार कम्माह्रवुसिह a. of आज्ञोचदीपिका. Later than 1400 ^. D. कयीटभदु 71. in भाद्धसागर of eye. seorrarget ( probably same 25 qar- शङ्कर ) 2. ण वास्तुचन्द्रिका, वृचि- भद्धधिधि. करुणाहाङ्कर A. of नीति्िवेक ककं m. by तिकाण्डमण्डनभास्कर, हेमादनि. Earlier than 11006 A. D.; a. of com. on आप. a. सु. and on पारस्करग्रह्यचजः B01) कठायखस a. of eesrarsy. कल्याण 2. of तिथिकत्पद्रम. कह्याणभद्टु revised असहायऽ भाष्य On नारवस्बति. इल्वाणवर्मन्‌, 2 prince ; a. of com. on विवाहदृन्वाद्छ of केशवाय anda. of TTT ARTY - on स्नानसुत्र of कात्यायन and on wrayer of Fitstory of Dharmatistra wearer a. of शिवधरतिष्ठाप्ति (at the bidding of king राचव- सिंह ). way a. of a स्घुति, m. in मस्करिःऽ माष्य on at. ध. सू. and in पराहार- माधवीय. कविकान्तसरसवती a. of विश्वादह्ष q. v.; flourished between 1100-1200 A. D, कविरत्न a. of सरोजफलिका ( B. O. mss. cat. vol. I No. 419 p. 495). Earlier than 1600.4. D. कविराजगिरि a. of कविराजकोततक. कवीन्द्र a. of हान्तिचन्द्रिका. कश्यप 2. ofa udu and a स्मरति. Vide sec. 19. BUTT 2. of श्य्रपशथचसस्फाराधिधि. कस्तूरि, son of नागय ; a. of कस्तुरि- स्यृति or स्यृतिशेखर. | काण्व a. of a पर्मसूत्र and of 2 tafe. Sec.18; m. in आप. ध, सु. I. 6. 19. 7. कात्य, an author, m. in ar ध. सु. I. 2. 45. कात्यायन a. of बृषोत्सर्गादिषद्धति ( ms. No. 9470 Baroda O. I. ). कात्यायन 2. of आुरसन्यासविधि. फात्यायन a. of 2 स्घुति in verse. Sec. 38 ; a.of a garaa, भद्ध, of मूल्याध्याय, warrga or स्नानविधिः aa or त्रिकण्डिकारज. कात्यायन 2. of कर्मप्रदीप. कान्डिवेवं a. of नित्यस्नानपखति. कामदेव a. of दावभागनिणेव List of Authors on Dharmatistra कोमदेववीसित, Later than 1500 and earlier than 1660 A. 9. ; 2. of प्रायश्ित्तपदधति, पारस्करगृह्य- परिशिष्टपति and of कर्मप्रदीषिका (a पद्धति to पारस्करगृह्यसूत्र ), of 9 com. on भूल्याध्याय, कामदेवमहारांज ०. of दानसागर. Later than 1200 A. 7. कामन्दक Or-fis, a. of कामन्वकीय- नीतिसार, Referred to by भवभूति (in the character कामन्दकी in मालतीमाधव ) and by वामन in his eruegraasfr and in the महामारत. Earlier than 650 ^. pv. and probably flourished in 3rd or 4th century A. D. कामख्पपति a. of गृढाथप्रकारिका com, on हारवातिलक. कामिभ्वरयञ्बन्‌ a.of com. called हित- धम on पराहारस्सुति. Mentions antarary. So later than 1400 A. D. erutfins 2. of a स्घूति quoted in काटधिवेक of जीमूतवाहनः, भिताक्षरा (on याज्ञ, III. 265 ) कालिवास a. of saveTarga. कालिदास a. of srarafexer. कालिदास, son of बलभद्र ; a. of gug- प्रबन्ध (D.C. ms. No. 42 of A 1882-83 ). The work was com- posed in eB 1554 i.e. 1632 A.D, ( श्ैब्दश्धिभितेथ qaftear भासे MITE ). कालिवासवयनिम्‌, m. in the plural in कालसार of गदाधर “preteen of antarage काङीचखरणन्यायालङ्कार 2. of eafterert { composed in 1834 A. ०. ). काठेसि महामहोपाध्याय, 2. of ` देहाकमै- पदति. कारीदीक्षित, son of सदाशिषदीक्षित a. of प्रयोगरत्न, रुद्रातुष्ठानपद्धति ( or महारुत्रपद्धति or रुदरपद्धति), सप्तविधान- पति and भाद्धप्योगषद्धति or भाख्‌- ` दीपिका, आद्धिकप्रपोग, प्रयोगरत्न. Belay ARISE 2. of com. on तिथिततत्व and प्रायशित्ततर्व of ty- नन्दन (प. 1. 0. 105 ) and प्राय- ध्नित्तकदृम्बसारसंगह. कारीनाथ मत्र a. of आपस्तम्बाह्धिक and ग्षेवाह्धिकचन्द्रिफा. काङीनाथ a. of gacamradt -. a. of com. on anvatites.- a. of भाद्धकल्प, किनाथ उपाध्याय ( 01 -पाध्ये ), son of अनन्त, son of कादयुपाध्याय. Sec. 112.: a. of wattreg (or -सार composed in 1791 A. D.), Tq श्ित्तेन्दुशेखर, विदटलकटमन्नसारभाष्य, कुण्डदिक्पाल with com wrattara, son of जयराम ( surnamed we ) ; 2. of शिबपूजातरङ्गिणी erataraag (also called शिवानन्व- नाथ ) ; son of जयरामभटू, son of शिवरामभदर \ 2. of कालनि्णयक्ीपिका, तिथिदीपिक्ाः परश्चरणदीपिका, गायज्री- पुरश्चरणचन्द्रिका, चण्डिकाचंनदीपिका, विष्यलीसेत कारीराम षाचस्यतिभदाखा्य, son of qraraga, son of qereer; a. of commentaries on the various parts of the eqfaaea of warqa (such as gyrerer, qerreferes, तिथितख, दायतच्व, धायभ्वि्त ०, भल- मास ०, श्यदितच्व, छन्दोगभादखतस्व ). He is वालि) from काक्ञीनाय- वकीलङ्कार, who also commented on feftrrer (compare N. I p. 140 with N. II, p. 84 ) कार्यये a. of स्सूति, Vide sec. 19. काह्नवेष a. of frerenrareafe ( 8. O. ms. cat. vol. I. No, 244 p. 267). कणिक 17. in आप. ध. सू. 1. 6. 19. 7. कुत्स mM. in आपे. ध, शु. 1, 6. 19. 7, कथमि a. ग स्वति m. by square ( p. 548), कालविषेक of जीमूतवाहन, हेमाद्रि. Also कौथुभि. कवेरानन्द a. of दानभागवत ( vide . D.C. ms. No. 265 of 1887-91 and 496 of 1886-92 ), a huge work composed under wata- ` सिंह. कुकेरोपाध्याय 111. 1 srgaee ( [1४2- nanda vol. I. p. 298) of र्नन्वन. करवेरोपाच्याय ( reputed ) ४. of दत्तक- चल्द्रिका, Said to have been com- posed by a pandit of Colebrooke, about 1800. कुमार a. of eqf m. by मिताक्षरा (on याज्ञ. Il. 253), अषराकं ( 9. 1070 ), स्शृतिसार of हरिनाथ, eaters प्रायश्ित्तविवेक (7. 550). कमारस्वामिन्‌ a. of आश्वलायन - कारिका. Later than 1000 A. D कुमारस्वामििष्छ 2. of भ्रयोगसारपीयव कुषछनिषि a. of नित्वधर्मपकालिका EXetory of Dharmatietra कुलमाणिद्यह् a. of com. on अद्गिः- स्सृति, com. on गौतमधभेसुञ्च, com. on याज्ञवसल्क्यस्सृति, and of आद्धिक- चन्द्रिका, of रामाचंनखन्िका. कुलष्ठनि a. of नीतिप्रकाक् and of शान्तिखिन्तामणि. gor m. by the सरस्वतीविलास (p.281)in the same breath with विज्ञानेश्वर and स्पृतिष्ठन्व्रिका. Before 1500 A. D. Bees, son of भटुदिवाकर. Sec. 88. About 12504.D.; a. of मन्व wpraet ; com. on waeefe and of भद्धसागर, आखारसागर and विवादसागर. छपाराम pupil of जयराम ; 2nd half of 18th century ; a. of aeqwal- प्रदीप. छृपाराम a. of com. on शछहूर्ततस्व and of बवास्तुचन्द्रिका. कुषाराम ( ४ Gauda prince ), son of यादवराज. First half of 17th century ; ( reputed ) a. of राम- WETeT- कृष्ण, son of भोचिन्द्‌, son of शधव of the aregrsntra ; a. of quistentt दीप or- बीपिका een, author of agra. Between 1350 and 1500 A. D. ; ms. ( Ba- rodaO. I. No. 1422) dated सवत्‌ 1592 andthe author names चन्द्रिका, eqfrare and स्सृत्यथंसारः flourished between 1350 and 1400 A. D कृष्ण of Bry family, son of शुर्सिंह or नरसिंह ; about 1500 A. D. ; a. of List of Authors on Dharmatieirea हाद्राारक्िरोमणि (where he claims गोषिन्दाणैव as 1115 own work ), भ्लोकचलतु्वशी. कृष्ण of the होसिग family; 2. -of जाससारोखार. Later than 1450 A. D. eer आचा, 2. 07 guvare. ष्ण आचार्य, son of कुमारवुसिंहभदु ; a. of स्सतिष्ठक्छाषली. कृष्ण आखायं 2. of परभा, a com. on हािदीपिका, कृष्णकान्तशमेन्‌ a. of com. on दाय- भाग. कृष्णगोविन्दपण्डित a. of जातिविवेक ( part of वणौश्रमधमदीपिका ). surges 2. of वतविवेकमभास्कर. कष्णतकोलङ्कार- vide under श्रीठ्ष्ण- तका ०. छृष्णतात, 2. Of सन्मागकण्टकोाचार. कुष्णताताश्याये, 2. of धर्मनिणैय, वेष्णव- लक्षण. Sergey, son of आवस धिक saree ; a. of कमेकोददी. छृष्णवलमिश्च alias वनम्ालिमिभ, son of महेशामिभ and pupil of wart ; a.of seiramaty. About 1650 A. D. Swrara a. of मक्तेिरसाणव . छष्णवीक्षित, son of येज्ञेण्वर ; a. of ओध्यदेहिकपयोग- कृष्णदेव, son of रान्नाच्चायं ; a. of Qeora- धमोवृष्ठानपडति, afeerierat and विष्छमर्तिघति्ाविधि. छष्णदेवस्मातंबागीषहा, son of नारायण ; a. of saree alias प्रयोगसार, धाय- ¢at भ्विलकोष्दी or fire, हचिपदीपिका and grafiewese. छष्णदेपायन, a. of cafe, m. in निता- क्षरा. छृष्णनाथ a, of com. on अतरिस्सुति, of com. on qareafa, of com. on मनस्यति and sqracatt, of com. on संस्कारतस्व of ago, of com. on wararaaatver of गोपीनाथ, 0स्बिति- कोष्ठदीटीका, स्थृतिसारटीका. server a. of धमौगमानुबन्धि- ITE. छष्णपण्डित, son of राचवदेवज्ञ ; a. of सन्ध्यामाष्य, छृष्णपण्डित, son of रामभद्र and लक्ष्मी; a. of सन्ध्यावन्दुनभाष्य and सन्ध्या निणयकल्पवहली . ऊष्णपण्डित Heras, grandson of मदा- az, author of कासार; a. of नीदिरत्नाकर. About 1450 A. D. eeraz, son of पुरुषोत्तम, son of qyara; 2. of कमेतश्वप्रदीपिका alias agra, कालनिणयवौीपिका. Between 1300-1500 A. D. were, son of नारायणः; a. of भायत्री- पुरश्चरणप्रयोग ( composed in 1759 A. D. ) कृष्णमट 2. of भद्धदीधिति. छृष्णमटु a. of स्यृतिसारसग्रह. छृष्णभदु a. of कविरहस्य. छृष्णभटू 2. 0 जीषत्पितुककर्तव्यसं चय . छष्णमदु a. of समयमपूख. छृष्णभदु आं (Or आरढ), son of श्नाथ of Benares; a. of श्लमाला alias दीपिका on frdrafaey of कमलाकर- We: “ छष्णभदु मीनिने, son of शषुनाथभटु, son of areata; 2. of कालखन्द्रिका हाखिचन्ध्रिका and सरोजचन्व्र ( vide N. I. p. 14 for हद्धिचन्द्रिका ) छृष्णमिश्र, son of विष्णुमिश्र, son of अतिञ्चख, son of Rearaez; a. of srrgerfirer, ४ com. on शआ्राद्धसुत्र of कात्यायन. Composed in संवद्‌ 1505 (1448-9 A. D. ). कृष्णभिच्राचायं, sonof रामसेषक, son of देषीवक्त ; 2. of कालमार्तण्ड, तिथि- निणैयमातैण्ड and sarmdiq, पेत- प्रदीप, भाखधवीप and of com. on firgregret क. sunfire, of the great, a. of SSAA. | serra, 2 king who ruled over महाराष्ट onthe गोदावरी ; `बणीश्रमथसदीप, a large work. छृष्णराज a. of स्यृतिमहाराज. Men- tions मदनरत्न. छृष्णराम a. of कमकालपकाशिका or- TER, उत्सगेनिणेय, दानोदयोत, प्राय- भ्रि्तकुतुहल. छष्णराम (of कादमीर ), a. of महा- शिवराच्धिनिणय santas a. of com. on श्राद्धषिवेक of gear. sere, son of arfitg; 2. of हाखिप्रकाक्ष (composed at the bidding of छोदराय ). surety a. of प्रवरदीपिका. Later than 1250-A, D. छृष्णसरस्वती 2. of हरिभक्तिकल्पलतिका. छष्णाचार्थं 2. 0 com. प्रभा on शुचि- tear of श्रीनिवास. a, of | Eiistory of Diarmatietra छृष्णाचायं, son of sarcaiteng ; a. of स्मुतविष्ठक्तावली. कृष्णानन्द 2. of ज्ञानानन्दतरङ्गिणी. कृष्णानन्द वागीभ्वरभटुाचायं a. of षद्‌- कमेदीषिका. कुष्णानन्दसरस्वती a. of अनुयागपद्धति. केदार, 111. in स्सुत्य्थसार. Earlier than 7150 ^. D. केदारनाथदत्त a. of धृत्तककस्तुम. केहाव a. of सन्तानदीपिका. are a. of केशवाणंव. । केशव, son of सोमेश्वर ; a. of कोशिक- गह्यसजपद्धति, केह्ावकवीन्त्र a. of सख्यापरिणामसंथह. He 45 116 chief pandit of the परिषत्‌ of a king of Tirhut. केहावजीवानन्दकमन्‌, 2. of भाद्धकारिका. फेशवतकपश्चानन a. of ज्योतिषरत्न. केशावदास, son of जीवनराभ. About 1770-1790 A. D.; ४. Of अहल्या- BIg and रामार्च॑नरत्नाकर. केहाषदीक्षित, son of सदाशिव ; 2. of प्रयोगरत्न erates of नन्विग्राम, About 1500 A. D.; ४. of गोन्नप्रवरनि्णंय 07 “HOT. केशाय वज्ञ, son of कमलाकर of arg ग्राम ; a of छर्ततस्व and कायस्थावि- धर्मपद्धति. About 1500 A. D. He is probably the same as the preceding केश्ावमद a. of अन्त्येष्िप्रयोग हिरण्यकेशीय ( from his प्रयोगमाणि ); Liat of Authore én Dharmatistra Sewag son of अनस्त, of पुण्यस्तन्म (Puntambe) on the syqradt; a. of अग्व्येशिपखति. Later than 1450 A. D Berrag a. of ararerary ( probably same as that m. in आदधत्स्व of vy? ), छत्यप्रदीप, ` धायाश्चत्तपदीप and हुद्धिपदीप, केशवम 8. of जातकमेपखति. केहावमदु son of गोपालदीक्षित ; a. of कृण्डमण्डपधिधि केशवम, son of नारायण अभयंकर ; a of प्रयोगमणि केशवमदुगोस्वामी a. of com. on क्रम- दीपिका. केशबमिभ 2. of छन्दोगपीरशिष्ट. केदवमिश्र. 2. of देतनिरणयपरिरिष्ट. वाचस्यतिभिश्र was his परमगुरु- So about 1540 A. D Serreta, son of गोविन्दरायः, son of रामराय of भारद्वाजगोत्र ; 2. of धमं चन्त. Mentions स्सृत्य्थंसार and पारिजात. Ms. dated सवत्‌ 1810 ( Baroda O. I. no. 5860 ). | केदावहार्मन्‌ a. of सप्रतिसार- केशावस्वापिम्‌ 2. of बोधायनण्हयपद्धति ; m. in जिकाण्डमण्डन, Before 1100 A, D केशषाचा्यं 07 केदावभदु कादमीरिक a of क्रमदीपिका, (pr. Ch. 5. series) About 1500 A. D C. विषरण by गोबिन्दमदु (pr. Ch. 9, series ) | केशवावित्यमहु 2. of erfrerirer. Sererd,.son of शाभिग ; 2. of विषाह- qraray. (Ms. dated 1398-99 ४. D. 87. A.D. }. The com. is by aig, son of केषाषदेषज्ञ. केरावीकार m. in निणैयसिन्छ and भावषि- प्रकाशतप्रायश्ित्त (probably केडाव, the author of the जातकपद्धति or ert ). केरावेन्द्रस्वामिन्‌ a. of साधनचन्द्रिका. केटासयति a. 0 त्वर्णिकसंन्यास. फोकिल a. of मात्रादिश्राद्धनिणंय (No. 641 of Visrambag collection I and D. C. No. 104 of 1895- 1902). He mentions करकोपाध्याय, चिन्तामणि, arrig, eeadia, मज- री, चन्द्रिकादिनिबन्थ, विज्ञानेश्वर Later than 1400 A. D. कोण्डभट a. of zea. फोनेरिभद 2. of तत्वसंग्रह. कोनेरिभदु, son of ere ; a. of स्घृति- aur. कोलाप्पाचा्यं a. of वत्तकचान्दरैका. कोषशछीधर a. of ह्यदिषदीपिका (28. O. Mss. cat, vol. I, No. 380 P- 435 ). कोकिल ( reputed ) a. of a स्वति ( D. C. No. 223 of 1879-80 is a different work on wre from above ). कौण्डिन्य m. in व्यवहारमातृका of जीबत- वाहन (prose passage on limita- tion for recovering a debt ) and IN आद्धमयख. aia m, in आप. घ. ख. 1. 6.19.4 and 7andI. 10. 28. 1 and in कालाविवेक of sftararea (7. 304 ). erate m. in हेमा, काहछमाचव (p. 76). " ae - 690 ehtre a. of eqfr; m: in स्यृति- eTaret and हेषाद्वि. Pifers आदित्य Vide under आदित्या चार्य. क्रतु a. of cafe ; 01. in तिताक्षरा (on ara. Ill. 28), अपराकं ( pp- 487, 1086, 1187 ), eqftratenet ्षमङ्कर 2. of विषाहरत्नसकषेष. Steps a. of निणयसार. क्षिमराज 2. of रामप्रजापति. mace, son of शभ्रीमबनन्द, son of arg called द्विप्ाहावद्मारथन्‌ 5 2. of ्रेतदधक्तिदा, रामनिबन्ध ( composed in 1720 A, ०. ). Vide Ulwar cat. No. 1431. ्षेमराम, son of कलमणि, son of लोक- mtr, son of वीक्षित arg लक्ष्मी कान्त (who is styled qaareraa- न्धिसोमयाजि) 01 Kanoj ; colophon of भराद्धषद्धति gives this pedigree, but the verse before it says that the parents of क्षिमराम were भ्रीमवसण्डन and पश्चिनी, So this man may be the same 25 above. ` क्षिमराम a. of आह्धिकपद्धति णि Sama- vedins ( vide 8. O. mss, cat. vol, I, No. 33 p. 32 ). क्षेमराम 2. of दहूतसचय. Sawer a. of प्षेमधरकाषशा composed in 1512 ^. 