- Madanaratna
The Madanaratna is an extensive digest on Dharmaśāstra but only one part of it has been edited by the present author for the Anup Sanskrit Library of Bikaner and published in 1948. The Introduction to that edition (pp. VIII-IX ) may be consulted for more information. In the colophons of mss. it is also called Madanaratnapradipa or simply Madanapradipa. The work was divided into seven1228 sections called uddyotas on samaya (or kala), ācāra, vyavahāra, prāyaścitta, dāna, śuddhi, śānti. The order of the various sections was the one indicated, the samayo ddyota being the first part. I have not been able to examine the mss. of all the uddyotas.
The Samayoddyota deals with the subjects usually treated of in works on kāla, viz. discussions about the year, the seasons, the months, the intercalary months, the rules about tithis, the rules about the proper times for various religious observances, gifts, homa, the rules about kalivarjya.
There is a ms. of the Dānoddyota in the Anandāśrama collection at Poona ( No. 2378). Recently (i. e. in 1964) the Sanskrit Acadeniy of the Osmania University (Hyderabad, Deccan) published a part of the Dāna-vivekoddyota in the Sanskrit Academy Series (the General editor being Dr. Aryendra Sharma, M. A., D. Phil., Head of the Department of Sanskrit at the Osmania University and the Editors being Shri Khanderao Deshpande, M. A., and Shri D. G. Padhye, B. A. ( Kāvyatirtha
1228 उद्योताः समयाचारव्यवहारविवेचकाः । प्रायश्चित्तस्य दानस्य शुद्धि शान्योश्च सप्तमे।
तबादौ राजसिंहेन सर्वधर्मोपयोगत: । तन्यते मदनेन्द्रेण समयस्य विनिर्णयः ।। verses 24-25 of ms. of HFT1417 in Viśram bāg collection I, No. 146 and verses 26 and 27 in the I. O. Cat, ms. (p. 537 b ) and Peterson’s Cat. of Ulwar mss. No, 1410 and extract No. 336 at
p. 131,
- Madanaratna
805
Sāhityalaökāra). The first printed part extends to 272 pages and it is stated that the whole work on Dāna to be published will occupy about 1100 pages in three parts ī in all). The first part so far published has been well printed. There are seven parts of the Madanaratnapradipa which is a huge work, divided into seven parts, of which the first part on Vyavahāra was edited by me and published in 1948 for the Anup Sanskrit Library of Bikaner. The following are the subjects treated of :- eulogy of dāna; the nature of dana, various kinds of dānas; the constituent elements (angāni ) of dana; the donor, proper persons for gifts, persons underserving of gifts, what things cannot be given away, proper and improper times and places for dāna, measures of corn and other substances and weights and units of length &c., finding out the east and other directions, characteristics of a torana, patāka and maṇḍapa, tula-puruṣa ( weighing oneself against gold or silver ), gift of a thousand cows and other magaificent gifts, dedication of a tank or well and planting of a garden &c. In this work the author refers to Kalpataru and to Hemadri as a dākṣiṇātya nibandhakāra.
Deccan College ms. No. 392 of 1891-95 deals with the śānti section. It treats of rites for propitiating gods and planets and averting the evil consequences of great or small portentous phenomena, such as Vināyaka-snāna, sūrya-śānti, navagraha-śānti, śāntis for birth on certain evil nakșatrus like mula, aśleṣā and evil astrological conjunctions like vyatipāta, raidhrti, sankranti ; rites for the safety of the foetus and of the newly born infant; ayutahoma, laksahoma, kotihoma &c. In this section sages like Uttara-Garga, Kātyāyana, Nārada, Baijavāpa (on gļhya), Mānava-samhitī, Yājñavalkya, Saunaka and purāṇas like the Skanda, Bhavisyottara, Viṣṇudharmottara are very frequently cited. Besides the following are among the authors and works referred to :- Apekṣitārthadyotini, a commentary of Nārāyana, Karmavipākasamgraha, Karmavipākasamuccaya, Kumāratantra promulgated by the son of Rāvana, Prayogasāra, Vijñānesvarā. cārya ( in the plural ).
A ms. of the Acāroddyota is noticed by Burnell in his Tanjore Cat. (p. 137 b ). Stein (in his Cat. of Jammu mss.) notices an incomplete ms. of the Vyavahāroddyota (p. 98
806
No. 2437). M. M. Haraprasad Sastri notices a ms. of the Prāyaścittoddyota (Nepal Palm-leaf and Paper Mss. Cat. XVIII and p. 223).
