________________
INTRODUCTION.
cxxix
commentary? The latter author says there that he has taken cognisance of the opinions) approved by Kullaka and Narayana, and of those entertained in their hearts by Govinda and Medhâtithi.' As it is evident that in the second group the later author has been placed first, the assumption that the same order has been observed with respect to the first pair, and that Raghavananda, applying the principle of uttarottaragarîyastva, i. e, naming the more important persons later, intends the whole series to be read backwards ?, is not unreasonable. In its favour speaks also the fact that Narayana quotes Govindaraga on Manu VIII, 123. In order to fix the date when Narayana wrote, we have to rely chiefly on some quotations. His opinions on law are first quoted by Kamalakara, who wrote in the beginning of the seventeenth century 8. But a Namanidhâna by Narayana Sarvagna is mentioned by Råyamukuta in his commentary on the Amarakosha, which was composed in 1431 A.D.. The only MS. of the Manvarthavivriti hitherto found (Deccan College Collection of 18791880, No. 238) bears at the end of Adhyâya VIII, the date Sam. 1544 kaitra badi 9 ravau, which corresponds to Sunday, March 27, 1497 A.D. Hence it follows that Narayana cannot have written later than in the last half of the fourteenth century. Possibly he may be somewhat older.
The Manvarthavivriti is not a running commentary which explains every word of the text. It confines itself to the elucidation of selected difficult passages and words. It was written with the avowed intention of undoing the work of the author's predecessors. At the end of chapters
1 Jolly, Tagore Lectures, p. 11; the passige has been printed in Dr. Bumell's Tanjore Catalogue, p. 126.
* This manner of enumerating a series of persons or of arguments is also found occasionally in older Sanskrit works; see e. g. Vasishtha XIII, 58.
• Aufrecht, Catalogue Sansk. MSS. Bodl. Libr. p. 279.
• See Professor Aufrecht's Analysis in the Journal of the German Oriental Society, vol. xxviii, p. 114.
This MS., which has been used for the notes to the translation, is a very fair copy, containing the commentary alone. Fols. 1-8 have been half eaten by rats. Fols. 192-3 have been lost.
[25]
Digitized by Google