9. when he was a a governor of बीरसिंहषुर. Aufre- cht (II. pp. 26-27) is wrong in saying that he composed the work in 1612. न History of Dhermasisire Rratex and and 3rd quarter of 11th century; a. of atiteeqas and नीतिटता, areaat, Bremen. `` ater 2. of दानपारिजात. खण्डमदु, son of मपूरेष्वरः surnamed अयाधित ; a. Of संस्कारमास्कर, शद्रा धृष्ठानप्रयोग. खण्डेराय, son of नारायणपण्डित, Bet- ween 1400-1600 A.D,; a. of TUTTE, first part of which 15 आष्वारोह्लास, खण्डेराय, son of हरिभद्ु, son of नारायण, who belonged to बहो- qreme honoured by the king of fart ; a. of grea OF छत्य- रत्नाकर, Mentions हेमाद्रि, Ara, . रताकर, So later than 1400 A. D. Also wrote सस्काररतल, ` erfirc a. ग द्राह्यायणग्रह्य. ` गङ्गावसत 2. of ातुवैण्यषिष्यार. गङ्गादास दिवेदिव 2. of तिथिषरकाश. भङ्कादित्य or गङ्गाधर, son of भोषीनाथ- मिथ ; a. of रदङूतिचिन्तामणि. About 1450-1500 A. D. गङ्गाधर 2. of आखारतिलक or sae (The D.C. ms. No. 135 of 1886-92 though described as ararites appears to be a different work. It-quotes siratt- तिक (folio 6a) and explains ` sacrificial terms like प्रणीताः प्रोक्षणी and sacrificial materials like ger. गङ्गाधर a. of पाकयज्ञपंखति, पयोमपदति ( बोघायमीय ). | List of ‘Anthore on Dharmasiistra गद्गगघर a. of आह्निक, काटकाह्धिक गङ्गगधर a. Of कायस्योत्पत्ति, वातुष॑ण्यै- विवरण गङ्गाधर 2. of आहहो्गङ्गाधरी, संस्कार- गङ्गगचरी गङ्गधर a. of तिथिनि्णय, दायमागटीका. गङ्गाधर a. of fread. गङ्गाधर 2. 01 उत्सदनिणेयमशरी ( com- posed in 1632 A. D. ). गङ्गाधर 2. of प्रति्ठाचिन्तामाणि and प्रति्ानिणैय Tyree a. 01 विधिरल. गङ्गाधर a. of चोडशकमपखति. गङ्गाधर 2. of तीथकाशिका. गङ्गाधर, son of नारायण. About 1600 A. 9. ; a. Of भ्रनोरम्रा, ४ ८011. on क्ुण्डमण्डववपंण of his father गङ्गाधर, son of भेरव वज्ञ ; a. of at भैरव, छदृतालङ्खार ( composed in 1633. A. D. ) गङ्गगधर, son of अद्निहोभिराम ; 2. of सस्कारपखति. Tyrer, son of रामचन्द्र ; a. of प्रवास- छत्व (composed at Khambayat or Cambay in 1606-7 A. D. ). गङ्गगधर son of सदाशिव महाहकर ; २. of प्रपश्चसारधिषेक or भवसाराविषेक ( ms. dated 1784 ^. ०. ). गङ्गाधर चक्रवर्ति 2. of com. भावार्थ- दीपिका on भाखतस्व of श््नन्दन गङ्गाधर दीक्षित 2. of संस्कारगङ्गगमधरी probably same as preceding. = ` गङ्गगधरसरस्वती pupil of शमचन्त्रसर- श्वती ; a. of peter com. on srore- कल्प, 691 Tyres a. of wendy spray 2. Of आपस्तम्बध्रयोगसार. apres, son of सदाशिव महाडकर ; probably the same as गङ्काधर , महाडकर above ; a. of आरामादि- प्रतिष्ठापद्ति, गङ्खमरामन a. of com. On दायभाग. गङ्काराम ४. of निबण्धसिान्तबोध. गङ्गाराम a. Of युखजयोत्सव गङ्गमविष्छ, patronised by त्रिविक्रम ; of आचारदीपक. Earlier than 1750 A. D गङ्गेभ्वर om. in भद्धसागर of कुहक गजानन 2. of चाणक्यनीतिदपेण- गणपति, son of धीरे्वर (ईरिभ्वरः); a. of गङ्खाभक्तितरद्गिणी ; says his grand- father was patronised by king नान्य of त्रिथिला. If नान्य is identi- cal with the grote king of मिथिला of that name, then गणपति flourished about 1350 A. D Vide B. O. mss cat. No. 86 p 88 गणपति, son of हरिक्ङ्कर राट ; 2. of पर्वनिर्णय (composed in 1685- 86 A.D.), छतंगणपति, शान्तिगणपति and संबन्धगणपति, अहशान्तिपखति, दशकर्मपदति ` गणपति a. ofcom. on राजमातैण्ड of भोज. गणहा 70: in. शुर्सिहप्रसादि. than 1500 A. D. गणहा, son of ज्ञानेभ्वर, son of महावेद, son of छालमहु ; 2. of तिथित्रसरी. spore 2. Of इरिभाक्तिदीषिका. Earlier गणेशवत्त a. of देन्दवन्रासनिणैय, -क्षया- धिकमासविषृति. गणेशवेषज्ञ, son of Sera, of नन्द्रि्राम ; about 1520 ( in which year he composed his अहलाचघष ) ; a. of ayer, of a com. on छह तत्तव and on विवाह्नन्दावन. गणे पाठक ४. of प्रयोगक्रौस्तुभ. गणेराभट a. of उद्गाहविवेक. गणेहामदु 2. of स्शृतिचन्द्रोदय. गणेराभटु 2. of दायमागव्यवस्थासंक्षेष (part of व्यषस्थासंक्चेप ) or वाय- सक्षि. । गणेशाभिशभ् महामहोपाध्याय a. of प्राय- श्रित्तपारिजात (N. vol. V. p. 222). गणेशाचायं a. of frorraqor. गणेभ्वर मन्धिन्‌, son of देवादित्य ( who was father of &fysqz ) and uncle of चण्डेष्वर ; m. in हरिनाथःऽ स्सृति- सार, भीदत्त ऽ snares; about 1300-1325 ^. 72. ; a. of इुगति- सोपान and गङ्गगपत्तलकः (B. 0. mss. cat. No. 84 p. 85 ). ~ गणेश्वर ( महामहोपाध्याय महत्तक ) a. of आद्धिकोखार for वाजसनेयशाखा. 8. O. mss. cat. vol I No. 38, p. 36. Probably same as the preceding. गव, surnamed द्विवेदिन्‌ ; a, of संप्रवाय- प्रदीप composed in संवत्‌ 1610 (1553-54 A.D.) in gearea, while भिरिधर and other grand- sons of ggarary were living. गदाधर 2. of रायसिहप्रकाहा. गदाधरः 2. of सत्संपरषोगरधदीपिका. ` History of Dharmatastra गदाधर a. of छत्यकल्पत्रम ; 01. by arer- स्यति. Earlier than 1 500 ^, D. गदाधर, son of बामन ; later than 7550 A. D. ; a. Of com. on आद- कल्पसूत्र 07 नवकाण्डिकाभां स्त्र, of com. on पारस्करण्ह्यसूज्न, of com. ` 00 आश्वलायनयह्यसुत् ; mentions ककं, जयरामभाष्य, मदनपारिजात, राम- वाजपेयिन्‌, हरिहर. गदाधर, son of qratex, a. of तन्त्र प्रदीप a com. on हारिदातिलक ; about 1450. A. D. गदाधर, son of नीलाम्बर. About 1450- 1500 A. D.; a. Of कासार ( pr. in. B. I. series ), Raat, Ata, छदधिसार गदाधर a. of ्रहयागपद्धति (ए. O. mss. cat. vol. I. p. 113 ) गदाधर 2. of वासिष्ठीशान्ति. गदाधर 2. of com. हष्दीपिका ०० शमा- चनवन्द्रिका by आनन्दवन. गदाधर वीक्षित a. of वता. Tatas, mM, 171. प्रायन्रितमयूख. गयविष्णु, m. in. नि. सि. गचव्यास, 71. in कालविवेक of जीग्ूत- वाहन, by हलायुध in बराह्मणस्षंस्व. गभस्ति a. of a स्थृति ; m. by अषराकं ( ए. 549 ), waftrafener,. tarfix ( III. 2. 50 ). गर्म 2. 00 politics ; m. in com. on नीतिवाक्याबत. ma. of a स्वति! 71. in aque ( pp. 124, 196, 368), in eat गर्म a. of. गगपदति On qTTRETURTEy: List of Authors on Dharmatistra मने, a. of एकनश्ष्जननशाभ्ति. गागाभटु-- Vide under freparag. भाग्यं a. of a स्मुति ; sec. 20. area a. of a रसृति ; m. by हेमाद्रि. गिरिभदु, son of gguz ; a. of सस्कार- sftaterayetex a. of com. on परपश्च- सार. गीवाणिन्त्र सरस्वती, pupil of विभ्वेभ्वर सरस्वती ; a. of गायत्रीपुरश्चरणविधि. गुणविष्णु, son of दाष्ुकः a. of छान्दोग्य मन्बभाष्य ; 71. by रप्रनन्दन in उद्वाहतस्व, भात, मटपतिष्ठातच्व. गुरुनाथ vide पञ्चाक्षर year. छरुप्रसादशर्मन्‌ 1. of मरमासार्थसंयह. were न्यायभषणमड़ाचायं 2. of com. on श्ुदितच्व. शवडमह 2. of विषाहपदति. भोटुलचन्रव्मन्‌, a. of आद्धिकचवन्विका. गोकुलानजित्‌, son of हरिजित्‌; a. of संक्षिपतिधितिणयसार ( composed in 1632-33 A.D. ). गोकुषदेष, son of अनन्तदेव; a. of तीथ- कल्पलता, गयाध्राद्धतिधि. गोकुलनाथ महामहोपाध्याय, son of बिथानिधि ; a. of $ुण्डकादभ्बरी and कुण्डकादम्बरसिरोद्धार (9. O. mss. ` cat. vol. [No. 65-66 pp. 59-60), of प्रदीप or कादम्बरी a com on gafatrr of बाखस्पति and of भासमीमांसा (8. 0. mss. cat. vol. I No 54 P. 50 gives कावुम्बरीपदीप as the name of the com. ). गोण्डिमिभ, son of हरपति under king बाद्धदेष son of रषिकर ( of मिधिला); a. of garanitaraht; 698 ms. copied in छ. स. 592 (1677 A. D. ), गोपाल a. of apararrarverariteract गोपाल a. of rag. Vide pp. 294- 296 above tra, m. in भाद्धकल्पतरु of sft- aw; probably the same as the author of the graitg. गोपा 2. of गोपालयपद्धति. गोपाल 2. of सक्कियासारदीपिका; between 1500-1565 A. D. गोपाल; a. of Sis sey. गोपाल a. of बूल्यनिरखूपण, a. of com. on बूल्याध्याय of कात्यायन. गोपाल a. of आचारनिर्णय, आह्ोलनिर्णंय (composed in 1613 ^. D.), विधि निर्णय, हचिनिर्णयः, विवादनि्णैय. गोपाल a. of आचारकोषठदी. गोपाल a. of खातुभास्यकारिका. गोपाल, son of हरिवंक्ञभटू, a प्राविडः; a. of काटकौष्ठदी. गोपाल a. of प्रायश्ित्तकारिका or पाय- भ्रित्तदातद्वयीकारिक्रा. गोपाल a. of रत्नाकर गोपालजित्‌ a. of com. on बूत्थाध्याय of कात्यायन. मोषाटदेकिकाचार्य, son of arse Seong. Later than 1620 A. D,; a. of आद्धिक and जयन्तीनिणेय, aftre- जयन्तीनिणयः, रामनवमीनिणंय, भवण- द्वादह्ीनिर्णंय. भोपाठन्यायपथ्यानन ०. of सदाथारस्रह ( according to qrargst ). मोपालन्यायषथ्चानन्‌ About 1570-1620; composed com, on the meas of 694 शधुनेन्दन called निर्णय viz. आचार- निर्णय, उद्राहातिर्णय, कालनिणेय, तिथिनि्णेयः वायनि ०, दुमौत्सवनि ०, भरा यथ्िलनि ०, विच्ारनि्णंय, विवाद्नि०, what, भाखनि०; संक्रान्तिनि०, , ` सबल्थनि ०, and प्रायश्िनकमंनि ०. गोपाटपाण्डित a. of गृह्यभाष्य. गोपालभठु, son of छृष्णमहु, 501- named उदास ; 4. of चुद्रष्वति ( Vide Baroda 0. I. ms. No. 8975 ). He quotes छ्वद्ितस्व and wag. Later than 1650 ^. ४. wares, pupil of प्रबोधनानन्व; a. of हरिभक्तिविकास ( 8. O. mss, cat. vol. I. No. 454 p. 534) and a. of भगवददधाक्ताषिलास. About 1560 A. D. गोषाङभदु 2. of सक्छियासारदीपिका. भोपालयज्वन्‌ ( भाग्यं ) a. of पितूमेध- सार, पितुमेधव्याख्या or- भाष्य. गपालब्यास a. of नवराज्जनिर्णय. गोपासिखान्त 7. in आचाररत्न of लक्ष्मण. Earlier than 1640 A. D.; a. of srghararer. arreranredtaritea 2. of अयवहारा- लोक, विवादत्यवहार. भोपालाचायं 2. of पितृपति, Later than 1450 A. D. गोपालानन्द्‌ a. of frarvarcrarhy. गोपीनाथ a. of attasreatadre. गोपीनाथ, son of महदिव ; a. of दीपिका com. on स्नानसन्र of कात्यायन. भोपीनाथ 2. of विथ्वादिनिर्णय. गोपीनाथ 2. of इद्वाहाविकालनिणेय. Flistory of Dharmatastra गोपीनाथ, son of ergrac, son of feaqarreara of षासिष्ठमोश्र who was one of the four sons of सामराज and resident of क्रत्यण्डवुरः; a. of जातिविवेक. Earlier than 1600 A. ०. Ulwar cat. No. 1323 and I. 0. cat, p. 518 cause con- fision and make it appear that there were two writers of जाति- fave of the same name. गोपीनाथ अगम्मिहोच्िन्‌ 2. of संन्यास- queer. गोपीनाथदीक्षित 2. oof भाषणीकमं ( हिरण्यकेक्षीय ). 3 गोपीनाथपाठदक, son of akaatwarse, son of काक्लीपाठक ; a. of प्रणवो- पासनविधि. गोपीनाथमदु a. of निणेयरत्नाकर. गोपीनाथमद a. of आद्धिकचन्द्रिका, तलापरुषमहावानपद्धति, पेतदीपिकाः भासिकभाखपखति, सस्काररतनमाला. मोपीनाथमिश्र 2. of छत्यकौश्ठदी. गोपीनारायण, 501. 0 लक्ष्मण ; a. of निणयामूत (written atthe bidding of prince सू्ंसेन ). Probably there is some confusion. The author of निर्णयासूत was अलाड- नाथस्चरि who wrote under daa. गोभिल 2. of qeras and of a cafe (also called atsraty of कात्यायन). Vide pp. 218-220 above). गोभिल ( reputed ) a. of gqaaqaees. गोभिरषश्न a. of garage. ` गोवधेन उपाध्याय a. of sareerfarer. गोवर्धन कबिमण्डन १, of आपस्तम्बाक्गिक, Liat of Authors on Dharmatistra नोषभनदीक्षित, son of वेणीदास ; a. of छन्योगाहिक-. aera पाठक 2. of प्राणसबस्व. ( com- piled in gr 1396 under Bergal Zamindar श्रीसत्य ). गोविन्द, son of aearara, son of वा.?वेव; a. of आशोचनिणेय. गोषिन्ु, son of सदाशिषमिभ्र ; a. of सग्रहरत्नाकर ‘afer a. ग प्रूजाप्रदीप 7). in दीक्षा तस्व, Probably the same as the next. गोविन्द a. 0 प्रायश्ित्तश्लोकपद्ति. गोविन्द्‌, son of केव. Earlier than 1550 A. ०.3 2. Of प्रज्ाप्रदीष 71. in the @ratrerea of रघुनन्दन. He wrote पूजाप्रदीष at the bidding of war- नन्वुराय (ए. O. mss. cat, No. 264 p. 287 dated छ. सं. 432 1. &* 1§§1 A.D. ). भोविन्त्‌ a. of स्मातांघानपद्ति, गोचिन्व्‌; son of पुरुषोत्तम ; a. of लक्ष- grata. ोषिन्द्‌, son of नीलकण्ठ ; 2. of पीरष- धारा com, on शदरूलचिन्तामाणि of era who was his uncle; com. composed in ara 1550. गोविन्द्‌ उपाध्याय m. by हेमाद्रि. भोविन्ुदश्, son of गणभ्वरमान्तिन्‌, who was younger brother of faz and son of देवावित्य who was minister of king हररसिह ; a. of मानसोल्लास (?). A work call- ed मोषिन्दुभानसोष्ठास 15 mention- ed in बलमासतस्व (p.822 ) and एकादशीतरव ( p. 72 ) of tyaeqa. 696 (Vide ए. 0. mss. cat. vol. I. pp. 107-109 ). About 130० 1370 A. D. गोषिन्ये वैषज्ञ, son of गदाधर of the , माध्यन्दिनशाखा and seater ; ४. of दछुण्डमार्तण्ड (composed at Junnar in 1691-92 A. D. ). गोविन्द्षण्डित, son of रामपण्डित; a. of ` भआखपदति. नोविन्दपण्डित a. of भाखदीपिका. Ear- lier than 1560 A. D.; m. in भद्ध कल्पलता of नन्दषण्डित. गोषिन्वुभदु a. of com. on क्रलदीषपिका. गोषिन्वमदरः m. 10 AAA of छुक्र (on we ). Earlier than 1250. गोषिन्दभदु 71. in ममासतसव (p.787) by रघुनन्दन as भाष्यकार of पराशर. Earlier than 1500 A. D. मोविन्दभद 2. of द्ोभाद्धपयोग- भोविन्दमटु ghee 2. of तिथिनिणय- गोविन्दराज, SON of माधवः; a. of com. on अरनुस्पति and of स्वृतिमशरी. Sec. 76. सहममनविधि is ascribed to him. मोविन्द्राय 2. of परशश्रकररण (compos: ed between 1740-49 A. D. ). गोविन्द्‌ बाखदेवभट्र 2. of वत्तएत्रावियार- मोषिन्दस्वामिनर्‌ 2. of com. on बोधा- TATA: : भोविन्दानन्द कवथिकङ्कणा वां, son of गणपतिभदु, Sec. 101. Flourished between 1500-1540 A, ०.३ 4. of हानकोष्ठदी, बर्षक्रियाकोष्दीः gre Batt, भआद्धकोघदी and of अं ` वी com. on gfaatiter of भरीनिषास and तच्यार्थकौश्दी (com. 0" ्मलपाणिऽ प्रायश्ित्तविषेक ). भोषिन्दोपाध्याय a. of मलमासे निकेध- विशार ( 8. 0. 17155. ` cat. No. 292 0. 