History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s70.13

v1.c6.s70.13

As the Smṛticandrikā names the Mit., Aparārka and Smṛtyarthasāra, its upper limit cannot be placed earlier than 1150 A. D. Their Lordships of the Privy Council say in *Buddhasingh vs Laltusingh*⁸¹² that Devanandabhaṭṭa is supposed to have been a contemporary of Aparārka. But this supposition is not quite correct. Since Aparārka is quoted several times as an authority to be preferred even to the Mit., it looks more probable that there is some distance of time between Aparārka and Devaṇṇabhaṭṭa. Hemādri quotes the views of the Smṛticandrikā probably oftener than those of any other *nibandhakāra*. In one place⁸¹³ he does not approve of the explanation given by the Smṛticandrikā of a verse occurring in the Mahābhārata about a man with male issue performing śrāddha on the thirteenth *tithi*. In another⁸¹⁴ place Hemādri refers to the view of the Smṛticandrikā on the question whether the *śrāddha* on *amāvāsyā* is optional with śrāddha in dark half. Therefore it follows that the Smṛticandrikā must have been composed at least a generation earlier than Hemādri, i. e. before 1225 A. D. The Smṛticandrikā is frequently quoted by the Sarasvatīvilāsa, the Vīramitrodaya and other digests.