DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49827#0029
u
NEW MATERIALS FOR HISTORICAL STUDY OF HINDU LAW.
Lecture frequently differs from the latter work about the choice
L of readings in the texts of Yajnavalkya, and occasionally
on questions of principle too. Certain opinions, which
have been viewed as peculiar to the Bengal School, may be
traced to Apararka’s Commentary, or to the lost writings
of his predecessors.
Cuiapani. Several instances of this special agreement of the Bengal
writers with Apararka may be found in Culaparri’s Commen-
tary of the Yajnavalkya-smriti called' Dipakalika. This
brief work of a Bengal writer, which is similar in kind to
Narayana’s gloss of the Manu-smriti, is decidedly more
recent than the other Commentaries, but it can hardly
be teamed a modern work, as has been done by Colebrooke.
It is quoted by Raghunandana, who flourished about the
commencement of the 16t‘h century.
Vifvepvara. Nothing tends better to illustrate the high esteem in
o . o
which the Mitakshara was held than the fact, that although
a Commentary itself, it was repeatedly commented on by
eminent Pandits. Vigvegvara-bhatta wrote by order of
King Madanapala, son of Sadharana, his valuable Commen-
tary called Subodhini or Mitakshara-tika Subodhini or
Vigvegvari which is an independent work rather than a
Commentary, as it dwells at much length on some difficult
passages in the Mitakshara, leaving totally out of sight
most others. After having written the Subodhini, Vigvegvara
compiled another work on law called Madanaparijata,* 1
which may be advantageously used to supplement the
Subodhini. King Madanapala, the patron of Vigvegvara,
reigned in Kashtha, which was situated to the north of
Delhi, on the banks of the Jumna.2 He is the reputed
author himself of a law Digest, called Smritikaumudi,
which treats of Achara (religious law) only, and of the
Maharnava, which is quoted in the Smritikaumudi. As
however the author of the latter work refers to the
Madanaparijata as to a production of his own, it has been
argued with justice that the Smritikaumudi too must
have been composed by Vigvegvara and not by Madana-
pala himself.3 The fame remark applies to Madanapala’s
valkya-smriti was probably composed by the earlier one of the two, one of
whose grants is dated A. D. 1138. See Sivaji, Journ. Bomb. Br. R. As.
( Soo., 1882.
1 This work contains a reference to the Subodhini. f
2 See the introductory stanzas to the Madanaparijata, printed in Pro-
fessor Aufrecht’s Catalogue of the Bodleian Library, p. 27'4.
3 See ibid.
NEW MATERIALS FOR HISTORICAL STUDY OF HINDU LAW.
Lecture frequently differs from the latter work about the choice
L of readings in the texts of Yajnavalkya, and occasionally
on questions of principle too. Certain opinions, which
have been viewed as peculiar to the Bengal School, may be
traced to Apararka’s Commentary, or to the lost writings
of his predecessors.
Cuiapani. Several instances of this special agreement of the Bengal
writers with Apararka may be found in Culaparri’s Commen-
tary of the Yajnavalkya-smriti called' Dipakalika. This
brief work of a Bengal writer, which is similar in kind to
Narayana’s gloss of the Manu-smriti, is decidedly more
recent than the other Commentaries, but it can hardly
be teamed a modern work, as has been done by Colebrooke.
It is quoted by Raghunandana, who flourished about the
commencement of the 16t‘h century.
Vifvepvara. Nothing tends better to illustrate the high esteem in
o . o
which the Mitakshara was held than the fact, that although
a Commentary itself, it was repeatedly commented on by
eminent Pandits. Vigvegvara-bhatta wrote by order of
King Madanapala, son of Sadharana, his valuable Commen-
tary called Subodhini or Mitakshara-tika Subodhini or
Vigvegvari which is an independent work rather than a
Commentary, as it dwells at much length on some difficult
passages in the Mitakshara, leaving totally out of sight
most others. After having written the Subodhini, Vigvegvara
compiled another work on law called Madanaparijata,* 1
which may be advantageously used to supplement the
Subodhini. King Madanapala, the patron of Vigvegvara,
reigned in Kashtha, which was situated to the north of
Delhi, on the banks of the Jumna.2 He is the reputed
author himself of a law Digest, called Smritikaumudi,
which treats of Achara (religious law) only, and of the
Maharnava, which is quoted in the Smritikaumudi. As
however the author of the latter work refers to the
Madanaparijata as to a production of his own, it has been
argued with justice that the Smritikaumudi too must
have been composed by Vigvegvara and not by Madana-
pala himself.3 The fame remark applies to Madanapala’s
valkya-smriti was probably composed by the earlier one of the two, one of
whose grants is dated A. D. 1138. See Sivaji, Journ. Bomb. Br. R. As.
( Soo., 1882.
1 This work contains a reference to the Subodhini. f
2 See the introductory stanzas to the Madanaparijata, printed in Pro-
fessor Aufrecht’s Catalogue of the Bodleian Library, p. 27'4.
3 See ibid.