332 ). गोस्वामिन्‌ a. of नि्णयसार. मोतम 2. of weg (sec. 5) and quoted as a writer on politics in the com. to नीतिवाक्यासृत. -मौतिम 2. of onfewaa, Raia. mean a. of वानवान्िका मोरीकाम्त (and others ) a. of विषा- दा्णैवमसखन, गोरीवत्त son of रामभव्र ; a. of वाग्बती- ती्थयाश्राप्रकाश. गौरीनायथक्रव्तिन्‌ a. of कालमाष्यनिर्णय, नबाक्ञभाष्यनिणंय. भोरीपति son of बामोदर्‌ ; a. of com. on आचारदष् of भरीदत्त. Compos- ed at Benares in 1640 A. D. ` atfterag son of वामोद्र, son of नायकपण्डित. दामोदर was born in eerere on the banks of a holy river in Yajiabhami, but studied at Benares and was honoured at the court of Akbar. मौरीहा- wy wrote अनुभरणपदीष. He com- posed it after 67 years of Akbar’s era ( अकब्बरमहीन्द्रस्य गते- दैन्यतैवत्सरेः । परितः कार्तिकेष्टम्यां कायां मोरीशकार्मणा ), i. €. 1609 A. 29. He mentions srete ( बालक ?), जिकन, च्लपाणि, मदन- पारिजात, अतरुमरणविवेक and several other works. He mentions History of कव also fagen@era of his father. Vide D. C. Ms. 76 of 1892-95. गोरीहाङ्कर 2. of विषाहपञ्चति. ग्हेष्वरामिश्र mM. asa jurist in वितीष्‌- रत्नाकर of चण्डेभ्वर ( pp. 46, 483 ) and in षर्धमानऽ दण्डविवेक where his work seems to be called व्यवहारतरङ्ग. Earlier than 1300 A. D. चटकर्षर ( reputed ) a. of नीतिसार. चक्रधर a. of पेतृकतिथिनिणय. चक्रपाणिपाठक 2. of com. on तिथे प्रकाहा of ayrara. Ms. (in B. O. mss. cat. vol. {. No. 163 p. 178) is dated gr@ 1700. चक्रपाणिभिभ्र 2. of व्यवहारादरशं. चण्डमारुतस्वाभिन्‌ 2. of हरिदिनतिलक. खण्डीदास son of दुर्गादत्त ; a. of सक्षि- तराहनिकपद्धति (composed at the desire of coratate of छारमीर ). quge a of स्मातंकमातुष्टानाषैवरण or च्वण्डूनिबन्ध (vide Baroda O. I ms. No. 296 dated सबद 1593, sae. 93 श्चक्रे ). Fe is styled महामात्य and ware. चण्डेभ्वर ठक्कर son of वीरेभ्वर. Sec 90; a. of स्घुतिरत्नाकर (divided in- to seven parts On कत्य, YEA, ara, guy, विषाद्‌, व्यवहार 200 gre) and of छत्यचिन्तामाणि, राजनीति- रत्नाकर, दानवाक्याबलि and शिष-. वाद्यावलि, हेवमानसोह्यास तुज 2. of catrardavattr तुज a. of विबाहपद्धति खर्ज 2. Of अद्खुतसामरसार and of अटावरसचस्कारा List of Authors on Diarmasastra aga 2. of छष्णपदखति. wean werard om. in gfarrer Cp. 243 ) by रषुनन्वन. gfe मदाचायै 2. of anetrawerer and आकौष्वसंग्रह (both works are probably identical ). He is probably the same as the चहु- ae 7. by egaeqe. चतुद्ैनाचायै 2. of गङ्गगभक्तितरङ्गिणी. . wee a. of स्तुति, m. in crates. WYSE 07 चन्द्रहोखरशार्मन, son of उमापति ( alias उमणमडु ), son of धर्मेभ्वर 0 धर्म॑भदु पौराणिक. Between 1575-1650 A. D.,; a. of कालविवाकर, कालासिदान्तनिणंय, गह वास्तुगैर्णय, पाकयक्ञनिणय पिण्डपितु- यज्ञप्रयोग, भद्धनिर्णय, सस्कारनिणेय alias खन्द्र्बुडधीय. अन्करमोलि a. of आच्ारसार or आचखार- शतन. खन्द्ररोखर a. of धर्मविवेक. अल्तरहोखर a. of पुरभ्वरणदीषिका. VAT महामहोपाध्याय a. of स्घृति- भवीष. wnt वास्यति, son of विथाश्क्णः 2. of Qeftreta or -निणयसंग्रह, धर्म- or eafesratirer, स्मुतिसार- खनदरसखरशामेत्‌ a. of बुगोमजन or स्स समन ० सङकलप्ुरममखन, रुद्करितिम्मयञ्म्‌, son of छक्मणमह ; a. Of बदकमेष्यिका qrgy m. as a writer on राजनीति by माहिना on rye ४, so. ह, ®, 88, 607 wrorey a. of ersratfaerrer in verse ( varion recensions ) pr. in Dr. N. Law’s Calcutta Oriental Series ; and of the atfretz. Hultzsch’s R. II. No. 993 ( and p. 85 extract )is a खाणक्यसत्रति the last verse of which is ‘sgfyer- नामिति waar नीतिसारसष्टश्चयस्‌ | चन्द्रगुप्ताय चाणक्यः संक्षेपेणोपािष्ट- वान्‌". Vide under चाणक्यनीति and similar works. वचारायण m. in the com.‘on the नीतिषाक्यासूत. श्रारायण a. of wzerqar. चिज्रपति, son of नन्दीपति, son of मधसदन; a Pandit of Colebrooke ; a. of व्यवबहारसिद्धान्तपीयूष ( com- posed in 1803 ^. ०,; vide B. O. mss. cat. vol. I No. 356). चिदम्बरेभ्वर 2. of स्मृतिद्क्ताफरसप्रह. चिवानन्दनाथ, pupil of स्वयप्रकाशा नन्दनाय ; a. of : चिद्धनानन्दनाथ a. of कमेपखति. चिन्तामणि न्यायवागीशभटुाष्ार्य, a गोड ; a. of स्शृतित्यषस्था (divided into parts on उद्वाह, तिथि, दाय, पायः शित्त, हायि and sre). Earlier than 1680 A. D. चूडामणि, son of qratereg; a. of TTT: ayeng ( sometimes said to be ) a. of क्ीर्ति्न्द्रोदय composed by हामोव्रपण्डित in the 2nd half of 16th century in Akbars’s reign. ओतन्यभिरि ४. of महाविष्प्रजापखति and qermasaAs IMRT Tee 698 चोण्डपायं, son of ftreart and कामाम्धा and pupil of भारतीत्ीथै ; a. of सन्ध्यामाष्य ( आश्वलायन ), composed at request of arqrts, son of भातु. Bows to areatatel and बिद्याती्थं 25 भाष्यकारऽ and describes them as बरयीमयमहाणदौ. Probably flourished about 1350-1375 A.D. Vide Tri. cat. Madras Govt. mss. for 1919-22 p. 4214. | eqaq Sec. 21; a. of a चर्मसु Sarktarran a. of श्पूतिसग्रह. wane or sent atte ( or मदर्सिह ) son of नारायण ; a. of स्सुत्य्थसागर ( of which कालतरङ्गः 15 first part ) and afi for arers. Later than 1644 A. D. om थाक्ञिकचक्रश्रूडाधेन्तामाणि a. of com. On स्नानदन्र, छागल Or ortega. of cafe m, in मिताक्षरा ( ०" यञ्च. III. 290, 326), BETTS, TAT, BITS Pp. 442, 533, 932, जगवानम्ब्‌ 2. of छत्यकोष्ठवी. जगदीहा a. of भावा्थदीप com. on द्रपाणिऽ भाविक. serena a. of अत्रुभोगकल्पतर° जगच्नाथ a. of विवाहयति, जगन्नाथ TETMTAT. Sec. 113; a. of विवाद्मङ्गाणव | जगन्नाथ वारिकः, son of erga; a, of सस्कारकल्पद्रम जगश्नाथद्ररि a. of सद्ठदायग्रकरण. जनमेजयं ( reputed ) a. of भीतिप्रका- शिका ( which is said to have History of Dharmatistra - been imparted to him by वेशम्यायन ). जमदग्नि 2. ofa स्तुति m. by निता- क्षरा ( 0 याज्ञ. I, 256 in prage), by eran, कलत्यतरु, अयराकं ( 17. 267, 468, 501, 880, 1064 ) and exftrafexesr wrgara wardter, son of gurfk; 9. of sraRererqagtt. ATS 2. 0 गङ्गास्नानसङ्कत्यथाक्यदीष ( 2. 0. mss. cat. vol. No. 90 p. 91 ). Hreey or श्रीषष्ण weregre 8. of दीष com. on दायभाग and of वायाधिक्ारक्रमसग्रह. Harsco तरकवागीहा a, of आङवर्षण alias अद्धवीप, wary pupil of आनन्दी ; a. of com. on sufrorr of भानन्ब्ीथै, of gsrqafe. For latter vide ms. No. 8685 of Baroda O. I. aay (Ishe an author?) m. in ठोडरानन्द्‌ and निणयसिन्दु. जयनारायण तकैष्चानत a. of नीराजन प्रकाहा ( composed for शिकनाश- यण घोष ), सूरसक्रान्तिदीपिका, जयन्त or जयन्तस्वामिग्‌, son of कान्त, son of इल्याणस्वानिव्‌, He was father of अभिनन्द्‌, End of eighth century; a. of आण्बङ्ञायनीय श्य ` कारिका and feagrqvarer com. on आश्वलायनय्द्य्ज्न. हेमाद्रि ( Ill, 1. 1339 ) says that हइतिर refuted the view of अयन्तस्वानिन्‌ on the verse अग्न्यभावे g विप्रस्य. He is m. by मवार in his नाष्य on पारस्कर, 10 sreurfivet List of Authors on Dharmatistra. of egara and प्रयोगरत्न of नारा- यणमडु. For विमलोदय (com. on srqerarmgy vide D. C. ms. No. 45 of 1899-1915 ). जयराम a. of शतखण्डीषिधानपद्धति जयराम a. of com. on कामन्दकीय- नीतिसार. जयराम a. of araaftaer ( abstract of tarft’s work ). जयराम 2. Of छदतालङ्कनर, जयराम, son Of बलभद्र, son of शाभो- ax of भारहाजगोत्र. Between 1200- 1400 A, D.; ६. Of सज्जनवहुभा (२ com, on. वारस्करगह्यसचुत्र). In Ul- war cat. extract No. 39 the date ( of composition probably ? ) is waa 1611 ( 1554-5 A. D. ). जयशर्मन्‌ m. in dtafrarafir of वास्यति savages, king of नोरक्षुर. Earlier than 1750 A. D.; (reputed) a. of जयमाधवलानसाछास, Hees 7), in (2. 782 ) of cyarqa, जयानन्द 2. of genera. जातूकण्यं- vide sec, 22. srretenrantara 2. of सत्स्सृतिसार. जाबाल or -f a. of a zefe m. in मिताक्षरा ( on याज्ञ. Ill. 24, 260, 263-64, 315, 322, 326 ), अपरकं Pe 736, जिकन Earlier than 1250 A. D.; 7), in भआखसागर of gaye, in शूल - पणि'ऽ हुगौत्सवविवेक and पायभ्रिस- विवेक, by रदुनम्बुन in gfyrw AGATATS 699 (p. 237 vol. Il. refers to his अन्त्येहिविधि and अनुमरणविषेक ) and in wearare (vol. I. p. 774 ). | जिताभिन्च Earlier than 1250 A. D. ; m. in qerreftrer (vol. II. p. 46 ) of egaera as referred to by भीवत्त. | जितोन्दरिय Sec. 66 ; flourished about 1000-1050 A. D. sttarrares Sec. 78; a. of refers, ग्यबहारमादकाः FTA. जीव a. of दुर्भसङ्गमनी 2 com. of wit%- TaTEM ey: जीवदेव, son of aay and younger brother of अनन्तदेव ; latter half of 17th century , he names निणेय- faeg and age; ४, of आदोच- निर्णय and गोचघवरनिर्णय ( ex- tracted in संस्कारकोस्तुभ ). जीवनाय day a. of बास्तुरत्नादली. जीवराम a. of स्वस्तिवाखनपयति. Safire ६. of भेरवार्थापारिजात. जैमिनि a. of स्वति 10. in मिता० ( on ary. Ill. 20), erearaa (p. 259 ), पकाबुह्लीतर्व, नि. सि. जैमिनि 2. 9 स्सृतिमीर्नासा ( 101. by अपराकं ): जैमिनि 2. of wera ( pr. in Punjab Oriental series ). जरिभ्वर महामहोपाध्याय ४. of Fare (2. O. mss. cat. vol I. No. 225 p. 237. ) ज्ञोग्लोक- vide योग्डोक्, ज्ञानभास्कर ६. Of आद्धिकसेक्षेष and आदिक, , 700 शानस्वखप . a. of com. on परपस।र. ज्योतिर्ग्भं m, in निर्णयसिन्ध. ज्योतिर्माग्य m. in exhraferar. ज्योतिनोरव्‌ 71. in निर्णयसिन्छु. श्योतिनांय a. of हेवरत्नाकर. ` ज्योतिदेसिंह m. by मद्रोनि in चतुर्वि- रातिमतन्याख्यान. ज्यो तिङ्रहस्यति m. by tenfk (IL 2. 472 ), in निर्णयवीपक-. ज्योतिषेसिष्ठ m. in संस्कारकोस्तुभ. ज्योतिष्पराहार m. in eratede of जीषतवाहनः, कालमाधव ( ?. 91), in qerastrrer of सद्रनन्दन. ज्योतिभ्ितामह m. in कालमाधव (p. 91 ). ज्वालानाथमिभ्र a. of घष्त्यप्रकाश् and उदक्याष्यचिपरकाह. fryer कोबिव ( or हिङ्खय्प ), son of tag मश्चनाचायं ; 2.01 प्रयोगपद्धति (for आपस्तम्बीयऽ, also called fargr- हीय ) दीकाराम a. of दायद्चक्तावली. टीकाकारशम॑न्‌ 2. 0 पिषटपश्युलण्डन (ms, No. 2436 of Baroda 0.1. ). He was of aria and followed Witte GQ Rca qT eq. ater Sec. 104; (reputed ) a. of stewaeq (several parts of which are separately noted, as कालानिर्णयसोख्य &c. ). srog Cor मिभ ); a. of भाख- विधि for aren@rfias. Mentions ककं, कल्पतरु, भीकंण्ठ, हटायुष (BBRAS. cat. p. 236 No. 736). qréx a. of मांसानर्णय and मासादिनिर्णय, History of Dharmatistra: इुण्डिशज son of (ुरुषोत्तम and pupil of शम्रपण्डित father of aexqrige. About 1600 A. D; a. of कुण्ड- कल्पलता. ५ ~ we “ दुण्डु (or gug). Earlier than 1555 A. D.3a.0f पद्धति m.in अन्त्येष्धि- पद्धति of नारायणमड and in भदत. Steg २. of भरादविधि ( माध्यन्विनीय ) Same as हण्ट्‌ above. Between 1200-1500 A. D. stataer son of srorssor ; २. of भाद्ध- frre. apaates Later than 1686 ^. 9: 4a. of com, on areata, of com. on आब्ाराकं, of com. on qareaft, 600. ON वृत्तकचान्रिक्ा, COM. on हारीतस्युति, तकविटेक vide under मोहनमिभ. तातयायं 2, Of स्शृतिरत्नाकर. तातादास a. of पपक्नमतिदीपिका. arearerntera a. of वृत्तकातर्णय. तानपाठटक a. of qeeragaract. ताभ्रप्णाचायं 2. 01 स्ततिरत्नाकर. तालष्ठन्तनिवासिन्‌ 2. of आपस्तम्बगहयसूत्र- canter ; follows देवस्वाभिन्‌, eda, कुमारसिखन्तिन्‌. तिगलाभटु a. of भीस्थलप्रकारा. तिष्यामदु, son of रामभहु, son of बाङ- म्भदु surnamed महर; a. of स्मातपाय- fiat, सस्कारनिर्णंय ; wrote संग्रह दीपिका in 1776 A. D. तिम्मणमहु 2. of eartrerereifirer. तिम्मयज्वस weet a. of षदकर्मखस्द्िका. तिरुमलकषि of पराहारगेोन्न 2. of List of Authors on Dharmatistra frenereny a. of संध्वावन्दनभाष्य. faenwatranera, son of fasaa- ` यज्वन्‌ ; 2. 01 आश्वलायनप्रयोगदीपिका. तिपिलिद्ररि a. ग प्रयोगषठक्तावली. ` तिरमल of errata. of धर्मसेतु. तुरगववनपाण्डित 2. of शालग्रामलक्षण. बुलजाराम a. of उत्सवनिणय. generat Tanjore king ( 1765- 1788 ^. D. ); (reputed) a. of आदिधर्मसारसग्रह, राजधरमसारसग्रह. He is said to have com- posed सक्गीतसाराघत also. तोटफा चार्यं a. of काटनिणय. तोद्धण्यर, son of श्रीनिवासाचायं ; a. of वत्तकवन्द्रिका. जिकाण्डमण्डन (मारकर). Between 1100 and 1250 A.D.; a. Of आपस्तम्बसूत्र ध्वनिताथकारिका (pr. in B, I. series) m. by हेमादि, मवन- पारिजात and he wrote प्रवरतिणय, Mentions ककं, केशावसिखान्त, qrat- वर, WTA, GITA, AA. fraraaRia earlier A. 9.; a. Of धर्मकोश. विलोखनदहिष a. of srafaraaea- fafasse. Earlier than 1550 A. D.; 2. of श्रिविक्रमपखति 0 बरैविक्रमी or प्रतिह्ठापचति (on the consecra- tion of idols &c. ) m. in दोहरा- नन्व्‌ and निणयसिन. भिबिक्रम ४. of स्यासपखति. जिविक्रमश्ञ, pupil of sftererareet ; a. of yerdatfrer ( or gx° ) com. On हारवातिङक, than 1450 701 विविक्रमसरि, son of egaft; a. of आचारन्द्रिका ; 17. 1 ठोडरानश्व्‌, Probably the same as above. Stragey 2. of आभ्वङायनसखशपरयोग. , अथम्बक, pupil of यज्ञेश ;2. of भाहंस्थ्य- दीपिका. यम्बक a. of तश्वदीष. उयम्बक a. of स्ीधमंपद्चति. sutras, son of नारायण, surnamed मादे ; 2. of araqiteg. ( composed in 1838 ^. ०. ), प्रतिठेन्दु. sare, son of रामर, surnamed ओक ; a. of आच्वारश्रषण ( composed in 1819 A. D.). इयम्बक पण्डित, son of नारायण of the आङ्गिरसष्ठद्लगोश्न; about 1760 A.D.; a. of आशोचनि्णैय, इयम्बकमभद Ales, SON of छृष्णभहु ; a. of जातिषिवेक; प्रायग्ित्तसार, प्रायशिल- पयोग. वृक्ष Sec. 43 ; a. Of cafe. wa vide गोरीदन्त. qaafved 2. of चूडाकर्म. दत्तात्रेय प्रि 10. ¶्सुतिचन्दिक्छा, अपराकं (p. 971), भवनपारिजात, निणंयसिन्द्. . दयाराम a. of दानपदीप, veafast, स्शृतिसंग्रह दयाश्ङ्कर, son of धरणीधर; a.of उषाकम- विधि, ओध्ववेहिकपद्धति, तिथिनिणय, दरहाश्रादधपरयोग, दानप्रवीप, नीतिविषेक, धयोगदीप (or रत्नाकर), शाङ्खायनग्रह्य, हखिरत्न, MATA, sre. वलपतिराज, son of wea; SEC. 99; a. of चुरसिंहधसाव (several parts of which are separately noted ip 702 History of Dharmatastra the catalogues, such 25 आह्धिकसार, दामोदरणाण्डित. Letter half of 16th कालनिर्णयसारं ). century; 8. of कीर्विवन्दोदय दशु ( probably this is only the (under the patronge of 4A surname ) a. of aaerataure. "मह ). दादा, son of माधव son of afer, surnamed Karajgi. He was a ane and of बसिष्ठगोत्र and resided at Nasik ; mentions aye and कौस्तुभ ; a. of gare ( com- posed in हके 1697 शशिधर सथुधुरशाककेष्व ). Aufrecht is wrong in giving the date as 1661. वामेोदर ४. of इ्टिकाल. दामोदर ४. of छ्धकालनिणेय. वामोदर a. of जातकमेपखति, हामोवर a. of भखष्दति. ह्ामोदर 2. of मां सविवेकः दामोदर, son of शाङ्करभवु and eldest brother of नीलकण्ठ. About 1610 Ans a. of कलिषज्येनिणेय, हैतनिणेय- परिशिष्ट. कामोदर गाग्यं a. of प्रयोगपखति ( alias संस्कारषडति) following पारस्करण्ह्य. Names ee, गङ्कमधर and हरिहर" दामोदर sex Earlier than 1575 A-D.; a oof दिव्यनिर्णय ( compiled under संग्रामसिंह ) and विषेकदीपक; N. vol, V. १. 