Universitätsbibliothek HeidelbergUniversitätsbibliothek Heidelberg
Metadaten

Jolly, Julius [VerfasserIn]
Outlines of an history of the Hindu law of partition, inheritance, and adoption: as contained in the original Sanskrit treatises — Calcutta, 1885

DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49827#0023
Overview
Facsimile
0.5
1 cm
facsimile
Scroll
OCR fulltext
8

NEW MATERIALS FOR HISTORICAL STUDY OF HINDU LAW’.

Lecture Medhatithi’s Commentary from abroad and got them copied,
because in his own country no copy was to be had. ».
Medha- Before compiling his Commentary on the Code of Mann,
tithi’s Medhatithi appears to have written a law-digest, called the
viveka? Smriti viveka. This wolk is repeatedly quoted by him
in his Commentary as containing a full exposition of doc-
trines touched on incidentally in the latter work.
His merit Judging from the numerous referenced to the opinions of
as a com- Asahaya and Medhatithi in the more recent law-books from
mentator. pqe Mjtakshara downwards, the influence exercised by these
two authors, especially the latter, on the development of
Jurisprudence in India, must have been very considerable.
Nor ds this wonderful, considering the vast amount of
matter contained in Medhatithi’s immense volume. Jones
and Haughton have charged it with prolixity and obscu-
rity ; nor is this charge wholly unfounded, looking at this
work in the light of a mere Commentary. It abounds
more than any other law-book in Mimamsa terms
and dissertations. But it also contains a host of inter-
esting observations on the every-day life of the period,
and it is simply invaluable as being the earliest extant
Commentary of the Code of Mann, and as recording the
opinions of a number of earlier writers on every difficult
passage in that work.
OtherCom- The influence of Medhatithi on the development of
mentanes. jncqan Taw is exhibited with particular clearness in the
numerous subsequent Commentaries by which his own
Bhashya was followed and gradually superseded in author-
ity. Sir W. Jones in the preface to his translation of
Manu, and Colebrooke after him, quotes four commentators
of that author

Govinda-
raja. '

1. Medhatithi. I 3. Dharanidhara.
2. Govindaraja. | 4. Kullukabhatta.
However, recent research in this field has brought to
light seven old Commentaries of the Code of Manu, besides
• • c • 2
disclosing the former existence of a number of other works
of this class that have now been lost.
From the way iit ’which Kulluka refers to Medhatithi
and Bhojaraja, it is clear that he looked on the former as
being the oldest, and on the latter as being the next oldest,
commentator of Manu.* 1 Govindaraja, in his opinion, was
I
1 Kulluka’s gloss on III. 127 “ Medhatithi, Bhojaraja and others
who belong to an earlier time even than Govindaraja.” See. too. his gloss
on VIII. 184, as quoted in the next note.
 
Annotationen