V 11 that by Gobindardija, and that by Dharani-dhara were in great repute until the appearance of Kullitka Bhatta's cominentary, which has preference over the other glosses, being considered by the Pandits to be the shortest and yet the clearest and most useful." The glosses of Manu denominated the Mādhave by Shayanáchárjya and the Nandarjakrit by Nandardija appear to be known atmong the Marshattats, and the former to be of general authority copecially in the Carnatic. The continentary denominated Manwartha-chandrika; appears also to be a work of celebrityt. Another commentary on Manu called the Kūmadhen. appears to exist whigi is cited by Sridhardichérjya in his Smriti-satra. An excellent commentary on the Gostitutes of Vishnu, entitled the Voijoyant? was writte: by Nanalaz Pundita, w lao is also the author of a commentary on the institutes of Parásara. The copious gloss of Apartírka of the royal house of Silara is supposed to be the most ancient commentary on Jägnyavalkya, and accordingly earlier than the more celebrated commentary on the institutes of that sage, the Mitäkhsharts of Vigyāneshwara. A commentary on Jágnyacalkya was also written by Deo abodha, and the one written by Bishwa-rápa is osten cited in the Digests. - The Dipa-kalikó by Shulapcini, which is likewisc a commentary on Jägnyavalkya, is in deserved repute with the Bengal schoolt. The Mitákshará of Viyyàneshwara or Vigyána Jogi, a celebrated ascetic, althouglı professedly a commentary on the institutes of Jaignyavalkya, is in fact a general and excellent digest. 13 y citing the other legislators and writers as authority for his explanation of Joigny, twalkya's text which he professes to illustrate, and expounding their texts in the progress of his work, and at the same time reconcilitig the seeming discrepancies, if any, between them and the text of his author, Viyyāneshwara has surpassed all those writers of commentaries whose works combine the utility of regular digests with their original character as commentaries. Ἀattrakoz ßhcrtta, the celebratel autlior of the comumentary on tho 3/jnava-d/iarma.-shóstra, wrote also a gloss on the text of Jama, brother of the 7th Manu. The text book of Goutama was commented upon by Isara-dattácharjyaş. The Paradardjya, by Varadó Raja, is a general digest, but it may be placed among the commentaries, since it is principally framed on the institutes of Worada. It is it work of anthority in the Southern schools and especially in the Drăvirot country. The Mādhwiya or Mādhavya, though a commentary on the échéra and préyaschitta Kiindows
- “At length appeared, (says Sir William Jones.) Krotte&a. Botto, a Brähman of Bengal. who, after a painful course of study and the collation of numerous manuscripts, produced a work, of which it may. perhaps, be said very truly, that it is the shortest yet the myst Iunainous, the least ostentatious yet the most learned, the deepest yet the most agreen'sle commentary ever coulposed on any author, ancient or
modern, European or Asiatic.’ 曝
- .
+ This work was used by Monsieur Deslougehamps in the preparation of his edition of the institute“ of Manus, and in his opinion it is in many instances more precise and clear than the gloss of Kullrikos Bhatta. † Shulapični was a native of Mitlilá, he resided at Salluria in Bengal, and wroto also a treatise on penance and expiation, whg. is in great repute with both schools. Coleb. Dig. Pre. xviii. § This commentator was a resident of Drávira, and is famous for his other compositions : his work, in which he occasionally quotes other Smritis, is called Mitákshard, and must not be coufounded with Vigyāneshwara's treatise of the same name.