282 speaks of दिष्य- atiter (compiled under oftera- ), while N. vol, VI p. 40 says that विव्यनिणेय was compiled under qarerare ; but the works appear to be the same. qrarereet 4. of प्रायश्चि्तनिर्णय ( B. O. ‘mss. cat, Vol. I No, 276 pe 3१39). . हामोवरीय 7. in छदिमयूख and निणय- हीपक. arte a. of com. on कौरिकयद्यस्ख- areer a. of qaterrer ( D. C. ms. No. 267 of 1887-91) in verse (with a ` few prose passages about staat) on प्रेतक्रिया, एकादशा्भाख, ATE, सपिण्डीकरण, दषोत्सश (aire asks area ) and of a पद्धति. reed ४. Of नारायणबरिपद्धति, विनर son of afte from the वृषाणं country..Earlier than 1600 A. D.; a. of भोषापद्ति. दिनकर a. of प्रायश्ित्तरहस्य' विनकर alias दिवाकर, son of ` गसषष्ण- ag; 9.07 कमौविपाकसार, धायभिलत- सार, शान्तिसार, विनकरोषूखोत (com- pleted by his son frapae alias मागामहर ). Between 157571640 A.D. दिवाकर son of महादेव, son of are: gent, of the ATCT: His ma- ternal grand-father was ateeue author of the twelve mys; 4. of धर्मशाज्नद्धधानिधि of which sea- RET, आचाराकं (composed in 1686 A. D. 2) ATABTTAT STE sreaftxet, तिथ्यकं, प्रायाशिनक्ता ` वली, वुर्योदिपायलनधतिष्ठापडधति and others were parts. Aufrecht (part 1. p. 253) confounded List of Authors on Dharmatasira this with the next, but corrected himself ( part II. p. 54). दिवाकर, son of महादेव, son of रमे- ष्वर, surnamed are ( काले in Marathi). He was daughter’s son of THESE, father of कत्र लाकर. About 1620-1670 A.D.; a. of qreratteer (or दानसंक्षेपचान्धिका), आहिकचन्धिका 0 संक्षेपादिक- चन्द्रिका, काठलनिर्णयश्ण्ष्रिका, स्मात- TARTAR, पतितत्यामविधि, FAST नलयन्रयाम Prarez, son of दिनकर ; a. of वानदिन- कर. दिवाकरभद्र a. of ्रिवेणीपद्धति. विषोवास Earlier than 1560 ^..9.; a, of विवोवासप्रकाह्ञ; m.by कालनिणय- चन्वरिको of दविषाकर and seems to be the same as दिवोदासीय m. by frtateeg, विधानपारिजिात, मयूख. दिव्यसिंह महापाच्न 2. of कालदीप (or- प्रदीप), भ्राद्धवीप and of विव्यसिंह- कारिका (which summarises the two preceding ). दीक्षित About 1050-1100 A. D.; m. by दायभाग (on daughter’s suc- cession ) and @retate ( pp. 92, 102, 237, 264, 541). Earlier than 1100 A. D. दीनया पाठक ४. of छतमेरव rine m. in मिताक्षरा (on याज्ञ Ill. 260) and by भस्कारैन्‌ ( on गौतमघमच्ज ) दुःखमजन 2. of हदतकस्पाकर, युचजय- Weel: 708 gitar 2. Of grape ttre aia, son of arate ; a. of com, on वायवहश्छोकी OF दावसंगरदश्लोकवशक दुगांसहाय 2. of धरतंर्यना gore a. of दूलालीय. देवकीनन्दन a. of एकावक्षीत्रतनिणय, वेषजानि (?) ४. of देवजानीयमाष्व on निणयदीषक. देवण्णमदुः son of केष्ाबभदर. Sec. 85; a. of eaftre fixer देवदासमिभ, son of नामे, son 0 .. Sa of the मौतमरगोज्न and honoured by area king; between 1250-1500 A.D.; Mentions कलपतर, ककं, अणव ( महाणैव ) मिताक्षरा, carat, विभ्ादहौ ; a. of वेषवास- प्रका 01 सदग्रन्थचुडामणि, विथि- निणेय. निणेयासृत and विधानषारि- जात mention a देषवासीयं which is probably the geqrersrvarer. देवनाथ sec. Earlier than 1620 A. D. ; 2. Of स्मुतिकोडवी, दिच्यतन्तर or aexetadt. 8. O. mss. cat. vol. I No. 60 p. 54 15 > काल. eradt of देवनाथ, which is pro- bably a part of the egfweratr वेवपाल, son of हरिपाल ; a. of भाष्य On काटकगहयसजच. देषबोध a. of com. on argraeezeqe, m. by रद्कनन्यन 11 gfeew ( ए. 236 ) tea a. of कार्वणश्राद्धपयोग ( for बाजसनेयऽ ) Rann पाठक a. of gorgwetetra प्रयोग #04 tray पाठकः, son of बहभद्र; a. of पयोगसार (कात्यायनीय ). देषयाज्िक vide याक्ञिकदेव. देवयािक 2. of चतकलसिदान्त. वेवयाश्ञिक a. of 2 पदति ( यञ्रववीय ) ; pr. in Kashi S. series. दैवराज a. of com. on नीतिमखरी of wigs दैवराज 2. of पायश्ित्तसं्ह (com piled under orders of prince ante of Benares, 1770-1781 A.D. ), dary a. of छहतपरीक्चा वेषराज a. of भराद्धाञोचीयदूर्षण, देवरात a.ofa work on धर्महास्र (pro- bably a निबन्ध ) m. in स्युति- अनिका © the view that altar: in याज्ञवल्कष्य'ऽ verses on inhe- ritance means afrer. The (p. 414, Mysore ed. )attributes the same view to him along with wrsqz, वेष- स्वामिन्‌ and भीकर. देवराम a. of seater. देवराम a. of घहूत॑क्तावली. Rae vide sec. 23. वैवस्वामिन्‌, Vide sec. 65. About 1000-1050 A. D.; 8. of भाष्य on आश्वलायनगरह्य and of 2 निबन्धं on प्मशास्र. देषीवास a. of राजनीति, देवीवासपण्डित 2. of कर्मविपाकचिष्षि- व्साद्तसागर. Reema, pupil of विदुधेन्दराभम Barlier than 1696 +. D.3 ४, of History of Dharmadasira (D.C. ms. No. 33 of 1898-99 is dated संवत्‌ 1753). urafttsr a. of tarred. दिवेदिव, son of लक्ेमीधर, son of अत्रि, son of apre of आनन्दषुर ; a. of नीतितरखरी and com. there- on ( composed in 1494 ^. ४. ) Aufrecht (I. p. 263) said that पाद्धिवेदिनर्‌ composed in 1054 but corrected himself later (II. 2. 56). द्रविड m. as an author in the स्शत्यथसार of भ्रीधर. बरह्मायण ४. ग द्राह्यायणश्ह्यशू (attributed to arf ). ro Earlier than 1100 a. p. ; a. of रत्नकरण्डिका, दारकानाथयज्वन्‌, son of ठटीकामदरु; a. of उपाकम॑प्रयोग. Buta ( reputed ) a. of हृत्तकदू्षण. बेषायनाचायं 2. of sartuaratgeertrer. धनसेय Earlier than 1500 A.D.; a. of धमंप्रदीप and सम्बन्धविवेकपरिशिष्टः 71. In संस्कारतरव (vol. I 27.897) of रषनन्दन ). In gargerer (vol. Il. 7. 14; ) we have only सम्बन्ध- विषेक of धनय. धनपति, son of रुचिपति, son of बिभ्व- नाथ, son of रतिधर of atareas ; a. of srgatoy. The author re- sided at Sstf and is later than 7500 A. D. धनराम son of arrda; a. of भादः प्रदीप. Earlier than 1750 a. D. धनिराम 2. of सिखान्तस्यात्ला, List of Authora on Dharmaédetra धरणीधर Earlier than 1250 a, D;a. of com. on ageafe m, by See: धरणीधर son of रेवाधरः; a. of सापिण्ड्च- तस्वषकाहा (probably same as , next), धरणीधर, son of mate, 2. of एकादही- निणयसार composed in शफे 1408 (1492 ^. 9.) ; ms. No. 12052 (Baroda 0. I.) was copied in waa 1620 arate (Dec. 1553 A.D. ). It recites that the work was composcd during the reign of king etaatq and mentions विज्ञानेभ्बर, अनन्तभदु, विश्वरूप and बोपदेबपण्डित. धरणीधर पन्थ 2. of com. on काल- निर्णय (of माधव), of चातु्वंण्यतिवेचन, of चाहुर्वण्यव्यवस्था. ध्न a.of भाष्य 11. in स्सृतिचन्िका and हेमादवि ( III. 2. 747 ). ध्मकरोपाध्याय a. of तढागादिप्रतिष्ठा- पचति, दष्करिणीपत्तरक (2. O. mss. cat. vol. I. No. 263 p. 286 ). Both works are pro- bably the same. धमैराजाध्वरीन्द्र, son of माधवाध्वरीन्त्र ; ४. of कृत्षरत्नाकर. Later than 1640 A. D. wiegqr, son of रामचन्द्र; a. of agatertrerftr. धर्मभ्वर a. of com. 011 याज्ञवत्क्यस्थृति ; m. in gpeunt’s sTaRaaete. ( p. $29 ). Wear 2. 01 com. on eqresrePren- माणि 9 arerzoreg. | ४, D. 89, 705 wae Earlier than roso A.D. ; पा. in कालविषेक of जीमूतवाहन (pp. 134, 264, 543 ). waa a. ofa निबन्ध ; धवलनिबन्ध is m.in the avarferafer of नारा- goraz, in निणयासृत. Pro bably the same as the preceding. धरिभ्वर. Vide sec. 64. धीरमति (queen of नरसिददेव of मिथिला) reputed author of दानवाक्यावटी ( real author being विद्यापति ) and दानाणैव. About first half of 15th century. धीरेन्द्रपश्चीभरुषण, son ol धर्मश्वर : 2. of नित्यकमैलता, ater a. of a स्यति ; "1. in मिताक्षरा (on याज्ञ. Il. 290 ) नन्द, son of agra; 2. of ज्योतिः- सारसष्ठञ्चय, CTATTSAT: नन्वुन a. of भ्राद्धचन्द्रिका. नन्दन, younger brother of छक्ष्मण 5 a. of नन्दिनी; com. on the AAT TATA | नन्दनमिथ्र a. of सुद्रविलासानेवन्ध. नन्दपण्डित alias विनायकपण्डित, son of रामपण्डित धमीधिकारिन्‌- ०९८. 105; a. of काक्षीप्रकाडा, तख WHAT, AUS eTS AT, दत्तकमीमांसाः नवराजप्रदीषः प्रमिताक्षरा ae = मिताक्षरा ) com. qarercegia ), वैजयन्ती alias केशव वैजयन्ती ( com. on ) esfeateret ( com. on qwaftfe of कोकिकादित्य ), ाद्धकल्पलता, FTE सिन्धु (of which संस्कारनिणैय is a part), हैरिषक्षविलासं (of which कालनिभयकोतुक is a part). He probably composed ज्योतिःसार- wgeag and wmiageaz: न्दम 2. of विषाहनिरूपण. नन्द्रामनिश्न, son of कौीप्वब्दरनभिश्; a. of निणैयसार (composed in 1780 A. D. ). . mean vide under नबराज. नरसिंह 2. of wrerraftrerce. नरसिंह a. of आपस्तम्बग्रहाचत्रकारिका- aft ; composed in 1614 A. >, wefte vide छलारि afte. भरसिंह a. of gadterrarerarcenaty. नरसिंहं or afite sex About 1300- 1326 ^. ०. ; ४. of प्रमाणपह्वव _ (vide 8. O. mss. cat. vol. I. No. 270 p. 209 ). नेरसिंहदेव (reputed ) ४, of antafie- ercfpoht or gaivagfx. About 1425- $0 A. D. भरसिंहमदु 2. of घतूर्ेदचिन्तामणि,. नरसिंह शचराजपेयिन्‌, son of gufe of Stevie. Later than 1400 ^, 7), ; a. of facarererfiy. Pr. in 8. I. series. नरसिंह ५ son of प्राघवाचा्य ; a. of विच्छुप्रतिहाविधिव्षण. नरहरि a. of विवाहषद्धति. avert 2. of संश्कारणसिह. नरहरि उपाध्याय 2. 0 द्वितनिणय (B. 0. mss. cat. vol. I No. 223 p.236). neeften सप्तिं a. of भण्डपकुण्डमण्डन and com. srerftrer thereon and ofa .work on erfege;m in com.oner विच्छ कल्पश्विषशा, History of Dhermattisiva attwret a. Of ca ftrerary. नरोलमसास 2. of प्रातःपूज्ाबिधि ( fo: followers of {rex ). नरोलमवेष 2. of आखप्रकरण. नवरसोन्यमद्र 2. of द्द्रा्ारसश्रह 01 . VENTS. नषराज, son of देवसह of the द्रोण family ; a. of दानी and ब्रत पी and‘ दानवाक्यावालि. The real author was सूरयैकर. Often read as नरराजञ in the catalogues ; vide Peterson’s sth Report p. 177 extract and B. O. mss. cat. vol. I No. 195 7. 210 where we Have both नरराज and alert. -araya flourished before 1435 A.D.; a. of आच्वारदीप or- प्रदीष ( 1715. No. 3858 Baroda 0, 1. copied in 1491 शके ara) and निणय- m. in samara and दद्रकमलाकर, नागदेव a. of agate and घहूरतवीपक arta, son of fairy. Later than 1612 A. D.; a Of तीशर्नणिये based on निणैवसिन्द. मागदैषज्ञ, son of शिव ; a. of निणैय wee (which is an abstract of Rrdraftreg ), आखारपदीप, पथित- तिथिनिणैय, Most probably the same as the preceding. नागेश, son of Bgater of Haldipur in North Canara; about 174I!- 1782 A. 2. } ४. Of आगमग्रन्यः जनिशामहु or नागोजिमहू, son of शिव wg and सती. Sec. 110; a. जा List of Avthore on Dharmatietra हेनवुशेखर, आहोखनिणय, आशोचिण्ट शेखर, कुण्डपदति, तिथीन्दुहोखर, तिथिनिणय, बिस्थलीसेतु or- सारसंग्रह, Treacher, चखण्डीभरयोग, तीरथन्बु- शेखर, प्रायश्रितेन्तुरोेखर, प्रायभ्रिल- सारसश्रह, भेन्दुशखर, सस्काररत्न- माला, सापिण्डीमशरी Or सापिण्डप- दीपिका, सापिण्डयनिषौय ( probably same as preceding ). aréiag m.asa स्सृतिकार in नित्या- araraty ( 0. 20). नाश्व Sec. 36. नारद्‌ (reputed ) a. of aarfaas 07 ATATST. नारायण a. of a, caf 17. in अपरर्क Pp. 135, 146, 500, 508. In the Mad. Govt. Oriental Library there is a areraneafe in 9 chapters, where नारायण asks gate about sins. नारायण m. in आखधसागर of HRS AE- नारायण, son of ataea,son of इरि ; a. of कुष्डमण्डपदपंण (composed in 1578 ^. D.) and of हुते भातण्ड and its com. artoeagar (composed in 1572 A. D. ). array a. of 2 पद्धति; 71. in ज्योति- स्स्व (p. 616) and भलमासतस्व ( 7. 746 ) of रष्नन्वन. नारायण, son of serstikafta, son of श्रीपति, Probably earlier than 1570 a. D. He was from sftarzaatt in asreter ; a. of com. wesaies on शाङ्घखायनगर सत्र and of a gerraf® also. 107 नारायण 2. of प्रदीपमाष्य On वाना. नारायण Earlier than 1600 A. 9. ; a. Of चमत्काराथिन्तामणि. नारायण Earlier than 1450 A. ०. ; a. of com. अपेक्षिताथयोतिनी ; 71, in मवनरत्नप्रदीप ( शान्ति portion ). नारायण, son of बरहा, Earlier than 1500 A. ०. ; ४. Of apex on गोमिल- गृह्य ; m. in भाखतस्व and grerr- strenterer of ugar. नारायण, son of wysftaray, sur- named आर ; a. of qerrftrearae Or प्रयोगसार and शआरद्धसागर, sire वरति, Later than 1650 A. D. नारायण, son of दिवाकर of the मेव गोत्र ; ४. 