History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s71.12

v1.c6.s71.12

One important question is as to the identity of Haradatta, the commentator of the Dharma and Gṛhya sūtras and Haradatta, the author of the Padamañjarī, a commentary on the Kāśikā of Vāmana and Jayāditya. Bühler felt uncertain about the identity. Śaṅkarabhaṭṭa in his Dvaita-nirṇaya speaks of Haradatta as expounding⁸²⁷ a *kārikā* of Hari (Vākyapadīya III. p. 260, Benares ed.) and also speaks of Haradatta as the author of the Ujjvalā and the Mitākṣarā without making any distinction between the two. This shows that he regarded the two as identical. Haradatta in his commentaries on the Dharmasūtras gives far more attention to grammar than almost any other commentator of Dharmaśāstra.⁸²⁸ His grammatical disquisition on Āp. Dh. S. I. 2. 5. 18 (‘plāvanam ca nāmno’ etc.) is almost identical with the Padamañjarī on Pāṇini VIII. 2. 83 (‘pratyabhivādeśūdre’). On Āp. Dh. S. II. 7. 17. 17 he quotes a verse as from the grammarians for defining the location of the *udīcyas*.⁸²⁹ The Mādhavīya Dhātu-vṛtti mentions the Padamañjarī. From this it follows that the Padamañjarī was composed before 1300 A. D. Dr. Belvalkar places Haradatta, the author of the Padamañjarī, about 1100 A. D.⁸³⁰ The learned editor of the Anāvilā in the Trivandrum series points out that, as Haradatta is quoted in the Puruṣakāra which in its turn is mentioned in the Dhātu-vṛtti of Mādhava and as Śaraṇadeva, the author of the Durghaṭa-vṛtti, who wrote in *śake* 1095, cites the Jainendra and Kaiyaṭa but not Haradatta nor the Padamañjarī, Haradatta wrote about the close of the 12th century A. D. These circumstances render it highly probable (if not certain) that Haradatta the commentator of the Dharmasūtras is the same as the author of the Padamañjarī and that he flourished between 1100 and 1300 A. D. and probably about 1200 A. D. The Smṛticandrikā twice refers to the bhāṣya of the Āpastamba-dharma-sūtra.⁸³¹ Haradatta's commentary is styled *vṛtti* and not *bhāṣya* and the citations do not occur in his work. Hence it appears that the Smṛticandrikā did not know Haradatta's works and the latter could not have flourished much earlier than the Smṛti-candrikā.