From the colophons at the end of the several mss. of the Madanaratna it appears that the work was composed under the patronage of king Madanasi:āha-deva, son of Śaktisinha.1229 The king is styled mahārājādhiraja and one of his titles is Kodanda paraśurāma (meaning ‘who was a veritable Paraśurāma in wielding the bow). The introductory verses1230 to the Samayo ddyota in the Viśrāmabāga collection and the Ulwar ms. refer to Delhi-deśa and its king named Mahāpāladeva. Then verse 9 speaks of Damodara whose exact relationship with Mahāpāladeva is not clear. Damodara is said to have made the yavanas of Mūlasthāna (modern Multan in the Punjab) give up the slaughter ing of cows. The whole pedigree is given below.1231 Saktisimha is said to have eclipsed even Bhoja. It is further said that
Madanasimha called1232 together four learned men viz., Ratnakara, Gopināth, Viśvanātha and Gangādharabhatta and entrusted the composition of the digest to them. The colophon1233 at the
1229 इति श्रीकोदण्डपरशुरामेत्यादिबिरुदावलीविराजमानमानोन्नतमहाराजाधिराजश्री
शक्तिसिंहात्मजमहाराजाधिराजश्रीमदनसिंहदेवविरचिते मदनरत्नप्रदीपे दान famelia &c. in us, ( Ānandāśrama No. 2378); there is a
similar colophon at the end of the the section. 1230 तस्मादाकस्मिकोद्यद्दहनघनमहस्तुत्यतापप्रतापज्वालातालाभिभूतद्विषदवनिपतावन्वये
भास्करस्य । राजा राजावतारो वरसमरधुरोद्दामरामानुभावप्रध्वस्तारातिभूमीपति दनुजवयोभून्महीपालदेवः ॥ यत्रासीद्भुवनेषु विश्रुतचणो दामोदराख्यः कृती श्रीमान्पुण्यवदग्रणीर्जितरिपुक्ष्मापाल सङ्घः प्रमुः। मूलस्थानपुरे तुरुष्कनिवहत्क्रान्ते परित्याजितो येनाद्यावधिगोवधो यवनकैः शत्रापि (कुत्रापि ?) न स्मर्यते ॥ verses
8 and 9 of the Ulwar ms. of समयोद्योत. 1231 The pedigree is :
महीपालदेव-दामोदर-देवीदास-सूर्यदास-शक्तिसिंह-मदनसिंह. 1232 तेनास्य मनीषिमण्डनमणि सन्मिश्ररत्नाकरं गोपीनाथमनुत्तमं च सुधियं श्रीविश्वनाथं
तथा । मुग्धं पण्डितमुन्नतद्युतिमति भट्टं च गङ्गाधरं राज्ञा शक्तिन (क ?) सू नुना सकृतिना ग्रंथोयमारभ्यते ॥ I. O. Cat. p. 537, No. 1681, verse 53; this is verse 21 in the Virāmbag ms. and verse 23 in the ms. in
Peterson’s Ulwar mss. Cat. 1233 महाराजाधिराजस्य मदनेन्द्रस्य शासनात् । श्रीमाली (लिना ?) गुर्जरेण भट्ट
पज्यात्मजेन वा । भट्ट श्रीविश्वनाथेन काशीतीर्थनिवासिना । शान्तिकं पौष्टिकं वापि यथाशास्त्रं प्रकीर्तितम् ।। The U]war ms. ( Peterson’s Ulwar Cat, No. 353) reads श्रीमल्लिनाथगुर्जरेण.
- Madanaratna
807
end of the śāntyuddyota in the Deccan College says that it was composed by Viśvanātha, a resident of Benares and son of Bhattapūjya, a Srimāli Gurjara (Brāhmaṇa ). There is a similar colophon at the end of the Prāyaścittoddyota noticed by M, M. Haraprasad Sastri.
The Vyavahāra section of the Madanaratna is a large work in 348 printed pages. It deals with both judicial procedure and the eighteen titles of law (Vyavahārapadas ). A brief analysis of its contents is set out here :- The nieaning of Vyavahāra, names of the titles of law; Sabha (court of justice) and its adjuncts; the king himself should preside over the court, or a judge (prādvivāka ) should preside and may be helped by sabhyas (persons expert in law, as stated by Yāj. II, 2); requisite quali fications of judge and members of court; when the parties may appear through agents; modes of proof viz. documents, witnesses, possession; requisites of plaint and of the reply; requisites of royal edicts; contents of the decision in a legal dispute ; Pascātkāra and Jayapatra; inference of three kinds; characteristics of possession as means of proof; when ordeals are to be resorted to; nine kinds of ordeals; special oaths; details of the several ordeals; punishments may be of the body or in money (property); punishment for brāhmana is banishment (and not of the body) or shaving the head or making a mark on the forehead or banishing after seating him on an ass; when a judgement of a court may be reviewed; when a person is held to be major; recovery of debts is the first vyavahārapada (cause of legal dispute ) among the 18; when interest is allowed and the rates of interest; rule of dāmaduppata; mortgage and pledge and various kinds of them; surety of various kinds; rules about suretyship, debts and about the liability of the heirs of the surety; modes of covering debts when the debtor fails to pay; liability of son or other heirs to pay the debts of their father or ancestor ; deposits and the like; sale of or use of property by one not the owner of it; rules about property lost and found by one who is not the owner; rules about partnership and partners; non rendition or resumption of gifts; disputes between master and servant or herdsman; violation of compacts and the meaning of naigama and vrata, pūga, gana, sangha, gulma; repentance after purchase or sale or non-delivery after sale; breach of contract of
808
service; boundary disputes; abuse and defamation; assault and battery; theft; adultery; duties of husband and wife; partition of heritage; property not liable to partition; fresh partition as to concealed ancestral estate; definition of stridhana and kinds thereof; heirs to stridhana; heirs of sonless person; gambling and prize-fighting; miscellaneous.