0 com. on apeera war. Itis probably this नारायण that is m. in पराक्षरनारवीय. नारायण a. of आग्बलावनसज्पदति, नारायण a. of चला्चांपयति. Later than 1450 A. D. नारायण 2. of दिनत्रयमीर्मासा ( for म्नाध्व followers ). नारायण a. of छबोधिनी. नारायण a. of vaftater. Before 1675 A. D. नारायण a. Of मादुगोश्रनिभय, नारायण a. of दुक्षिणह्वारनिणय. a. of com. ON शारदांति्क नारायण, pupil of विज्ञानेश्वर ; a. of व्यबहारकशिरोमणि. About 1100 A.D. नारावण a. of नीतिमाला. नारायण ( छकारि ) a. of egfienng and ष्युतिसार, 706. नारायण उपाध्याय ; 11. in एकादहीतस्व ` ( 3०), ज्योतिस्तखछ (Cp. 708 where his explanation of the last aa of आपस्तम्बधर्भसूज्ज 15 given), in आद्धसागर of Sys, in भ्राद्धक्रियाकोषठदी of गोषिन्दानन्व नारायण उपाध्याय son of गोण ; a. 01 परिशिटपरकाश् com. on ead. नारायणचक्रवतिन्‌ ४. of शान्तिकतच्वासृत. नारायणटक्कर 2. of ब्रह्मसस्कारमखरी or सस्कारमशरी, नारायणतकांचा्यं 2. of दोलायात्रासृत. नारायणदीक्षित, son of चायम्भदु. Later than 1400 A. ०. २. of प्रयोगदुपण. नारायणदीक्षित 2. of स्मातंस्छुटपचति नारायणव, son of treet, son of सदारिषदेव. He was pupil of नागेज्ञ, About 1750-80 aA. D 2. of com.on सोापिण्डचकल्पटतिका of his grandfather. नारायणपण्डित, son of विभ्वनाथयण्डत, pupil of भदुनीलकण्ठ. Earlier than 1720 A. 0. ; a. Of पिष्टपहाखण्डन- मीमांसा (ms. No. 8831 of Baroda O. I. is पिष्ठपष्यमीमांसा of नारायण, son of विश्वनाथ )› fte- पटमीमांसाकारिक्ा. नारायणपण्डितः son of विभ्वनाथसरि ( acc. to Stein’s cat p. 107) and son of हिताथसूरि (acc. to Bik. cat. p. 449 ); ४. of aararceafa- टीका. नारायणपण्डित 2. of सध्याषन्दनभाष्य. नारायणभद्रु, son of रामेभ्वरमदु. Sec. 103; a. of अन्त्येष्टिषद्धति, अयन- निणय,भरामोत्सर्गपद्धति,आतुरसंन्यास- History of Dharmatisira विधि, atrestanam, Preadiva, प्रयोगरत्न, आदिताधिमरणवाहादिपददति, महारुद्रषति Or रुग्रपद्धति, कारीमरण - wipers, गोत्रप्रषरनिणंय, तिथि- निर्णय, तकादरुषवानप्रयोग, earners Tala, मांसमीमांसा, काटनिणंय- - कारिकाव्याख्या, दषोत्सपखति, लक्ष- होमपद्धति, विष्णश्राद्धपद्धति, Por- tions of his syayveq and other works are separately entered in the catalogues as distinct works. नारायणमदु 2. of वराकमैषद्धति. नारायणभदु between 1400-1 600 A.D.; a. of धमपन्रत्ति. नारायणमट ४. of जातिविवेक ( ms. No. 11147 of Baroda 0.1. ) नारायणभद्रु a. of प्रायश्रित्तसग्रह. नारायणमटरु 2. of विधानरतन. नारायणमभटु, son of राम, son of नारा- यण ; a. of काञ्लीरहस्यप्रकाज् ( com- posed by order of arate ) नारायणयज्वन्‌ a. of आपस्तम्बपयोगरलन. नारायणबन्दोपाध्याय ४. of ह्दिकारिका. नारायणश्न्‌ a. of धर्म॑सेग्रह. नारायणशम॑न्‌ ४. of व्यवस्थासार (2 different work from व्यवस्था- सारसंग्रह ). नारायणशम॑सिद्धान्तवागीशमदराचायं 2. of व्यवस्थासारसंयह नारायणसर्बज्ञ a. of wert Sgr com on ageata, of कामधेचु्वीपिका, of छद्धिदीपिका. As wagge ( 1431 A. D,.) mentions him, he 1s earlier than 1400 a. ०. Vide Bhandarkar’s Report for 1883- 84 p. 62. List of Authors on Dharmatistra नारायणानन्दनाथ 2. of शिषाचचनशिरो- ` मभि. नारायणाय a. of com. on भोन्रप्रघर- frie of अभिनवमाघवाचा्यं. मा तैजिषण्डित, son of freqary ; a. of लक्षणहतक and com, लक्षणरत्नमा- feast thereon. निजानन्द्‌ a. of प्रयोगसार, नित्यानन्द a. of क्रमदीपिका, नित्यानन्द 2. of षटकमेव्याख्यानचिन्ता- मणि, निधिराम a. of आचारमाला. नित्रन्धनकार m. 1) सरस्वतीषिलास | ( pp. 51, 349). िम्बाकंरिष्य 2. of सन्यासप्ति. निरवथवियोद््ोत 71. in the वायभाग- of ज्ीषूतवाहन. निदूरिबसबोपाध्याय a. of व्याख्यानदी- पिका com. on मिताक्षरा of विज्ञा Pay. निभैयरामभदु ४, of walqaraage and सवत्सरोत्सवबकालनिणय. ates or श्रीपति ; a. 0पविषक्ञवह्लभ. नीलकण्ठ a. of आह्ोवशतक. नीलकण्ठ a. of ुण्डमण्डपसिदि or- विधान. नीलकण्ठ, son of शङ्करभटु ; a. of फुण्डमण्डपनिणेय. नीलकण्ठ a. of com. on दायभाग. मीलकण्ड a: of प्रतिमाप्रतिष्ठा. गीलकणठ a. of com.on srafas of Woah. ` नीलकण्ड 2. of निणयभास्कर. नीटकण्ड son of अनन्त, son of चिन्ता- भणि. About 1600 ^. D. ; fa, of 709 तिथिरत्नमाला and com. on gga- चिन्तामणि. नीलकण्ड, son of शङ्करमहू, 9०५, , 107; a. Of भगवन्तभास्कर ( divided 1/0 12 FAs ), AAT, कुण्डो- नीलकण्ठ son of भास्कर ; a. of ata- दीधिति. नीलकण्ठ 2. of आदहोखरातक. नीलकण्ठ a. of द्ानचन्दिका. नीलकण्ड a, of वानपरिभाषा. नीलकण्ठ 2. of ण्डमण्डपविधान and कृण्डमण्डपसिचि. ` नीलकण्ठदीक्षित son of अष्पयदीक्षित अदैताचार्य, of the भारदु{जगोत् ; a. of अधिषवे, नीलकण्ठ यतीन्तर 2. of यतिधर्मपनोधिनी. नीलकण्ठस्ूरि 2. of परशूप्रकरण, नीटकण्ठाचार्यं a. of स्घत्य्थंसार , नाङिकमल ( लाहा ) a. of काल्यच॑न- चष्द्रिका. नीलाम्बरभद्रु son of गदाधर (author of eraare ). Before 1500 A. D.; a. of ereatadt; 7. in gyay- stadt (p. 275) of मोषिन्दानन्द, He is probably the same as नीलाम्बर m. 25 भाष्यकार of कात्यायन in the यद्ध्वेदिभाच्‌तस्व of रश्नन्दनं (vol. II. p. 496 ). नीलाद्र (?), son of TEM ; a. of com. on yrgertay or नवकण्डि- eraa of कात्यायन. It is probable that नीलाद्र is a misreading of नीलाम्बर Meaning Few. afte ( कम्भाषटूर ). Later than 1400 ५, De; 2. of sirereagtter and तिथिप्रदीपिका, 710 aitty 2. of निषन्धकिरोमणि. wlte, of the कौण्डिन्यगोश्र, son of रामचन्द्राय, Between 1360- 1435 A. 2. ; a. of प्रयोगपारिजात, afte of stirs, resided on the Waadt near चन्दुनगिरि 11 वैराटवेश. Earlier than 1565 ^, 9. and later than 1300 A. D.; a, of विध्वानमाङा, He mentions eg- वर्गचिन्तामणि. alte a. of भरौतस्मार्तकमेषयोग. alee, son of मापवालायं src wifirg ; 2. of com, on कैखातसध्ं- पञ्च and देखानसस्जुर्पण, ससह, son of रामचन्कराखार्यं surnamed WT. 1400-1450 A. ०. ; a, काल- निणेववीपिकाविषरण, and of com. on तिथिनिणयसंग्रह (of मन्दर ), तिथिप्रदीपिका, गोविन्दाणैव or धरन तच्वावलोक } 115. 10410 ( Baroda 0.1. ) gives date of composi- tion (?) as शराङ्ककालानटविभ्ब- संमिते विरोधिव्े ( 1. 6. 1330 शके). शुसिंहठक्कर a. of परमाणपट्वब. सुसिहपण्डित a. of stra. aitierg, son of सिद्धभद of कण्व- शाखा ; a. of संस्काररत्नाव्ि. चृसिंहमटु a. of दत्तकएवविधान. इसिंहमदु, son of सोमभदु; a. of Rrepatatatar. afeerg ( मीमांसक ) a. of स्वृति- निषन्ध. बुसिंहभदु, son of नारायणमहु, Be- tween 1500-1600 A. D.; a. of परथोगरल. कृसिहवाजपेोधिन्‌ a. of श्ुतिमीमांसा History of Dharmatistra. शुसिंहारण्य or ‘afirerant. Earlier than 1440 a. 9. Vide Bhandar- kar’s Report, 1883-84 p. 76 ; a. of विष्छमक्तिखन्दरोदय. चृहरि a. of शाञ्जप्रदीप alias Preeqere. Before 1607 A. D. weft, surnamed पण्डरपुर ; a. of पासादघतिष्ठा. चरि, pupil of wer; a. of सदाथार- egtacter. were aires 2. of शाज्जदीषप. न्यायपश्चानन (probably भोपाल ) a. of हगोत्सवनिणैय. पक्षधरमिभः, son of महामहोपाध्याय बटे- saz. Earlier than 1600 A. 9. ; a. of तचवनि्णय (प, vol. V. p. 155). पक्षधरामिश् 2. of तिथिनिणव. Proba- bly he is identical with the preceding. | पक्षघरमिभ्र 2. भ तिथिचन्व्रिका; ms. of विष्छुपुराण was copied in 1464 A. D. by him. ; probably the same as above (B. O. mss. cat. vol. I. No. 145 p. 146 ). पञ्चाक्षर शरुनाथ a. of कमैपरकाशिका. प्ानन m. in कासार of गदाधर. पश्चाननरसिंह 17. in wearers. revert m. in - काटविषेक (0. 63 ) of जीभतवाहन. | (ण्डितपरितोषकार 71. by हेमाद्रि (1. 2. 481 ) as refuting गोविन्दराज ऽ view, Between 1075-1225 A. ०. qwart a. of माध्यन्विनीयाथारसग्रह- दीपिका. Lit of Authore en Diarmatastra qTwWara, son ot weaq. Between 1460-1550 ^. ०. ; a. of हुर्गाबती- प्रकाषा Or समयालोक ( under दुगा- षती, queen of zee, king on the न्दा ). a. of भोच्रप्रवरनिणय. Earlier than 1700 A. D. ; a. of तिथ्यादिनिणय. qwara a. of सन्यासरत्नावली (2५ cording to म्वमत ). पद्मनाभदुल, son of arayavry, son of श्रीदत्त. Between 1340-1400 A.D., as he composed his gayeaqrexar In 1367 A.D.;a. of आचार खन्त्रिका. quantifier, son of भोपाल, son of नारायण, residing on the banks of the प्रवरा ४८ निवासचुर्‌; a. of प्रतिष्ठावपंण and प्रयोगदर्षण. ( Vide Bhandarkar’s Report 1883-84 १. 355 for both ). पद्मनामाभिश्र 2. of arrgterdty. पन्तोनीदु, son of saturn; a. of THI AS- परमष्ठख, son of सीताराप्र. Later than 1685 ^. D. ; ४. of com. on gga- गणपति. वरमाण्वायै a. of वास्तुप्रजनपद्धति. परमानन्दहामेन्‌ a. of antateleat. परनानन्वु 2. of व्यबहारनिणंय ( on भत्स्याविभक्षणामक्षण ). परमानन्दधनः, pupil of श्िदानन्वमह्चन्द्र- सरस्वती ; a. of vaftegtaf and प्रयोगरत्नाण्ही परमेश्वरपरिवराजक a. of one a com. दोधायनध्मेदज्. on 711 परह्यराम a. of fereeteat 0 सच्या- RTATST. परराम 2. of बपाकवह्भ, वरष्ठराम, son of कर्णं, an उदीच्यत्राह्मणः a. of ब्रहाश्प्रपद्धति composed in 1458 ^: D. परष्यराममिशभ्र. Later than 1685 A. D.; a. of com, on gagtrerait. पराहार, SEC. 35 ; a. Of स्वति. पराकार a. of seafarers. पराहार OF पाराहार 11. as an author on politics in com. on नीति- वाक्यात. पह्यपति, minister of ह्क्ष्मणसेन and son of चनव. About 1766 1200 A. D. 3a. 0 प्रवराध्याय, weary कर्मदीपिका or वराकमेषखति, भाख- पचति and पाकयज्ञपद्धति. पाण्डुरङ्ग, son of ftrearentr, sur- named ze@, 2. of प्रविहासार- दीपिका ( composed in 1780 A. D.) at ववर near Nasik and यज्ुः- शाखामेवतस्वनिष्यय. पाण्डुरङ्ग मेरिभ्वर wg a. of कारुष्यन्द्रिका' पारस्कर a. of were: वाराय m. in the प्रायन्विलमयख, पालि m. as a writer on politics in com. on नीतिवाक्याद्त. frarerg. Sec. 443.2. of a स्वति, ` पीताम्बर son of कार्यपाशा्यं, Bet- ween 1500-1675 A. D.; a. of anrory and eerrararasratr. दीताम्बर 2, of avrareuiwet ( B. 0. mss. cat. vol. I. No. 193 p. 208 ). 713. पीताम्बरसिखान्तवागीक् a. of वाय- Bradt and विवादकोष्ठदी. About 1604 A. D. एरुषोक्तम a. of पुण्याहवाचनप्रयोम, परुषोल्तम a. of पुराणसर्वस्व. एरुषो्तम 2. of उत्सवप्रतान, संबत्सरानिर्णय- प्रतान : एरुषोक्तम a. of संबत्सरोत्सवकालनिणंय (D.C. mss. No. 177 of 1884- 86 15 dated स्वत्‌ 1816 1.९. 1759 A. D.). It deals with उत्सवऽ from भाव्रपद्‌ to sara for the followers of ag~urarf. Based upon त्रजराज'ऽ work. पुरुषोत्तम son of रपाताम्बर. Born सवत्‌ 1724 (1668 a.p.) and died संवत्‌ 17871 (1725 a. D. );3a. of शङ्घचक्रपारणवाव, द्रव्यष्चिदीपिका, संन्यासनिणेयविवरण. He was 7th from the great Vallabha- carya. दरुषोत्तम 2. of ऊध्वं पण्डानेणंय. एुरुषोत्तम 2. of संन्यासनिणैय. पुरुषोत्तम a. of कमसिद्धान्त or कर्म- सिधिसिदान्त (ms. No. 8361 Baroda O. I. ). एरुषोत्तम son of tara; a. of धयोगपारिजात, पुरुषोत्तम a. of THAT. Earlier than 1675 A. D. पुरुषोत्तम prince of गजपति dynasty; ( reputed ) a. of छुक्तिचिन्तामणि. About 1500 A. D. एुरुषोत्तमपाण्डित = 24111 than 1450 A. D.; a. of ataqac- History of Dharmasieira wart 01. cacrartt and महाधरवर भाष्य, एरुषोत्तम विद्यावागीका a. of ध्रयोगरत्न- माला. बरुषोत्तमानन्वसरस्वती pupil of guraeq; a. of aftent, यतिपत्नीधर्मनिरूपण, ` स्मतिसारसंग्रह. एलस्त्य Sec. 4 ; 2. of 2 स्पृति. Tey a. of स्थति ; m. in स्मृतिचन्व्रिका. TET 111. in सस्कारमश्ख. पुष्करसादि m. in अपि. ध. स. 1. 6. 19. 7, 170 I. ro. 28. 1. पृथिवीधराभिश्राचायं m. in gga ( 2. 314 ) by रष्नन्वन. qedtaex, son of arma; a. of आरोचपकाशा (part of wefrer- कलानिधि ). पृथ्वीधर a. of दहाकमैपद्धति. geflagas a. of महाणव. Probably the same as the महाणव attribut- ed to मान्धातु who was a brother of पृथ्वीमल and son of saaare. Qwaa.of eq; m. in निताक्षरा (on याज्ञ. III. 18, a prose pas- sage ), eaftraftxer (on आरौच, Mysore ed. p. 14 ) पेठीनसि Sec. 24, प्रचेतस Sec. 46. प्रजापति Sec. 47. प्रतापसद्रवेब Sec. 100 ; (reputed ) a. of प्रतापमातैण्ड or stewart मातेण्ड, सरस्वतीषिलास and निर्णय wag. His कोहुकाविन्तामाभि.( vide List of Authors on Dharmatisira D. C. ms. No. 981 of 1887-91) is not a work on wearer, but "on erotics and poetic fantasies ` like च्ित्रचन्ध, प्रदोलिका and magi- cian’s tricks &c. परतिहस्त a.-of a पद्धति ; m. in sar- निणेय of वर्धमान. परवीपकार 7. in सरस्वतीविलास p. 361. Vide sec. 80. परथम्नशभेस्‌, son of भीधरहा्मम्‌ ; a. of भाखपकवीष, Earlier than 1525 A.p. धरसोतनमदुाखा्य, son of aga. Latter half of 76४0 century. He wrote शारवाममर or चअन्द्रालोकप्रकार by order of कीरभद्रवेव, a Bundella chief ; a. of sraParersrerer saver a. of काशीतरवीपिका and sraftecsearere and गयापद्ति- aftftrer.’ परमाकर दैवज्ञ a. of वाक्युष्पमाला 2 com. on the भोच्ननिर्भय of केङाव- दैवज्ष. प्रभाकर Earlier than 1600 A. D.; a. of चर्नसार. परमाकरमदु 2, of धमाकराहविक- meray a. of नवरत्नमाला. प्रेमनिषि a. of नेमित्तिकभय।१९८१।क९. Talay Swe son of हन्त्रषति, son of सुखिचति.- A efwafe lived under Aew’s 16180 in fafwer; a. of werasoratfvdt (completed in 1410, of whatera is rather doubtful; probably संवत्‌). Vide under चमोषमधबोधिनी छ, 8, 90. ¶13 Satay पन्य ८ or पन्त ), son of उमा- पति, of the भारद्वाजगोनत्र ; 2. of चत- वानपद्धति, छतप्वानरत्न, TAT, प्रायभ्िवत्तप्रदीप ( composed in शक्ते 1675 ), शाब्दार्थचिन्तामणि com. on शारवातिलक, षथ्वीप्रेमोवय ( D. C. ms. No. 126 of 1884-86 says it was composed in डाके 1659 ). Taft a. of प्रयोगरत्नसस्कार. फकीरचन्द्र 2. of धमं रा[सनिबन्ध. afisa vide under विय or षद्धिय, 7H 2. of wala. बलदेव a. of बलवेबाह्िक बलभद्र 2. of नित्याुष्ठानपदखति. अलभत्र m. in हुचिकोष्ठदी (2. 33) of गोषिन्वानन्द्‌ and in ज्योतिस्तस्व pp. 690 and 686 (where we have छत्याचेन्तामणो बलभत्रः ). Farlier than 1500 aA. ०. He is _ probably the same as the author of आज्ञोचसार. बलभव्र 2. Of आहोचसार. awag a. of aris. बलमद्‌ a. of भहारुद्रपदति, महारुद्रन्यास- बलमद्रतकंवागीकामडाच्ार्य a. of दायभाग- _ सिखान्त. वलभब्रह्म्क, son of स्थाषर of the बत्स- arq- He came from स्तम्मतीर्थं (modern Cambay ); a. of gug- awmgty (composed in 1623 A.D.) and com, composed in विक्रम 1699 i.e. 1643 A. ०. (vide 0. C. mss. No. 204 of 1884-87 ) and. of चातुमौस्यकोष्ठवी 714 wearer 2. of कुण्डाकंमणिवीपिका. बल्वाकसेन Sec. 83 ; a. of aggrann, WIA, वानसाभर and witet- सागर, बसप्पनायक a. of शिवतस्वरत्नाकर. बसवोपाध्याय vide under निरि अआणेभ्वर ( and others ) ; a. of विषा- बार्णवसेतु (compiled in 1773 A. D. ). बावरायण 2, of wei ( m. in प्रायि . भयख ) and as a writer on politics in the com. on the नीतिवाकयासूत. बादरायण 2. of apadifirer. बापुभदु a. of सूल्याध्याय ` or भूल्यसंग्रह (N. vol. X. p. 238). Mentions गोपालभाष्य. बाप्रभद alias अनन्तम ; a. of प्रतिष्ठा- पदति. बापूमदु, son of महाविष, surnamed केलकर (modern Kelakara ); ४. उत्सजेनोषाकमेप्रयोग, परायश्वि्तमशरी ( composed in 1814 ^. 