- Prakasa The Vivādaratnākara of Candleśvara cites the views of Prakāśa scores of times ( e. g. pp. 131, 145, 456, 460,462, 474, 485, 504 etc.). Frequently Prakāsa is coupled with Pārijāta (vide Vivādaratnākara Pp. 145, 2+1, 260, 286, 456 ). On p. 602 of the V. R. the two ( Prakāsa and Pārijāta ) are cited as differing from each other. On pp. 286 and 465 of the V. R., Prakāśa, Pārijāta and Halāyulla are cited together as hold ing the same view. It would be shown under Kalpataru’ that a work called Maharnava’ is mentioned in verses 12 and 13 of the Introiluction to the Brahmacārikānda and that the same work is cited in citierent ways as Smrtimahārnava or Mahārnava-prakāśa’ or simply as Mahārnava’ or as ‘Prakāśa’ (e. g. p. 497 ). Onfraye 518 of the livadaratnākara a remark of Prakāśa wherein both Asahiya and Hedhātithi are named
(Continuerl from the previous page) ग्यम । किं च भूस्वामी सचेनाः किमिति बृथैव तत्र स्वत्वं जह्यात् । न ह्यत्र दृष्टमुट्यं ना यदष्टं धर्मशास्त्रोक्तेतिकर्तव्यताविरहात् । … नापि यदुद्देशेन यत्त्य ज्यते तत्तस्य म्वमिति नियमः । उद्देश्येनागृहीते व्यभिचारात् । वीर.
p. 212-14
- Pralokasa
.
"
"
.
653
is cited.982 The Dānaratnākara of Candesvara’ quotes a passage of Sarivarta with Prakaśa’s explanation of it.883 In the Srāddhasaukhya of Todarādanda Prakāśa’s explanation of the word · Yānevata’ occurring in a passage of Sarikha about the fruits allowed in śrāddha is quoted. 88+
These quotations establish that Prakāśa was a work that not only dealt with vyavahāra, but also with such topics as diints, sriddle etc.
Whether the Prakāśa was an independent work or a com mentary is somewhat doubtful. But from a passage of the Vivādaratnākara it seems to follow that it was a commentary on the Yajia valkyasmrti. There we are told that the Kalpa taru$85 read abhijanatā’ for ‘a vijanatā’ iu Yaj. II. 258, but that since that reading is opposed to Yūjnavalkya-prakāśa, Halāyudha and Pārijata it must be recarded as a wrong read ing. As it is a realiny of Yaj. himself that was being dis cussed, it would be somewhat stranye if it were said that it was opposed to Yiij. and Prakirýil anil therefore it is necessary to suppose that Yajia valkyaprakieśa is one work.
The Vivādacintāmani in several places gives the explana tion of Prakāśa.886 The Smrtisara 87 yives at great length the
882 पित्रा दत्तमिति स्त्रीधनमात्रोपलक्षणमिन्यमहायमेधातिथिरिति ( • थी इति)
प्रकाशकारः। वि.र. ( on मनु 9. 195. ) Sile p509 of वि.र. whe: e प्रकाश cite; मेधानिधि alone ‘पन्युरनुज्ञातनान्यदत्तोप्यलङ्कारी यो मण्डनार्थं धृतः
सोपि दायादेन हर्तव्य इनि भेधातिथिरिति प्रकाशः’. 883 ‘संवतः । सर्वेषामेव दानानामेकज ‘सोदरम्’ । हाटकक्षितिगा।णां सप्तजन्मा
नुगं फलम् ॥ गौर्योत्र गावः प्रकरणात् । कस्यापवादः कन्येति प्रकाशः ।’ दानरत्नाकर ( No. 114 of 1584-86 in the liort. Msr. Jilh. at the B. O. R. Institute, Poona 1, folio 5!!!. ‘आम्रान्यानेवनानिमीकाभव्यदाडिमान् । … श्राद्धकालोपपाइयत् ॥ यानवतः कादमीरे वोइ इति प्रसिद्धः । प्राचीनामलकमिति प्रकाशकारः । श्राद्धोख्य
folio 4:2 a ( BORI. ms. No. 257 of 151-57 1. 885 कलतरी तु आविजानतेति स्थाने अभि नाननेति पाटो दर्शित: म तु याज्ञवल्क्य
प्रकाश-हलायुध-पारिजातविरोधात् प्रमादपाठ इति लक्षिनः । वि. र. p. 198. 885 विद्ययापि साधारणधनानु पलपेण यदार्जितं तदेवाविभाज्यमिति प्रकाशकारः । तन्न
उभयोगदानानथक्यात् । वि. चि. p. 135; ‘परिसंख्यानवलापित भ्रातृपितृ व्यरेव विभागगर्वकं धनम रनं संसर्ग इति प्रकाशः।’ वि. चि. p. 157; vide
Pp. 1310, 110 11-0. 887 प्रकाशे तु तम्य संमृष्टिनो धनं संमृष्टयपहरेत् गृहीयात् । विभागकाले अज्ञाध गर्भायां पितृभार्यायां पवादुम्पन्नस्यासंमृष्ट्येव दद्यात् । सोटरस्य त संमृष्टिनो धनं
( Continued from the previous paye )
.