Since the Madanaratna mentions the Mit., the Kalpataru and Hemādri, Ratnakara and Madhaviya, it must be certainly later than about 1360 A. D. It is quoted as a great authority by the writers of the 16th and 17th centuries, such as Nārāyaṇabhatta, Kamalakarabhatta, Nilakantha and Mitramiśra. In the Vyava hāra-mayūkha Nilakaptha relies upon the Madanaratna as often as (if not oftener than ) the Mitāksarā. The Vyavahara-mayūkha of Nilakantha published in BORI in 1926 mentions the Madana ratna or simply Madana about two dozen times; out of these on some pages such as pp. 98, 136, 145 of the text it shows that the Madanaratna differs from Vijñāneśvara, though on p. 139 it doubts the correctness of the explanation given by the Madana ratna. In other cases it cites the Madanaratna generally as supporting his own views. The Mayūkha quotes Smārtabhattā carya (i. e. Raghunandana ) on pp. 63 and 88 (text). On p. 88 (text) it mentions Vācaspati. The Madanaratnapradipa on Vyavahāra mentions ’ Madhaviye-vidyāranyasricaraṇāḥ’on pp. 86 and 360, while on pp. 18 and 20 it simply says ‘Madhaviye’: The Viramitrodaya1234 says that the author of the Madanaratna refers to the views of the Mitākṣarā, Kalpataru and Halāyudha.
It may be noted that it states on p. 335 that the Samaya nirṇayodyota and the Acāravivekodyota had already been compo sed by the author. It profusely quotes in Vyavahārodyota Manu, Yajñavalkya, Nārada, Katyayana and Bșhaspati. The Parasara mādbaviya references on pp. 18. 20. 86, 360 show that he held that Madhava was identical with Vidyaranya. This fact that an author who flourished in northern India about 1400 A. D. held
1234 तत्र मदनरत्नकारेण मिताक्षराकल्पतरुहलायुधादिसर्वग्रन्थान्तरेष्वलिखनान्निर्मूलत्व.
मस्य जङ्गमं स्थावरमिति प्राजापत्यस्य लिखनात्समूलत्वमिति दूषणमुक्त्वा &c. वीर० p. 626; vide ateo pp. 5, 29, 36, 59 for reference to HET.
- Madanaratna
809
this view strongly militates against father Heras’ sweeping asser tions against the identity of the two. A remarkable matter is that he speaks of Dhāreśvara i. e. Bhoja .as bhatti’on p. 324 ( etat Sangrahakāramatam Dhāreśvarabhattenāpvāsritam). Madana simha and his ancestors are spoken of as ruling the country about Delhi. Though Madanasiiñha bears tic higli-sounding title of mahārājādhiraja it is highly probable that he was some feudatory chief under the Mahomedan rules of Delhi. It is difficult to conceive of a period between 1300 and 1500 A. D. when a Hindu ruler was king of Delhi. It may be that during the troublous times of Muhammad Tughlak ( 1325-1351 A. D.), when the capital was transferred from Delhi to Doulatabad, or during the weak rule of the last kings of the Tugilak dynasty ( 1388-1413 A. D.). Madanasimha’s predecessors might have usurped some territory about Delhi and ruled over it. At all events it would not be far from correct if the Madanaratna be placed about 1400 1450 A. D. M. M. Haraprasad Sūstri (Report on palm-leaf and paper mss. from Nepal, Intro. pp. 31-32 ) tells us that the dynasty to which Madanasimhadeva belonged ruled over Gorakhapur-Champaran (Western Tirhut), that Madanasimha deva was preceded by Śaktisiiñhadeva, whose predecessor was Pṛthvisimhadeva. The learned S.stri further says that a ms. of the Madanaratnapradipa-prāyaścittudyota applies the title ‘kodandaparasurama ’to Madana (p. 223 ), thai a ms. of the Amarakośa was copied in samvat 1511 (1451-55 A. D.) when Madanasimha ruled over Campakāraṇyanagara ( p. 51 of the body of the Report) and that a ms. of the Narasi hapurāṇa was copied in La-sam 339 ( 1457-58 A. D.) when Mahārājadhiraja Madana sim hadeva ruled over Goraksapura i. e. modern Gorakbpur (p. 29 of the Report ). It is likely that some confusion arose among the scribes of the work owing to the fact that two chieftains bearing the name Madanasimha flourished at the same period near Delhi and Gorakhpur. Tie great similarity of the names Madanapala and Madanasimha misled J. C. Ghose ( Hindu Law, vol. II, p. xiv. ed. of 1917) into holding that the Madanapārijāta and the Madanaratna were written under Madanapala. But it is clear from the ancestry of the two kings, Madanapala and Madanasimha, and the names of the real authors of the digests (Madanapārijāta and Madanaratna) that they have no connection with each other.
H.D.-102
810