9. ) and भचमजरी (composed in 1810 A. D. ). Vide N. vol. IX p. 302 for the first. बाप्रमहु, son of marge, surnamed weer of the चित्तपावन caste ; 2, of sarerarét ( composed in शते- qrergure i. ©. Sake 1640 ) at सर्दिकषे्न on southern bank of the river कृष्णा. Vide N. vol >. pp. 217-219. Therefore either this date is wrong or there were two wyag Seer, whose father’s name also was the same. छत्यमलरी further says —— History of Diarmatisira that atqwg was originally. an inhabitant of qorefrara (inthe Ratnagiri District ). Baroda O. I. No. 8442 gives the date as खवेदुस्वरशूशाङे (i. €, 1740) and seems to be the correct date. This would show that he is the same as the above. In the छत्यममशरी he refers to भाच matt as his work. वाप्यणमटू or बोष्यणमदु 2.0 स्मातभरयोग and of ोष्णमदगीय, आतकमं ( भाष स्सम्बीय ). वावदेवमदु, surnamed आदह (modern Athlye ). About 1740 A.D. ; >" of परभूभ्रकरण. बाबा alias काक्षीनाथ are. Sec. 112. Vide under egreftara qret above. areata, surnamed जे ; a. of guerusriete or- सिद्धि. बाबादेय a. of gresrerqrrrerte. बालक, Sec. 67. ब्ालङष्ण a. of हेोन्नकिधान, BTSs, 2 दाक्षिणात्य residing in मोकुरग्राम ; 2. 0 प्रयोगसार, जालष्ष्ण a. of पुनर्बिवाहमीर्मासा, बालकृष्ण a. of बाहबषा com. on araamrate of नन्वुपण्डित, बालकृष्ण, son of देषमद्र, surnamed फटनिटकर ; a. of qerftraqreererert बालकृष्ण 2. of etrereerranary. areser, son of were; ४. of aH सेभ्ाप्रयोग, बालकृष्ण च्रिपाडिव्‌, son of काकषीराम, of the srarey family ; a. of शुन मजरी (on प्रायन्ति) `` Liat of Authore on Dharmatiistra बाकछन्नदीकषित a. of निणया्णद. वालङ्ष्णमहु, son of apfirag ; 2. of जीषविितृककतंब्यनिणेय, Earlier than 1725 A.D. eres भारद्वाज a. of तिधिनिणैय. wredifrn 2. of उपाकर्मघ्रमाण. wravag 2. of गोचनिणय. wrarag, son of विन्बनायमदटु, sur- named दातार ; a. of आद्धिकसार- नखरी. wrerag 07 वाकृष्ण, son of Quarta, surnamed qragug. Sec. 117 ; 8, उपारृतितस्व, बालम्भदरी (com. on ftrrrarer of विज्ञानेश्वर ), धर्महान्ञ- संग्रह, जीवतिपितृककर्तव्यनिणय. wree. Sec. 68. reuters कागलक्र, son of grag, son of नारायण ; a. of प्रायश्चित्त प्रयोग Or सर्व॑प्राय ०. बालवार, son of trrag ; a. of कुण्ड- werarein. qr@ait 2. of हेमाद्रिसर्वप्रायभ्रितत. बालाग्निहोजिन्‌ 2. of व्राह्यायणगह्यसत्र- कारिका. बाष्कल m, by मिताक्षरा ( on यज्ञ. III. 58 ) 270 in धर्मप्रवीष of भोज. gan 2. of Rrirafreg. दुखिकरद्यह्न 2. of दिविधजकादायोत्सगे धमाणदहहन ( B. 0. mss. cat, vol. I, No. 222 p. 235 ). gw. Sec. 25; m. by कालविवेक of जीदतबाहन. > WU wy. 715 m. in निताक्षरा ( On याज्ञ, Ill. 296). ष्मः बृहत्कात्यायन 11. by व्यवहारमातृका of जीबतवाहन. रमय muererare. Vide sec. 35, pp. 195- 196 above. बृहत्मचेतम 71. in मिताक्षरा, by ern 00 गो. ध, सरु. 22. 18, अषपरा्कं (pp. 910, 1125, पा ) भाद aya. बृहत्संवत m. in मिता० ( on याज्ञ. 111. 256, 265 ) and in प्रायश्रित्मयख. बृहवद्गिरम्‌ 111. in the मिताक्षरा (on arg. 11. 277). बहवाश्वलायन, बृहदगगे m. in स्दृतिचन्त्रिक।* Tera. बृहयम m. 7" ब्राह्मणस्वस्य of हलायुध, by हरदत्त on मो. घ. चू. 23. 12, अप- शक॑ 7. 1074, भिता० (on याज्ञ. Ill. 255 ). m. in ftw (on याज्ञ. 111. 290 ), कालमाधव (p.140). बृहदोग्कोक m. by sraftae of जीमतबा्हेन. बृहसारीत m. in भिता. (on arg. 11. 254, 261 ). बृहन्ञारद m. by egaeqa,in निणयसिन्पु. बृहन्मह m. by मिताक्षरा ( on arg. Ill 20), erates of जीबतवाहल, सखारमयख, शान्तिमपूख. 716 कृदद्रसिष्ठ m. in मिताक्षरा, erefires (2. 386 ) of जीमूतवाहन, आथार- म्ल, कालमाधवब (2. 114 ). बृहविष्य m. in मिताक्षरा (on याज्ञ. I 135 and III. 20 ), सरस्वतीविलास, भायश्ि्षमय्ख, A pp. 909, 1070, 1243. qeaeara 170. in मिताक्षरा (on याज्ञ, Ill. 290), प्रायश्ित्तमरूख. बृहस्पति a. of अ्रहप्रूजापद्धति composed at the bidding of king हरिसिंह. (8. O. Mss: cat. vol, I, p, rrr ), हृ्स्यति a, of agdtenea. wueaie Sec. 26, 37. बृहस्पति son of wage ; 2. of मलमास- रहस्य composed in 1681 A.D. and ब्रहमासनिणय ( probably the same as the preceding ). बेजबाप 2. ofa garayz; m. in the तन्ञवार्तिक of कुमारिकभदु. वेजवापं 171. in अपरा pp. 27, 51, 229, 533, हारलता, eaferarearer. बोपदेव - vide under वोपदेव; a. of आचारदर्पंण ; 71. in grease: artariter 2. of भाद्धकाण्डदीपिका . Or भराखदीपकलिका (com. on परहरा- मप्रताप ), of गोच्रपवरनिणय com. on तच्वकोस्तुम, चतर्विदातिमत, चतुर्वश- श्लोकी. 9 बोधायन a. of शृद्यसूत्र and of a धर्मस; sec.6; a. of a wif; a. of नागप्रतिष्ठा ; a. of नक्षत्रश्ान्ति. aera 2. 0 स्वति ; 7. by मिताक्षरा ( on ary. III, 262, 268), अप- ae ( PP. 447, 536, 880 ), स्वृति- चन्द्रिका. . Eistory of Dharmatastra weran. Earlier than 1100 A. D.; a. of भाष्य on शाङ्घकायनग््य ; m, by रघुनन्दन in शुद्धितस्व ( p. 312) as referred to by कल्पतरु. बह्मवियार्तीर्थं a. of शृह्यप्रयोग. अह्माण्डानन्वनाथ 2. of aftercare. बरह्मानन्दनाथ 2. of किबोाखैनशिरोमाणि. ब्रह्मानन्द भारती, pupil of शमराजसर- स्वती; between 1420-1554 A. ०. ; a. of पुरुषार्थपबोध. | ब्ह्मानन्दिन्‌ a. of सभ्थासपद्धति. Mate, son of मोक्षेश्वर ; a. of परश्च ज्ञानदोषप्रच्छापरकरण. ब्ाह्मणवबल, son of araareagy ; a. of COM. ON काटकण्ह्यसञ- ब्राह्मवध m. in Pare ( on याज्ञ. IIL. 257 ). मजीमड a. of tari ( कालनिणव, Stein’s cat. p. 110 ). भदुखर a. of मपूरचिज्रक. मद्ुस्वाभिन्‌ a. of com. प्रतिपदपश्चिका on कौटिीय. wgrara. Earlier than 1520 A. D. ; ms. No. 3883 ( Baroda O. I. ) is dated सवत्‌ 1579 (1422 A. D.); a,of com. on frereggret and com. on आहौच्संग्रह or हौय- सग्रहविषति (same as the prece- ding work ). महारिभद् 2. of com. on eiftreqe- aa: महरोजिदी क्षित, son of gaftae and brother of रङ्गोजिदीकषित. About 1§75-1650A.D.; a. Of आचारप्रदीप, of com. on freregret, ,आषौख- निणय, आह्निकः; काङनिणैय ( afer )? List of Authors on Dharmasistra तिथिनिणय or तिथिनिणयस्ेप, तिथि- प्रदीपक,जिस्थलीसेतुसारसग्रह,01 com. on दशश्लोकी, of ध्मशाखरसवैस्व, प्रायभ्रिलाधिनिणय, मासनिणय, सर्घ- NATE, TANT, सापिण्ड्यनिणयः सूतकनिणय. हेमाप्रिकालनिणयसक्षेष भरत, son of adare and brother of रामष्वल्द्र ; ४. of com. on समरसार by his brother रामचन्त्र. भरत ( reputed ) a. of eafrars. भरद्वाज, Sec. 27; ४. of शह्यस्र and of a work on politics. भरव्राज 2. of fratrray. भर्तुयज्ञ. Sec. 59 ; a. of भ्राद्धकल्प and of com. 01 पारस्करग्ृह्य, ` wg 17. in निणयवीपक. wage styled बालवकमभीभजङ्ग, which may (apart from what is said on p. 305 above ) also mean a young gallant of क्रालबलभी (pos- sibly the village where wade lived). Sec. 73; a. of eat- दष्ठानपद्धति or वशकमेपदति, TT तिलक (part of व्यवहारतिलक ), TITITMACIT, घ्यवहारतिलक, सम्ब- न्धषिवेक. भववेवभवु, son of छृष्णदेवसन्मिश्र मेयिल. Earlier than 1635 ^. D. ; ४. of हानधमे्रक्षिया or वानपरक्रिया ( composed at bidding of श्र कासथधिन्‌, son of araraz). b, O. mss, cat, vol, I No. 189 p. 203. भवदेवशर्मम्‌ न्यायालङ्कार, son of हरिर; a. of श्घुतिचन्प्र ( composed in .. 1720-22 ^, D. ), its parts. being called कला such as भाखकला, १११ भवनाथ a. of com. on sree farqregret. ( B.O. mss. cat. vol. 1. No. 175 p. 186). This is probably a misreading for ways qr¢. Baroda O. I. ms. No. 765 by warare has the same opening verses and opening words. भवहारमन्‌ of the atqreaer. First half of 14th century; a. of qteq- महादानपदति (written at the bidding of wea, minister of king afte of भिधिला of the काणीटवंश्च ). 1. 0. cat. p. 549. It is probably he who is re ferred to in the gafterara as गणेभ्वर ऽ contemporary. भवानन्वशा्मन्‌ 2. of प्रायश्रित्तवारिधि- मवानीप्रसाव्‌ a. of पूजनमालिका. भवानी शाङ्कर 2. of स्छतिचरण. भागुणिमिभ a. of जलाशयप्रतिष्ठा and प्रासादप्रतिष्ठा. भागुरि 71. in कालविषेक (2. 14) of जीमूतवाहन and बि. x. ( 2. ` 104), where he appears to be regard- ed as earlier than eseqae and even म्रेघातिथि, atgaeanitr ४. of com. on बसन्त राजीय 07 हाठुनाणैव. Between 75९01600 A. D. भाडुजिवीक्षित,' son of wahfiatferr. About 1650 A.D.; ४. Of कान- frre. argae a. of हूतंसार. argaw 2. of पारिजात (Bi 0, mss. cat. vol. I, No. 257 p. 278 ). 718 wryara tas, son of चन्दुनानन्दु, of the waaaer. He was a afae a. of बयबहाररतन (astrology in rela- tion to religious rites, founda- tion of houses &c. ). N. vol V. p. 191 argag, son of नीलकण्ठभद्रु, son of शङ्करभद्रु. 1620-1680 ५.०. ; a. of एकषल्लस्नानविधि, दैतनिणयसिखान्त- संग्रह and होसनिणय. मारतीतीर्यं a. of वरतकालनिर्णय. भारद्वाज. Sec. 27 ; a. of गृह्यसुञ्च, of a work on aderre: and of a स्मृति _ Cin verse on व्यवहार ). Possibly these are the compositions of three different authors. भाराधि. Sec. 61. wire m. in स्पृतिष्वन्द्रिका and भराच- मदूख andin the com. of नीति- वाक्यासूत. In some cases भागेष probably stands for gyg’s work on politics. मागैवराम a. of वणैसङ्करजातिमाला 07 . परराहारपद्धति. मादक () मह om. in हखिचन््रिका (?. 31 ) of नन्व्षण्डित. भावधन m. in काठविषेक of जीमूत- वाहन. भास्करे a. of com. on गोजप्रषर. भास्कर of the लोगाकषिगोश्च ; 2. of ' आातुगोनिणेय, तिथ्यादितश्वनिणीय. Later than 1400 and carlier than 1680 A. D भास्कर a. of प्रायन्रित्तदीपिका, पाय श्िसिधि, प्रवीपिका, प्रापान्नित्तसष्ठथ्यय प्रायश्िल्षहतह्वी 0 | History of Dharmatiteira wrest a. of चहूतेष्क्तावली मास्कर, son of आपाजि or आयानिभटु, son of yftag of कार्यपगोच ; a of sirarererer, छक्तिक्षे्रपकाशा, wRaserer ( composed in 1695- 96 ^. D.), यहावन्तभास्कर ( under the patronage of यहाषन्तदेव, king of Bundelkhand ), eafesperer, aacatecameter ( part of यदहाषन्त- भास्कर ). भास्करदीक्षित a. of amarante. भास्करदीक्षित, pupil of राधवेन्द्रारण्य ; २. 2 पारस्करयह्यपञचति and com. ON वारस्करग्ह्य. मास्करदीक्षित, son of रामृष्ण } 2. of SATA ( शाङ्कायनीय ). मास्करमदु पण्डित 2. of धुत्तसिखान्त- मरी भास्करामिभ चिकाण्डमण्डन,50 of gat रवाभिन्‌. Between 1000-1 200 A.D.; a. of आपस्तम्बस्ध्वनितार्थकारिका _and व्रवरनिणय. भास्करराम son of भम्भीररामदीक्षित ; a of aeeratnaraearear. भास्वत्कविरत्न 2. of सरोजकलिका. ` मीमनाथ 71. by रष्ुनन्वुन in gr \erer. मीममहामहोपाध्याय of enwagiage (in राढा); a. of girgmract, भद्धदीपिका. मीमसेनकवि a. of ewer. भीमाहाङ्करशमेन्‌ 2. of सन्यासग्रहणरत्न- RIT. | ञुजबलभीत said to be a. of अतीष्वाद- निर्णय. List of Authors on Dharmatisira इूपातिभिभ 2. of तिथिनि्णय. Mentions Rare and भोज. ( 8. 0. mss. cat. vol. I. No 157 p. 171). शूपाल or राजा refers to भोजदेष. Vide under wr; 70. in समयप्रदीषं of भीदक्ष, वानरत्नाकर, छत्यरत्नाकर (as a. of छत्यसष्ठश्चय ). घुबनेभ्वर son of भीमानन्द्‌ ; a. of हरि- भाकभास्कर. About 1827 A. 9. ware son of frerrentg ; 2. of गृह्य कारिका ( सामेदीय ). शूषण m. in आह्िकतश्व ( 0. 417 ) ककणमदु a. of गायत्रीपद्धति, way sometimes treated as the pro- mulgator of ageefa. In many works verses are quoted as ya's which are not found in the wgeate ; (reputed ) a. of कमै- विपाक. qoge a. of प्रवराध्याय. भेयाभद्र, son of agresag ; a.of wi- vey ; ms. No, 12524 (Baroda 0. 1.) is arrfiereftfinfe from it. भैरवमद् 2. of संहिताहोमपदति. भैरवे (reputed ) a. of महादाननिर्णय or महादानप्रयोगपखति (the real author being वाचस्पतिमिभ) and of feargurecteat (vide 8. O. mss, cat. vol, I. No. 340 p. 383). About 1440-1460 A. D. भोज a. of विविधविथाबिखारखतुरा ( ms. dated 1490 A. D. ) | भोजवेष Sec. ८4 ; a. of दूपाटण्वति, भूपाछसदश्चय or भूपाललत्यसष्ठच्चयः कुजबलमीम, areaat, युङिकल्पतरु, (1. राजनीति, शाजमात॑ष्ड, किवत प्रकाशिका. area son of arte, king of कच्छ. Between 1400-1600 A. ०. ; 4, of धमैप्रदीष. Vide p. 279 above. मोलानाथ a. of वैष्णवासृत, मसनाचायं 2. of spaeraqgaatr- दीपिका मश्वरवास a. of धर्मपरीक्षा, मणिराम 2.0 अन्त्यक्रियाषिधि, Probably the same as the author of अद्ष- विलास. मणिराम a. of धम॑सिन्ड 01- सिश्ुसार. Probably same as author of धन्नौम्भोधि above. मणिराम दीक्षित, son of syrera, son of ftrazw. About 1630-1660 A.D.; a. of अनूपविलास or घन्रौम्भोधि, arava (४ part of अच्ष- विलास), gfe, and समयरत्न, हखबोधिनी com. on मानवधर्मशास ( Stein’s cat. pp. 98, 313 ). मणिराम दीक्षित 2. of छतिवत्सर. मणिरामदीक्षित a. of छुण्डनिमाणश्लोक- कीपिका, Later than 1640 A. D. मणिरामवीशित a. of srararansrayr. मणेभश्वर a. of com. on कायभाभ. मथुरानाथ खक्रवरतित्‌ 2. of छ्यिरत्नाङ्कर. मथुरानायतकैवामीश भदा a. of पाणि- ग्रहणादिरूत्यविषेक agreed 2. of अधपश्चविवेखन saree, आचारमशरी, sara srarigra, आह्ोचनिर्णयदरीका, कालमाधषवचल्रिक्ा (com, on. ere- माधव ), छत्यसार, क्रियाकोहठदी, तिथि- १90 frie, विष्यतस्वहुरटा का, दर्गाथैना- WS, मलमासतश्वटीका, निताक्षरा (com. on याज्ञवल्क्यस्सृति ), युच- » शारदातिलकपरकाश (com. on हारवातिलक ) मद्ठरानाथशमेन्‌ 2. of छ्िदीपिकादति. मद्वरानायष्शमेन्‌ 2. 