654
History of Dhuriasāstra
explanation of Prakāśa on the controversial verses of Yāj. (II. 138-139). The Viramitrodaya*** quotes at length Prakāśa’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 a meaning similar to that of Yāj. II. 116. The Prakāśa is mentioned in the Dayatattva ( vol. II, 1. 173) and in the Suddhitattva ( Vol. II, p. 288)and p. 385 and the Mahārnava-prakāśa is mentioned in the Kaljataru on Srāddha p. 262.
As the Prakāśa is quoted in the Kalpataru it is certainly earlier than 1125. A. D. It mentions Medhātithi. 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 livida ratnākāra, ‘59 explained by the Prakāśa in almost the same words as the Mit. It is possible that both borrow from the same original. At all events the Prakāśa must have been composed between 1000 and 1100 A. D.
Hemālri frequently cites a work called Mahārnava prakāśa.890 According to the latter the sandal unguents, flowers, incense, lamp presented in śrāddha are to be offered to the Brālunanas invited and not to the intr’s. In another place Hemādri quotes the explanation of the word ’niman trunc ‘81 give: by the Mahārṇa vaprakāśa. In some places
( Continuell from the previous posje ) संसृष्टी सोदरो गृहीयान्न भिन्नोदरः संसृष्टयपीति पूर्वोस्थापवादः अन्योदयस्तु संसृष्टी धनं गृहीयादिति शयः । नान्योदयधनं हेरेदिति संमृष्टयपात्यनेन
संबध्यत &c. स्मृतिमार ( I. O. cat. No. 301, folio 14s by ). 888 vide atto p. 572 ; the same also occurs in fq. Êt. p. 130. 89 अत्रापि प्रकाशः किंचिदसारमपि दत्त्वा पृथकिया विभागः कर्तव्यः तत्पुत्राणां
विवादनिवृत्त्यर्थमिति । वि. र. p. 465 ; यत्किंचिदमारमपि दत्या पृथक्रिया
विभागः कार्यः पित्रा तत्पुत्रादीनां दायजिवृक्षा मा भूदिनि । मिताक्षरा. 890 किं गन्धपुष्षधूप दीपाच्छादनानि ब्राह्मणेभ्यो दयान्युत पितृभ्य इति । तत्र
तावद्वचनार्थदर्शनन्यायोपलब्धब्राह्मणेभ्यो देयानीति महाणवप्रकाशकारी मन्यते । चतुर्वर्ग• III. 1. 1031. निमन्त्रणं नाम देवपितृकार्यार्थोऽप्रत्यारथ्येया नियोग इति म्भृतिचन्द्रिकाकारः । अध्यषणपूर्वकमभ्युपगमसंपादनमिति मेधातिथिमहार्णवप्रकाशकारों । चतुर्वर्ग. III. 1. 1131 ; vide also p. 1151 for another reference to महार्णवप्रकाश,
891
- Pārijātri
655
Hemādri refers to a work called Smrtimahārnava or simply Mahārnava.892 It appears to me that all these are the names of the same work. The Madanapārijāta (p. 93 ) quotes a verse from the Smrtimahārnava about upākarmn.