DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49827#0039
24 NEW MATERIALS FOR HISTORICAL STUDY OF HINDU LAW.,
Lecture long ago by Colebrooke, but he was not in a position to
explain it, as he was not acquainted with the datet. and
Bengal native country of either Vijnanegvara or Jimutavahana.
School and This is different now, and it has become possible to show
Schools? that not only the Mitakshara, but nearly all the really
ancient Commentaries and Digests of note, were composed
in tiie Dekhan. Nor is it difficult to account for this
fact. It will be seen in the next Lecture, that several of
the earliest Smritis have originated in the south of India.
When the era of Commentators arrived, the Dekhan con-
tinued to be a seat of legal learning, and the spread of
South Indian law-books into Hindustan was favoured by
the y-ide sway of powerful South Indian dynasties. Nor
was there ever a break of tradition in Southern India,
whereas in most parts of Hindustan Proper the composition
of law-books seems to have come to a dead stand-still for
a considerable time after the permanent establishment of
Mohammedan rule towards the end of the 12th century.
When,, at a subsequent period, a revival of Hindu Law
studies took place in those parts, the works coining from
the Dekhan maintained their repute, and were used as
text-books. Thus it has come to pass that King Apararka’s
Commentary, which may have been brought into Kashmir
by one of the ambassadors of Apararka, has remained there
down to this day, almost the only law-book used by the
Pandits of that country.1 When in the 14th or 15th cen-
tury, Vigvegvara of Kashtha near Delhi undertook by
order of his King, Madanapala, to set forth the doctrines
of the Hindu Law in two learned works, he began by
writing a Commentary on the Mitakshara. It is to the
same King Madanapala that a traditional account, which
has been quoted before, attributes the merit of having
recovered the lost Commentary of Medhatithi. Its loss
may have been due to the raids of the Mohammedans, and
the foreign country from which he recovered it may have
been the Dekhan. In the second half of the 16th century,
when Cankarabhatta, a member of the influential family of
the Bhattas in Benares,2 wrote his solution of doubtful
points (Dvaityanirnaya), he thought fit to declare expressly
in the introduction to his work that he would take the
opinions of the southern writers for his guide.3 The Mita-
s Buhler, Kashmir Report, pp. 50-52 2 Mandlik, p. Ixxi,
3
Lecture long ago by Colebrooke, but he was not in a position to
explain it, as he was not acquainted with the datet. and
Bengal native country of either Vijnanegvara or Jimutavahana.
School and This is different now, and it has become possible to show
Schools? that not only the Mitakshara, but nearly all the really
ancient Commentaries and Digests of note, were composed
in tiie Dekhan. Nor is it difficult to account for this
fact. It will be seen in the next Lecture, that several of
the earliest Smritis have originated in the south of India.
When the era of Commentators arrived, the Dekhan con-
tinued to be a seat of legal learning, and the spread of
South Indian law-books into Hindustan was favoured by
the y-ide sway of powerful South Indian dynasties. Nor
was there ever a break of tradition in Southern India,
whereas in most parts of Hindustan Proper the composition
of law-books seems to have come to a dead stand-still for
a considerable time after the permanent establishment of
Mohammedan rule towards the end of the 12th century.
When,, at a subsequent period, a revival of Hindu Law
studies took place in those parts, the works coining from
the Dekhan maintained their repute, and were used as
text-books. Thus it has come to pass that King Apararka’s
Commentary, which may have been brought into Kashmir
by one of the ambassadors of Apararka, has remained there
down to this day, almost the only law-book used by the
Pandits of that country.1 When in the 14th or 15th cen-
tury, Vigvegvara of Kashtha near Delhi undertook by
order of his King, Madanapala, to set forth the doctrines
of the Hindu Law in two learned works, he began by
writing a Commentary on the Mitakshara. It is to the
same King Madanapala that a traditional account, which
has been quoted before, attributes the merit of having
recovered the lost Commentary of Medhatithi. Its loss
may have been due to the raids of the Mohammedans, and
the foreign country from which he recovered it may have
been the Dekhan. In the second half of the 16th century,
when Cankarabhatta, a member of the influential family of
the Bhattas in Benares,2 wrote his solution of doubtful
points (Dvaityanirnaya), he thought fit to declare expressly
in the introduction to his work that he would take the
opinions of the southern writers for his guide.3 The Mita-
s Buhler, Kashmir Report, pp. 50-52 2 Mandlik, p. Ixxi,
3