DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49827#0031
16
NEW MATERIALS FOR HISTORICAL STUDY OF HINDU LAW.
Lecture The Vishnu-smriti appears to have been the subject of
L much comment among those learned in Sanskrit Law, but
,7 .. . we have no means of knowing the contents of early Com-
" mentaries on it except through the medium of the quotations
from them in Nandapandita’s well-known Commentary, the
Vaijayanti. It was composed in 1622, and must have been
one'vof the last productions of its fertile author, as it con-
tains references to three of his previous.works, the Dattaka-
mimamsa and the two Commentaries on the Mitakshara and
Paragara-smriti.1 Extracts from the Vaijayanti, together
with the text of the Vishnu-smriti, have been published by
myself in the Bibliotheca Indica (1881). The Vaijayanti
has (been deservedly designed by Colebrooke as a very
excellent and copious work, which might serve like the
Mitakshara as a body or 'Digest of law.
Cowmen- The paragara-smriti has been early commented upon by
Par&fara. no less a person than the celebrated Madhava, surnamed
Vidyaranya, the Prime Minister of King Bukka, of Vijaya-
naganr, in the Dekhan, in the latter half of the 14th
century.2 His work, however, can hardly be called a mere
Commentary, as far as Civil Law is concerned, as the
whole extensive section on the administration of justice
has been introduced in the gloss on one verse of Paragara
treating incidentally of the duties of the kingly caste. In
the section on Inheritance, which has been translated
into English by Dr. Burnell,3 Madhava has closely followed
the Mitakshara. Another Commentary on the Paragara-
smriti was composed by Nandapandita. But copious as this
work is, the section on Civil Law is extremely brief and
insignificant.
Commen- Among the few remaining old Commentaries of Smriti
(anes on works, Haradatta’s gloss on the Apastambya Dharmasutra,
Aoastamba ' i
and Gauta-called Ujjvala, and his gloss on the Gautama-smriti, called
Gautamiya MiCakshara, are perhaps the most important.
These two works come up to the true notion of a Com-
mentary in a higher degree perhaps than any of the
works hitherto noticed, a philologically exact interpretation
of his texts being a’l that Haradatta had in view: This
author was a native of Southern India. His date is
1 It is curious to note, however, that the Dattakamimamsa in its turn
contains a reference to the Vaijayanti. Could both works have been
composed at the same time ?
2 See Dr. Burnell’s Dayavibhaga, and Rajkumar Sarvadhikari, 362—366.
3 Dayavibhaga, 1868.
NEW MATERIALS FOR HISTORICAL STUDY OF HINDU LAW.
Lecture The Vishnu-smriti appears to have been the subject of
L much comment among those learned in Sanskrit Law, but
,7 .. . we have no means of knowing the contents of early Com-
" mentaries on it except through the medium of the quotations
from them in Nandapandita’s well-known Commentary, the
Vaijayanti. It was composed in 1622, and must have been
one'vof the last productions of its fertile author, as it con-
tains references to three of his previous.works, the Dattaka-
mimamsa and the two Commentaries on the Mitakshara and
Paragara-smriti.1 Extracts from the Vaijayanti, together
with the text of the Vishnu-smriti, have been published by
myself in the Bibliotheca Indica (1881). The Vaijayanti
has (been deservedly designed by Colebrooke as a very
excellent and copious work, which might serve like the
Mitakshara as a body or 'Digest of law.
Cowmen- The paragara-smriti has been early commented upon by
Par&fara. no less a person than the celebrated Madhava, surnamed
Vidyaranya, the Prime Minister of King Bukka, of Vijaya-
naganr, in the Dekhan, in the latter half of the 14th
century.2 His work, however, can hardly be called a mere
Commentary, as far as Civil Law is concerned, as the
whole extensive section on the administration of justice
has been introduced in the gloss on one verse of Paragara
treating incidentally of the duties of the kingly caste. In
the section on Inheritance, which has been translated
into English by Dr. Burnell,3 Madhava has closely followed
the Mitakshara. Another Commentary on the Paragara-
smriti was composed by Nandapandita. But copious as this
work is, the section on Civil Law is extremely brief and
insignificant.
Commen- Among the few remaining old Commentaries of Smriti
(anes on works, Haradatta’s gloss on the Apastambya Dharmasutra,
Aoastamba ' i
and Gauta-called Ujjvala, and his gloss on the Gautama-smriti, called
Gautamiya MiCakshara, are perhaps the most important.
These two works come up to the true notion of a Com-
mentary in a higher degree perhaps than any of the
works hitherto noticed, a philologically exact interpretation
of his texts being a’l that Haradatta had in view: This
author was a native of Southern India. His date is
1 It is curious to note, however, that the Dattakamimamsa in its turn
contains a reference to the Vaijayanti. Could both works have been
composed at the same time ?
2 See Dr. Burnell’s Dayavibhaga, and Rajkumar Sarvadhikari, 362—366.
3 Dayavibhaga, 1868.