0 छन्योगाक्ञिक Written to please prince माधव fee (8. O. ms. cat. vol. p. 126 ). भद्रश्च 2. of ज्योतिःसागरसार. मदनपाल Sec. 9३ ; (reputed) a. of मदनपारिजात, स्षृतिकोददी ( 01 धव्रघंवोधिनी ), महाणवकर्मविपाकं तिथिनिभयसार - मदनमनोहर 0 परवनमोहन, son of मचवन पण्डितराज, son of werax. Both 0417165 occur in mss. ( vide B. 0. mss. cat. vol. 1 No. 252 p. 274 and No. 253p. 275 ) ; a. of पलपी- area and sramdty. One ms. of पलपीदूषलता 15 dated शके 1694 (B. O. mss. cat. No. 253 A p. 275 ) मद्नसिंह, son of शाक्तिर्सिंह. Sec. 94 ; ` (reputed) a. of मदुनरत्न alias मदनरलपदीप, the several parts of which such as आचारवियेक are separately entered in the catalogues. ayTtrawe a. of strafafy (com- posed at the bidding of his mother’s sister's son geqara and based on strager and f&y- afterfyett ). Later than 1600 ` A. D. Ristory of Dharmatistra ngfirer or महकामीमिभ m. in चतुरवमे चिन्तामणि (III. 7. 1134 and 1343). ayaa 2. of नीतिसारसंग्रह. ayaaa 2. of भद्धवुषणे. ` अद्रदवनगोस्वामी, son of व्रजराज ; 2 of गोदानषिधिसग्रह, जीषत्पितृकबि- भागत्यवस्या 200 व्यवस्थासारसग्रह and तडागादिप्रतिष्ठाविषि, निणय- सग्रह, मिताक्षारसार्‌ (com. on मिताक्षरा ), ग्यवष्ारसारोद्धार 07 त्य वहारार्थसार. Ulwar cat. extract No. 306 gives for जीषविितृकसग्रह the date सवत्‌ 1812. मधसदन गोस्वामी a. of न्यासपद्धति. भ्टसदनगोस्वामी 2. of पश्चकशान्तषिधि, मलशान्तिषिधि. yaaa दीक्षित, son of meray; a. of स्यतिरत्नाषली. मद्टसवनमिभ a. 0 छहूत॑सिन्छ- मधत्दननिभ्र टक्कर. Later than 1500 A. D. andearlier than 1624 A.D.; a. of व्रैतनिणयप्रकाडा or वैतनिणिय- ज्ीणौद्धार and जीर्णोद्धार com. on समयपदीप of after. मद्ठसवनवाचस्पति भार्यं a. of अशोग्व- wae मधुन बाचस्यति of the ag family ; 2. of आह्ञोचसंकषेष ayaga बाचस्पति a. of दर्गाचौकाल- Read, भाद्धकालनिखपण, वतकाल- निष्कर्षं मधुखवनसशस्वती ४. Of मगबद्धाक्तिरसायन अद्शदनानन्व्‌ a. of यतिक्षौरविधि मध्यमाङ्किशस्‌ 11. by मिताक्षरा (01 याज्ञ IIL, 243, 247, 257, 260 ) List of Authors on Dharmatisira मध्व vide under आनन्दतीर्थ. sg Vide sec, 31. भनोहरभटु son of महादेव ; a. of आधिक प्रयोग ( हिरण्यकेकीय ). भय a. of वास्तुशाल्ञ. मयाराम्मिभ गोड. First half of 18th century; a. of araatetute ( under orders of wa@z), eva- हारसार, भिताक्षरासार, व्यवहाराङ्ग- मरीचि Sec. 48. मह्वारिदीक्षित भोनिन्‌ a. of मासिकथाच- मानोपन्यास. भस्कारेस 2. Of भाष्य on गोतमधर्मसज. महादेव a. of सन्तानदीपिका. अहेव, son of मतिनाथ and nephew and pupil of गोविन्द्‌ ; 2. of पितु- wrarqat com. on पितुभाक्ते of भी- qq. । महादेव 2. of तिथिरत्न. महादेवः, son of श्रीपति ; 2. of नियन्ध- wader ( 3rd chap. of which is on प्रायञ्ित्त ). । महादेव, son of विभ्वना, of the अगस्त्यमोच्न ; 2. of आक्तोष्यततत्व. महदिव a, of छबोधिनी. महादेव 2, Of धर्मतर्वसंग्रह. smite few 2. of गोश्ननिर्णय and तिथि- निर्णय महादेष द्विेविन्‌ a. of com, on स्नानसत्र or जिकण्डिकायज्न of कात्यायन. महादेव a. of सुर्यच्यवानपयति महदेव शाजङ, son of काह्नजिद्राडव, who was the guru of हेवतराज ४, 9, 9४. 21 (Haibatrao, some Maratha chief); a. of कुष्डप्रदीष and com. thereon, (composed in 1661 A. D.) and com. thereon, and of agar. महदेवयित, son of कालाजित्‌ (which is probably a misreading for काहल faa); a. of कालानिणयसिद्ान्त (composed in 1652-53 A.D.) and com. thereon. He was ho- noured by the chief of Girnar and composed the'com. at @at- चुर. From these details it appears that he is the same as the next. महविव सोमयानिन्‌ Earlier than 1650 A.D.3; a. of com. on facow@frger and of a com. on हिरण्यकेशिधमेसनत्र, Vide pp. 49- 50 above and BBRAS, cat, vol. II. p. 189. महानन्द; son of feqara; a. of वासिष्ठीशान्ति. Bik. cat. p. 490 shows that he only ‘ revised ’ or ‘restored’ the शासिका ( aout दूषिता हान्तिवोसिष्ठी सा परोधिता )- महायक्षस्‌ a. of भाष्य on गोभिलीष- भाखकल्प ; 71. 10 भाखतस्व ( vol. I. p. 213 ) by शछनन्बन. 10. in आखसामर of SUS and in हेमाद्रि ( TL. ६. 1440). महार्णवोषध्याय Mm. in भाखसामर छ . Probably same as the preceding. महारामन्‌ a. Of अन्वारपश्चाश्िका. महीपर 2. of अद्धुतविवेक, 122 ster 2. 0{अतीलारनिर्णय. | महे, son of सारस्वत gt; a.of आचार- व्ल्दरोवय OF भाधवप्रकाश. महेशा a. of व्यवस्थासारसग्रह OF व्यवस्था- wag and स्शतिसार weer, son महदेव, surnamed वैशम्पायन ; a. 0 प्रयोगरत्न or स्मार्त TATTLE eset 2. of तिथितत्वचिन्तामाभि (ए, O. mss. cat. vol. I. No. 149 p. 153). मेशाटक्कर महामहोपाध्याय a. of दाय- सार ( 8. O. mss. cat. vol. I. No. 206 p. 221) and श्द्धितस्व ( ibid. No. 372 p. 423). Later than 1500 A. D. | मदेशटक्कर महामहोपाध्याय a. of हरिभाक- कीषिका (ms. in ए. 0. mss. cat. vol. I. p. 532 No. 451 is dated छ. स, $46 i. €. 1665-1666 A.D.). Probably the same as above. महेशापश्चानन 2. of स्सृतिसंगरहसार. महेहाभदु, surnamed हँ ; 2. of अन्त्ये- शिपद्ति and प्रतिष्ठापद्धति. Aba, son of मनोरथ ; a. of Taare. About 1100-1150 A. p. meray Later than 1550 A.D.3 a. of com. on वायभाग. भहेन्बर a. of com. on waderadret ( of watftr ? ). Baroda O. I. ms. , No. 1488 He mentions आचार- श्ल. So later than 1650:A. p. wesaqt simply says that some noble soul composed these 14 verses, History of Dharmasisite महेम्वर 2. of हचिकोषठदी. महेश्वरमिशभ a. of भाद्ादकषी. माभ्रिवेष a. of भदठोत्सम माणिक्यवेष a. of छचिषचोष्ठक्तायण्छक Rosey m. in क्ालािषेक of जीदत- atea. Probably an astronomer. माण्डटय a. of work in 12 अध्यायंऽ on the Ganges (vide Tri. cat. Madras Govt. mss. 1919-22 p. 5161 ). मातृदत्त 2. of com. on feroreferazer- aa. माधव, son of खातर and pupil of भोपाल ¦ 2. 0 दिव्यदीपिका (B. O mss, cat. vol. I p. 225 No. 208 and No. 209 p. 226, which is dated ठक्ष्मणसवत्‌ 508). Men- tions firaraver and रत्नाकर. Be- tween 1350-1600 A. D. माधव a. of ुरगाभक्तितरक्रिणी माधव. Later than 1500 A.D. ; ४. of धर्मप्रकाश, माधव a. of graqafe. Later than 1500 A. ०. माधव, son of छष्णाच्यायं of ara गोच 33a. of ब्रहमखविष्टक of which होमष्यति is a part. माधव a. of com. on शारदातिलक. माघव 2. of माधवीक्ान्ति. माधवपण्डित a. of वसाव माधवपाटठक a. of grsarore fret. भाधवमदु, son of रमेश्वर About 1520-1570 A. D. 3a. Of strait निणेय, quitdqrrra it: Liet of Authore on Dharmatistra माधवमहु 3. of com. on gadain | माधष wETeerareara, son of feegr- ere ; 2. Of दानधदीष. भाधबष्ठनि a. of com. बोपण्णभद्रीय, भाधवयज्वन्‌ a. of com. नय्वनिका 00 अ्थंशान्ञ, भाधवहामंन्‌, son of शुनाथ, of the gray family ; 2. of aggaqtu. Later than 1200 A. D. माधषहाह्क, son of ges, son of sqra- नारायण, an ब्राह्मण of कादयपमेोध्र ; २. of कुण्डकल्पत्रम (composed in 1656 A. ०. ) and com. thereon. माघवस्वानिम्‌ m. in the गृहस्थरत्नाकर of खण्डेभ्वर as explaining a am of ergftfen. माधवाय 2. of geaamiry or "माहात्म्य, माधवाश्वार्य, son of मायण and सुकीर्ति. Sec. 92; several works are attributed to him, but their authenticity is doubtful ; a. of ` पराशारमाधवीय and कालनिणय, वत्त- कमीमांसा, गोच्रधवरनिणय, पुरुषाथं- उधानिधि, हूर्तेमाधवीय, eaters, ब्रात्यस्तामपद्धति- arava ( अभिनव ) ; 2, of गोश्रप्रधर- निणय, अभिनवमाधवीय. माधवाय 2. of सरवगेवपतिष्ठापरयोग. arqarard a. of कर्मविपाक लान्सह a. of आष्वारविषेक and ara- arartrrarie. 723 मनिन्वरशर्भेन्‌ 2. of वर्षत्यप्रयोगमतमाला or प्रयोगमाह ; ms. dated 1477 A.D. ( छ. सं. 358 ). भान्धातु, son of मदनपाल ;( reputed in some mss. 25 ) a. of महा्णव- कर्मविपाक. माकंण्डेय m. in मिताक्षरा (0 याज्ञ. Ill. 9). मातैण्डमिभ् a. of प्रायभ्ित्तमातण्ड. Earlier than 1620 A. D. मार्वण्डसोमयाजिन्‌ 2. of सस्कारमातैण्ड. मालजी 21125 बेदाङ्गराय ; 2. of wer- रद्रययति. About 1627-1655 A. D. Rraftrsr, son of परह्यराभमिध, son of हंसपण्डित. Sec. 108; a. of कीर- मिन्नोदय (com. on याज्ञवल्क्य ) and बीरमिग्रोद्य ( a digest ). ferftraft 7) fart छलि 2. of प्रयोगष्ठक्ता- घलि. Later than 1650 A. 9. विसरुमिभ 3. of frargerex ( compos- ed by order of afeartat, wife of prince qvafirg of मिथिला). Sec. 97. wera, son of माधवाचार्य ew; a. of serrere 2. of dhtererét, पणवा्न- ` चन्द्रिका, भायश्चि्करतूहल, प्रायश्चित्त fast, मावेण्डाचैनच्वम्द्रिका, of com. on मिताक्षरा, समयपकाशः, भाद भरी; श्सृतिसार, स्स॒त्यर्थसार. छङ्ृन्वलाल 2. of eager. . छवाकरखरि a. of छत्यरत्नाकर, Earlier than 1700 A. ०. as it is men- tioned in रामनिबन्ध of क्षिव्राम 124 wee, son of Preantry; 2. of weterrer 751 work (in which प्रयोगपारिनात is mentioned ), of बरदकारिकाऽ, of a स्मृति, of गभांपानाषोढकशकमे- प्ति, ans, पु्रपरतिग्रहपरयोभ, प्रणवकल्प, मूलनक्षश्रहान्तिप्रयोग, स- न्यासग्रहणपसखति. शोरिदत्त, son of रामभद्र; a. of षाग्बही- तीथेयात्राप्रकाहा. खयामद्धन्दर, Son of spray; a. of वेष- प्रतिष्ठाप्रयोग, समावतैनघयोग. ` इयाम्रखन्दरभद्ाखाय 2.0 आशोखदीपिका. भरीकण्ठ a. of हूरत्ठक्ताषली. भ्रीकण्ड Earlier than 1150 A. ०. ; प. in स्वत्य्थसार of भीधर, stog’s भाख- विधि and by रघुनन्दन. sfreug a. of परयोगमसरीसहिता, sfteosatd, pupil of महदेवर्तीधं sa. of भिक्त. भ्रीकण्ठशर्मन्‌ 2. of grata. भ्रीकण्ठायन a. of चातुराभम्यधम. sfrez Sec. 62. श्रीकराचार्य, father of श्रीनाय आचार्य ूडामणि. About 1475-1500 A.D.; ४. of दायनिर्णय, विवादनिर्णय ( of which कायनिणय seems to be part ). Seems to have been connected with srafyredrer also. sftesn a. of com. on आद्धविकेक of शूलपाणि. ` भ्रीषष्ण a. of रखतिसार- भरीषटष्ण तकरालङ्कार a. of कायक्रमसंग्रह, and of com. on हायमाम. About the middle of the 18th century. 642 sftecoragrary, son of नारायणवन्श- घटीय ¦ 2. of सबत्सरप्रयोगसार, sfrsenfraranfrer a. शान्तिकल्प- प्रदीप or कत्यापह्वववीपिका. ` sftrt a. of ganasrarr. Earlier than 1540 A. D, sitan Sec. 89. Between 1275-1310 ^. 0. ; a. of आचखारादहौ, छन्वोगा- fs, पितृभाक (for students of aeeg), छाङैनिणैय, भादखधकल्प ( for students of सामवेद ), समयप्रदीप, mare. Vide N. vol. Ill p. 34 and vol, II p. 363 for wraee and N. vol. V p. 250 for पितु- art. Aufrecht (I p. 668) is wrong in regarding पितुभाक्ति as another name of श्राद्धकल्य ; vide Ulwar cat. extract No. 351 for AAATT. vita, son of नागेष्वरभिश्र, Before 1418 ^. D. 3a. Of veniarrate, एरश्चरणपद्धति, ( 711. 10 the एकाच्चि- arava), आवसथ्याधानपति (pro- bably of this author and not of the preceding ). देष a. of eaftervasrerer. भ्ीषर, son of anmag विष्छभटु, of feoantrartry. Sec. 81. 5a. of eqandare and भीधरीय, आधर 2. of आक्तो्द्शाकदीका. आधर a. of काटषिधान. भीधर a. of कालिधानपसखति. Pro- bably the same as above. sfraz son of areara, son of डौल who was sole minister of the king | vi का रक of Delhi. About 1500 A. D.; a. of जटमहविास. ` आधर, son of. पभाकरनायक ; a. of नित्यकमपद्ति.. He was a fol- lower of the माध्यन्व्िनि te- cension of छ्युह्कयज्ञुषेद्‌ and based his work on कात्यायन; mentions रत्नकरण्डिका. Ms. No. 603 (Ba- roda 0. 1.) is dated सवत्‌ 1547 भाद्रपवं ( 1490 A. 2. }. ` He wrote also भाष्य on विनायकहान्तिषखुवि, Vide Ms. No. 5491 ( Baroda O. I.). He mentions विज्ञानेश्वर therein. The ms. was copied in संवत्‌ 1607 ara we १३ (1551 ^. 9.}. D.C. Ms. No. 119 of 1884-86 of the नित्यकर्मपदति is dated संवद्‌ 1434 चैज ष १४ afr वासर (1. ९. 1378 ^. ०). भधर a. of विभ्वामिव्रसहिता. श्रीधर a. of भ्रष्टवेष्णवखण्डन. भरीधर, son of रामे az and younger brother of anrqoag. About 1§20-1590 A. D. ; a. of सापिण्डच्च- दीपिका or सापिण्डश्चनिर्णय. भ्रीधर (आधरिहोभिन्‌), son of straw, son of arte; a. of क्ुण्डाणव, भीधरपति a. of grrartena भीधरभहु 2. of स्यवहारवषश्ोकी Or वाय- दरक. | ीघरमिभ 2. of दानपरीक्षा. sfravait a. of आखारपयति, sfraverttra m. by रघुनन्वन in qet- awetrrew (vol. If p. 25), in ae भासतस्व ( vol. 1. p. 820, as the author of a egw). List of Authors on Dharmatastra 7158 sftare srayderentr,son of भीकर; 2. | sftrare, pupil of छृष्ण ; a. of स्वति of werqereartrs or छत्यकाठाषेनिर्णय, | reg. ` | a वेका्णव and saa आचारः | भीनिवासतकवागीरा 2. of आकोष्वनिणेय. , दहानचन्दिका, and भा ॥ । अलिदिका, शूढकीपिका and छन्रोगभाच्‌- भरीनिवासतीथ a. 0 .सम्ध्यावन्वनमाष्य- | कीपिका or भद्धवीपिका, प्रायश्चित्त- | ओनिवासदीक्षित a. of ब्रह्मोदनप्राय- fete, दुगोत्सषविषेक, छा दिविषेक शित्त. —— and of ता्र्वीपिका (com on तिथि- | श्रीनिवासपण्डित a. of सदाचारसंगरह- विवेक of हूलपाणि ), दाथभ।गटिष्यनी (com. on कायभाग ), भा द्विवेक- व्याख्या (com. on ब्ूलपाभि'ऽ भरद्धि- विवेक ), सारम्रजरी (com. on छन्वो- गपरिरिष्टपरकाहा of नारायण ). Be- tween 1470-1540 ^. 0. as he quotes gue, मदनपारिजात and grareenatr of वाचस्पति and as ` 015 हयचितस्वार्णंष is quoted in sarees of rgaera and as ryarqa speaks of him as his guru and mentions his wrapaftxs; in the यज्वविभासंतस्व (Jivananda vol. II p. 393). situraag a.of वु्तकनिर्णय. भीनिषास a. of छकमीसपयासार- भीनिवास a. of छवोधिनी com. on Warr and of gafrt on SVQITICTTET. sfifvare 2. of भक्तिविषेक. भीनिवास 2, of चिदीपिका ( com- posed in 1159-60 A. D. ). eftfrera 2. of wararcegtt. Pro- bly same as above. श्रीनिवास, pupil of arearard ; a. of a com. on war शारख्दति by आनम्दतीथै. ४, De 95. eftPraraag, son of भीनिकेतन ; 2. of शिवार्चनचन्द्रिफा and भेरबाचौपारि- जात. रीनिषासमखिन्‌ ६. of प्रायश्ित्तबोधिनी ` श्रीनिषासाशशिष्य, brother of सीताराम ; a. of प्रयोगचन्रिका- भीनिषासाचार्यं 2. of दुत्तरल्नप्रवीपिकि. प्रीनिवासाचा्यं 2. 