History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c90.178
History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c90.178
- Language
- English
v7.c90.178.1
In the following notes on individual Purāṇas and Upapurāṇas the author adds a few notes based on his own study of the Purāṇas and (printed) digests (*nibandhas*) of an early age He desires to emphasize that the earliest works that can be called digests and are available in print cannot be placed earlier than about 1100 A. D. Though there is difference of views among scholars about the exact dates of composition, the Mitākarā, the Kṛtyakalpataru (which is a regular Digest of various kinds of materials on Dharmaśāstra) and Aparārka's work (though in form a commentary on Yājñavalkya-smṛti is still in the nature of a Digest) are three printed works more or less contemporary and composed between about 1100 to 1140 A. D. The Kṛtyakalpataru on Vyavahāra mentions by name Prakāśa, Halāyudha, Kāmadhenu and Pārijāta. Besides, Kṛtyakalpataru (Niyata p. 280) cites the explanation of Parārika (in Āp. Dh. S. I. 17. 26) by the Smṛtimañjarī (of Govindarāja) and also on śrāddha (pp. 46 and 259). It has been shown in H. of Dh. vol. I that Prakāśa (pp. 306-308), Pārijāta (pp. 308-309), Smṛtimañjarī (pp. 312-314) were works of the digest *genre*. The Kāmadhenu of Gopāla also appears to have been a digest (H of Dh. vol. I. pp. 293 ff.). The author Gopāla was a friend of Lakṣmīdhara (vide Introd. to Dānakāṇḍa p.
v7.c90.178.2
49), but, since the latter employs the past tense (*cakre*) with reference to Gopāla's work and the present tense (*tanyate kalpavṛkṣaḥ*) as regards his own work it follows that the Kāmadhenu was composed at least a few years before the Kalpataru. As no mss. of the Prakāśa, Pārijāta and Kāmadhenu are available it is impossible to say anything about their exhaustiveness or otherwise But from the summary at the end of the ms. on the Prāyaścitta section of the Smṛtimañjarī (H of Dh. vol I. p. 312 note 714) it appears that it must have been fairly large and was composed on the same lines as the later Kṛtyakalpataru, since it began with Paribhāṣākāṇḍa and Brahmacāri-section, then dealt with Gṛhasthadharmas, Dina, Śuddhi and Āśauca, Śrāddha, then with Vānaprastha and Pravrajyā (corresponding to the mokṣakāṇḍa of Kalpataru) and ended with Prāyaścittas. These predecessors of the Kalpataru were superseded by the extensive work of Lakṣmīdhara, who himself receded into the background when the works of Hemādri, Caṇḍeśvara, Madanaratna, the Vīramitrodaya, the Mayūkhas of Nīlakaṇṭha became popular. Even before the Kāmadhenu and probably the Smṛtimañjarī also, Bhoja (about 2nd quarter of 11th century A.
v7.c90.178.3
D) composed (or patronised the composition of) several works such as the Bhujabala and Rājamārtāṇḍa which exhaustively dealt with the astrological requirements of *saṁskāras* from *puṁsavana* to marriage and also of *vratas*, *yātrā*, *śāntis*, *pratiṣṭhā* (vide the author's paper on 'King Bhoja and his works on Dharmaśāstra and astrology' in JOR, (Madras), vol. XXIII for 1953-54 pp 94-127 for five works of Bhoja). So there was nothing very novel in the Kṛtyakalpataru except its exhaustive and logical treatment of all topics and profuse quotations from the Epics and Purāṇas. The Mitākṣarā does not quote much from the Purānas, but Aparārka and Kalpataru quote them profusely. The Kalpataru quotes about 600 verses from Devīpurāna, over 200 verses each from Kālikā, Ādityapurāna, Nandīpurāna and Narasimhapurāna (all Upapurānas) while it quotes none at all from Viṣṇudharmottara. The Kalpataru did not probably regard it as authoritative, though Aparārka and the Dānasāgara utilized it to some extent. The learned editor of the extensive Kalpataru, Prof. Aiyangar, has made great efforts to identify the quotations therein from the Purānas, and laid all workers and scholars under great obligations. But many quotations have eluded him as will be shown later on. He has been assiduous in pointing out how Hemādri, Candeśvara and Mitramiśra have copied wholesale from the Kalpataru.
v7.c90.178.4
It is not impossible that even the Kalpataru might have done the same to some extent as regards its predecessors such as the Pārijāta, Prakāśa, Smrtimañjarī, and Kāmadhenu. But as those works are not yet available, no positive conclusion can be drawn about its borrowing for the present