0 प्रणवदुपण. . भ्रीनिवासार्थ, son of मोषिन्वायै of the कौशिकमोज्न ; a. of तिथिनिणयकारिका and of भ्रीनिषासदीक्षितीय (on वेखा- नससज्र ). | भीपति a. of अद्खुतसागरसार. sflafe or नीलकण्ठ a. of Sayre. भीपति a. 9 छहूर्तरत्नमाला 01. by शच नन्दन. भीपति a. of व्थषहारनिर्णय 111. by ey- नन्वन in एकादरीतर्व ( vol. I. p. 39 ) and in agareees. श्रीपति a. of ध्यषहारसद्चश्चय m. in संस्कारतस्व ( vol. 1. p. 928 ) भीभीम vide under मीच. eftegarary of the argrenivy, same as बह्माष्वार्य ; a. of जगद्ह्वभा. भीरेरताताष्वाय, son of geet ; a. of बच्वनसारसग्रह. ~ भन History cf Dhatmatisira oftetatiiva a. of gtetgat com. on शारदातिलफ. श्लोककात्यायन m. by अपरां p. 485. | भ्लोकमोभिह m. by हेमाभ ! 754 HSE, स्ति ०, अपराकं ( pp. 134, 527, 548). सत्याधीलाशिष्य a. of syrenreraag: | सवानन्व्‌ a. of com. on विषयुप्जाक्रम- ग्छोकगोतम m. by कोलधिवषेक of | ifttcresr. जीतबाहनः अपराफं (p. 483), काठ- सत्रानन्द्‌ a. of CIs माधव ( p. 153 ). श्चोकव्यास 11. in मद्‌. पा, श्लोकापस्तम्ब 171. 11 आचारमय्ख, wae 70. 17 आप. ध. सर. 1. 4. 13 19. सकषैणशरण a. 0विष्मवधमठरद्रममजरी. सचलाभिश्र a. of स्षुतिसार (2. 0. mss. cat. vol. 1, No. 447 p. 524°). सच्चिदानन्द a. 0 विदिकालाररनिणय, सञ्िवानन्वनाथ a. of लष्िताचनचीन्रका. संशिवानन्दसरस्वती 2. of यतिसिखान्त- निणैय. सत्य ( probably a purely astronomi- cal writer) m.in काटविषेक ( 0. 191 ) of ज्ञीगूतवाहनः, अपराकं(9.5 50). A wetary is mentioned by वराहमिहिर ( 6th century ) in his बहनातक सत्यतपंस्‌ a. of a स्थृति ; 111. in स्सुति- चन्द्रिका, in कालमाधव ( p. 88), in नि.सि, सत्यनाथती्ं a. of कर्मप्रकाशिका ( com. cn जयती्थऽ टीका on कर्मनिर्णय of आनन्दी ). ` सत्यव्रत a. of efit; m. by कालाविषेक of stare (p. 141), strane of सवानन्व्‌ a. of दिव्यस्तग्रह. सदानम्वस्वामिन्‌ 2. of tregaree ( 8. 0. mss. cat vol. 1 No. 387 p. 454 ) सवाराम son of वेवेष्बर ; 2. of प्राय- श्रित्तसवोवंय. सदाराम a. of आष्वारखन््रोवुय. water a. of गोश्प्रवरनिणेय. सवाशङ्कर 2. 0 प्रायभ्वित्तसेतु. सवाशिष, son of भवाधर of the qargH family. First quarter of 18th cen- tury A,D.; a. of आयारस्पुतिथण्िकाः आश्लोचस्शुतिष्वन्दरिका (composed for king जरि of जयनमर ), लिक्षा च॑नचन्दरिका. सवाशिषं a. of चतुरक्षीतिज्ञातिपशत्ति. सदाशिष, son of जरिपाटि परमानन्ब; 2. of qranater (composed in 1678- 79 ^. D. at the bidding of गोडेहा मनोहरवास). सदाशिव a. of वायभागटीका. aetfere (same as आपदेष 4. ९.१; a. Of सापिण्डयकत्पलतिका. reiterate a. of श्रहयक्दीपिका, सदाशिवदिषेदिष्‌ 2, of शाषप्रामहशण- List of Authore on Dharmaéastra सनत्कुमार m. in नि. सि. निणैयासृत, ` बिर्थ्ीसेतु- सनातिनगोस््ामिन्‌, son of gare and pupil of चेतन्यं and brother of wa and aga. About 1500-1550 A. D.; 2, Of भक्तेरसासूतसिन्धु and हरिभक्तिषिलासटीका. सप्तर्षि- a सृति 15 2501060 to them. Vide under सतप्त्षिसमतस्सुति. सष्ठद्रकर ४. of भाष्य on! भाखसभ्र ( कात्यायनीय ) ; m. 1 भाद्धतक्त्व (vol. 1 pp. 194,°220), आद्धिक- तस्व (vol. I pp. 336, 388), तिथितच्व (vol. I p. 174), छचि- त्व (vol. IT p. 311 ). warag About 1000 a. 7. ; m. in काटषिषेक of जीमूत ० ( pp. 240, 255 ). | सरस्वतीर्तीथे or नरहरि a. of स्शृतिदर्षण. About 1300 ^. >. सर्वज्ञारायण vide under नारायण- स्वंभ्वर, son of विष्वेभ्वर, son of भूतेश्वर ! 2, of व्यषहारसर्वस्व. सर्वेन्वर, son 0 लीलाधर ; a. of सध्याकारिका. wate भ्िवेविन्‌ a. of विषादसारा्ण॑व (compiled for Sir William Jones in 1789 ), aeaentag 111. in com. on arrer- चा्टक of बररुचि. साँख्यायन vide ur der arate. BATH ४. Of ब्रतरत्लाकर, 755 साम्बभद्र 2. of गायत्रीपुरश्चरणप्रयोग. साम्बाजी Or साबाजी परतापराज, son of पण्डित पश्मनाम 07 जामदग्न्यवत्स- try. He was a protegee of निजामसाह ; 2. of परष्रामप्रताप and मागवार्चनदीपिका ( vide ms. No. 5887 Baroda 0. I. for weraga- काण्ड of the qugeranarg and हानकाण्डपषै is a part of it ). सायण, brother of anqarard and son of म्रायण. Vide sec. 92. Several works are attributed to him, but one cannot be certain of their authenticity; a. of भो मिलणग्हासखभाष्य, जातिषिषेकशतप्रश्चः एरुषाथघानिधि, सध्यामाष्य, प्राय- भ्रि्षष्ठधानिधि, रामतवध्रकाहा, स्थति सग्रह. सारङ्गपाणि, son of @grq; a. of विवाहपटल. सारषमोभ (this is a mere title) ; a. 0स्शतिग्रन्यराजः दायभागव्यवस्था. सहिबराम 2. of तीर्थसयषठ. सिखनाथ a. of तुलादानप्रकरण. सिखलक्ष्मण 2. ण तिथिनिणय ( com- posed by order of king प्रतापदेव of Kalpi ) सिद्धान्तपश्चानन a. of erezrerest ( part of gareree ). सिद्धान्तवागीक्ष, son of sfteafare ; a. of grapaTa@re com. on मिताक्षरा ( B. O. mss. cat. vol. I No. 383 0. 448 ). Rrarerartigragrary. Not later than 1610 A. D.3a. of तथ को्ठवी, छत्यकोष्ठदी, वयषषहारकोषठदी, ofaeredi, संक्रान्तिकोष्ठदी. 7 736 सिदान्तवाख्स्पति 2. of Pare. सिद्धेश्वर, son of arataz, son of erga. About 1630-1670 A.D. ; a. Of संस्कारभास्फर 01 WREATH, सस्काराद्ूत* सीताराम, son of नञ्ज्ुण्ड of etfrerq- atra;a. of weafaafa com. on नीतिप्रकाषहा of वेशाम्पायन. सीतारामचन्ब्र, son of श्रीधमोभदरु and कामहा 2114 grandson of afeg, of कोण््डिन्यगोज्र ; 2. of काटनिणय- wafers. सीतारामशहान्िन्‌ 2. of दृ्तरतनापण, छव्शनाचा्यं, son of वाण्विजिय. Ear- lier than 1600 A.D.; a. of arerdagry 0011. On आपस्तम्बग्हय (pr. in Kashi ऽ. serics ) ; आ fiesare, विथिनिणेय, शादनिणय ; m. in waif’s com. on qariar- तिमत and in विधानपारिजात, by anravrag in 115 प्रयोगरत्न, in the gear of argxaz. He men- tions कवर्विभाष्य in the तात्ययं- चन्द्र, son of Tar; a. of बाराणसी- चुन्धुरसन 70. incom. on नीतिवाक्ष्या- ब्रह्मण्य, son 0 वेङ्कटेश Later than 1400 ^* 2. ; 4. अभिनवषडहीति with com. धर्प्रदीपिका. grey Sec. 29. gta १. of afrirearatts. gbaz a. of तिथिस्वरूप or स्वतिथि- स्वख्प. Gistory of Dharmasastra छरेभ्वर उपाध्याय, Earlier than 1 500 A. D. 5 4. of व्यषहारोख्यय, सरेभ्वरस्वामि , pupil of रदुरामतीथ ; a. of उपचारषोढरहारतनमाष्टा and महवेषपरिचयाप्रयोग. svarrary a. of काहीसुतिमोक्षनिणय Or काहीमोक्षनिणय. छरासचाचा्य 2. of चिष्छातीर्थीयष्याख्यान. attest 2. of जगच्नाथपकाहा ( com- piled under orders of जगन्नाथ, king of कोम्बोज). ~ सरुमटुलक्ष्मीनरर्सिह 2. of कालात. सूर्यपण्डित. Later than 1500 ^+. D.; ३. 0 com. on काटनिणयकीपिका of रामन्श्त्रचाय, सूयंकरहामन्‌ 2. of दानपी ( compiled _ at the bidding of वराज ) सूर्यनारायण ( हन्द्रगण्डि ) 2. of आह्धिक- मास्कर- सूयंराम 2. of कमेविपाकसार. सर्यसेन ( reputed ) a. of नियामत. सोढ़ेदेव, son of गोतमवेषनार्थ, son of aga who was treasurer ( कोषठा- Rratét ) to a ate prince ; a. of Srarqa ( B. 0. mss. cat. vol. I No. 389 p. 456 ). सोमकीतिं आचार्य a. of सप्रध्वसनकथा- Weed. aye m. in हेमाद्रि ( कालखण्ड p. 79 ). arate 2. of atirerqurga. He wrote his qerftrese in fake 881 ( 969-70 A. D. ). List of Authors on Dharmatisira सोमनाथ 2. of भक्तिरस्य. सोमनाथ, son of gqe and grarréret and surnamed सकलकल and a resident of sara; ४. of ज्ञाति arat (0. C. No. 302 of 1884- 1886 is a work in about 160 verses in various metres on लक्ष्मीनिन्वा, वेराग्थ, पाव॑तीस्तुति, but not On wWerstrer Or castes ). सोमनाथमद्रु; son of grag of the frag family ; a. of eraarata. सोमभिश्न 71. in अपिषाल'ऽ शद्रषद्ति. सोमदपास a. of आशाचनिणय. सोमराभ्भु, pupil of सचिव, pupil of gerra ; 2. ०{कर्मक्रियाकाण्ड (com- posed in 10473 ^. D. ), HP. cat. p. XI. सोम्न्वराशिष्य a. of विषाहपटलस्तजक. सोमेभ्वर wateag Calukya king, son of faman@er. Reigned 1127-1138 ^. ०. ;. a. of अभि- छषितायखिन्तामणि 0 मानसोल्वास (composed in gake 1051 i.e. 1129 AY D. ). सौम्य m. in स्पुतिख ०. श्थूलीषं m. in नि. सि. स्मातं i. €. रनन्वनभद्राचार्य 111. in the oy. न, स्वल्पयोग्लोक 711. in काटधिषेक of efter: urea ; vide ए. 286 n. 631. स्वल्पसंव्तं m. 111 स्पविसार of हरिनाय,. wating About 1610 a. p.; a. of UAT AST. वि १९१ cae Sec. 86 ; a. of अनाकुला (com. 01 आष. णु. सु. ), अनाधेला ( com. on aq. श॒. स्‌. ), उज्ज्वला (com. on आप, ध. चु. ), com. on ary. स्तम्बीय waaay 0 एन्त्रपाठ (or एकापरिकण्डमन्त्र ), मिताक्षरा (com. on गौ. ध. शू. )) COM. On आपस्तम्ब- परिमाषादत्र. हरदत्त a. of eqitane. हरि a. of आशोषखवनिभैय. हरि a. of सहृदय. हरि, son of नरसिंह of the stage family ; a. of एकादज्ञीनिणव (com- posed at विशदनमर, modern Wai, on the Krsna river ) हरि a. of शिषाराधनदीपिका. हरिङष्ण सिखान्त २. of मकरम्वपकारा. (ms. dated 1668 a. D. ) हरिगिण 2, of exagrtagaa. हरिगिरि a. of कुरुषषजादक्छमणिका- हरिजीषनमिभ 2. of स्नानशत्रपडति. हरिदत्त son of दूधर ; 2. of कमेवीषिका (ms. No. 6892, Baroda O. I. ). हरिदल्तभिभ 2. of तिथिवन््रिका हरिवत्ताभिथ a. of व्यवहारपरिभाषा. हरिदास, son of रुषो्तम ; 2. of भरस्ता- greet (composed in संवत्‌ 1614 1, 6. 1557-58 A. D. )- हरिदास, son of वत्सराज ; 4. of लेख grater. Earlier than 1625 A. D. eferrenverard 71. by egaeqa in छखितस्व (ip. 243 ) हरिदीक्षित a. of com, On qTTHTT, 738 हरिवेषमद् m. in भाद्चसागर of छक ag: eivtrafe 2. of विबाहपटल. हरिनन्वन 2. of छहूर्तरत्नाकर हरिनन्वन a. of गङ्गमभक्तेप्रकाश्ा ( com- posed in 1795-96 A. D. ). aftara Sec. 91 ; a. of श्रुतिसारं or -सारसष्ठचय. हरिनाथमिभ a. of दत्तकतस्वनिणैय or -विनिर्णय. हरिनाथाचायं 2. of सङ्केतकोष्ठवी, सन्ता - नवीपिका. हरिनारायण a. of घहतैमखरी. हरिनारायण a. of ayer. हरिनारायण 2. 0 शदितस्वकारिका ( based on tgaeqa’s work ) हरिनारायण (a title of मैरवसिह king of मिथिला ) a. of महाणव divided into seven तरङ्गऽ 07 BT, आचारः frara, व्यवहार, वान, छुचि and sre. B. O. mss. cat. vol. I. No. 76 p. 69 contains the first viz. on Be. हरिप्रसाद, son of मकरन्द; a. of आचार- तस्व. हरिप्रसाद, son of गङ्गा or गङ्गे्वर of मथुरा ; ४. of सद्धर्मतस्वाह्धिक in 62 verses. हरिपसादशर्मन a. of परतिधाषकारा. हरिम a. of इ्हूतेहक्तावली, witag 2. of विवाहरल्न. yitagdifiny ४ of अन््यकर्मदीषिका History of Dharmasistra altarg sya a. of srrevarerast. हरिभास्करशरमन्‌, son of आपाजिभडु or आयाजैमदरु. Vide under भास्कर- शामेन्‌. - हरिभिभ 2. of विधवाधिषाहाविचार. इरिराम Later than 1600 A. D.; a. of com.on atfregta, of smear, of com. on छन्दोगपरिशिष्टप्रकाह of नारायण, of प्रायभ्रिितसार, of com. on gueefa, of com. on waar: ava, of व्यवहारप्रकाहा, भावेन, षटूकर्मविषेक- हरिराथ a. of हिवप्ूजनपद्धति. | हरिराय गोस्वामिन्‌ 2. of तप्तशठद्राविवेक. afters a. of दीपिका (com. on आचारावरा of शीदक्त). हरिरारमिभ 2. of तिश्युक्तिरत्नाधली. हरिषह् 111. asa predecessor in काटल- विवेक of जीमूत ० and in हाचितस्व of rgo ( vol. II. p. 295 ) हरिशङ्कर 2. of यात्राप्रयोगतचव. हरिशार्भन्‌ Earlier than 1500 ^.9.; m. in grataamava of रघु० (vol. I p. $31 ) as भाष्यकार of पारस्करश्ह्य, in हायितसव ( vol. II. p. 305 ), sare aver (vol. II. p. 143) etc.; in asdfesraee ( vol. 11. p. 488) हरिहर and हरिम are separately mentioned in the same sentence on a passage of the कातीयण्द्य. gftsrex 2. of धर्म॑सग्रह. हारि साभन्तराज, son of कष्ण ; 2. of | चर्यपकारा. List of Authore on Dharmaédstra हरिसेन of Benares ; a. of शाजनीति. etter a. of com, on आहौचदुशाक or qeragtet. Ms. (Baroda O. I.) No. 1526 is dated gre 7448. हरिर ( probably the same as हरिहर above ) a jurist m. in fy. z. efter 2. of com. on छन्वोगपरिशिष्ट- धकरा of नारायण. हरिहर a. of प्रयोगरत्म. etter, son of भास्कर alias भानुम ; a. of अम्येषिपदचति (following the WATT ). हरिदिर arena Sec. 84. Between 1275-1400 ; a. of भाष्य on पार- स्करगरह्यसू् and पद्धति thereon and of com. on स्नानविधिसज् of कात्यायन. | हरिहरपाण्डित, son of नारायण; a. of +आचारसग्रहठ. | हरिहरभदुाचायं ५. of समयप्रदीपं ( com- posed in sake 1481 i. 6. 15 59-60 A. D. ). | | इरीभ्वर a. of gr@atede (7. O. Mss. cat. vol. I. No. 379 p. 434). Later than 1450, as he Mentions रत्नाकर and grSfexe. - इषं, or भीहषवीक्षित a. of हर्ष (com. ) on guequeew. हषणमदु 1, in sapere of हटधरदीक्षित, son of TWara ; ¢ of raftre dor. 959 हलायुध 000-1100 A. D.; a jurist m. in कल्पतरु, षि, ©, eafrate of हरिनाथ. हलायुध, son of धनस्य of the वत्सगोज्र, brother of ger and erate. Sec. 72. ; a. of बाह्नणसर्ष॑स्व, पाण्डे- तसर्षस्व, वेष्णवसर्षस्व, Breeder, कमौपवेषिनी. ह्यु 2. of com. on आद्धपखति of वह्यपति. हलायुध, son of सङ्क्षण, Between 1200-1400 A. D.; a. of com. प्रकाहा on the आ्राखकल्वसुष् of काल्यायन, Vide p. 301 abpve. हलायुधः, son of पुरुषोत्तम ; a. of पुसखषः- सर्वस्व ( composed in 1474 A.D.). हलायुध a. of सषत्सरप्रदीप ( men-. tioned in the qapyefrrer and faerer). wargrag a. of com. on the मिताक्षरा of चिज्ञानेभ्वर,. हणिरामहामेन 2. of कामरूपयाज्नापद्धति, हारीत. Sec. 11, 56; a. of water and ( another हारीत ) a. of a cafe in verse on saqgte &c. हिरण्यकेतु m. in भाद्खसागर of छलक हिरण्यकेोशिन्‌ a. 07 wags, पितुमिधसज्, Vaasa. हवयनाथ a. of नान्दीष्धखनिख्पण (8. O. mss. cat. No. 242 p. 264 ) ; ms. dated हाक 1753. हृदयानन्व वियालङ्कार a. of ज्योतिःसार- सग्रह. 760 History of Dharmadnstra हेमरकरभतु m. by ggwin भाद्धसामर, | हेनादि a. of ज्रिस्यलीषिधि. हेमाथा्यं a. of अह॑ञ्जीति. Flourished | between 1088-1172 A. 2 हेमाद्रि 2. of लक्षणेसष्ठभ्चय हेमनि ; a. of पश्मै- हेमनि, son of erate son of ate होरिङमिभ्र ( or होदि ); . 0 | वेव. Sec. 87 ; a. of वहवर्गचिन्ता- ग्वरीवासाण्धि .01 श्युतिसं्रहः, भाच भणि, ` भाखकहप (according to छत्यप्रदीष (Ulwar cat. extract No. कात्यायन ) 355), भाखकत्यदीष.