1866.] A notice of the Caunaka Smriti. 157 



with " Athaha bhagavan baudhayanah, tlius says the venerable Bail- 

 dhayana," or a similar phrase. Amongst otber interesting matters 

 we find in it also the ' rule of adoption' quoted by Nandapandita in 

 the Dattakamiinamsa. I shall give it below, and it will serve to show 

 how great the resemblance is between the two works. What purpose 

 these Paricishtas served, and whether they belong to the same authors 

 as the corresponding Sutras, are questions which are open to dis- 

 cussion. But the circumstance that Baudhayana's ' vidhis,' as well 

 as those belonging to the Sama veda, are chiefly in prose, strengthens 

 the supposition that the ^launakiya karika has been remodelled and 

 verified by some later writer. It is not at all improbable that this 

 Vaishnava author, and the follower of Ramanuja who composed the 

 introductory verses, are the same person, and that the work in its 

 present shape is not older than the thirteenth or fourteenth century ; 

 for the Mitakskara and its immediate predecessor never quote this 

 work. In the chapter on adoption it is not mentioned at all, and 

 Vicvecvara as well as Vijnanecvara elsewhere quote a Qaunaka in 

 prose. On the other hand Devandabhatta and Nandapandita, who are 

 both Southerners and countrymen of Ramanuja, quote it. 



I now proceed to give the text and translation of the Putrasam- 

 grahavidhi, according to my MS. compared with the Dattakamimamsa 

 of Nandapandita, the Dattakacandrika, the Vyavahara-mayukha and 

 the Samskarakaustubha. There appear to have existed two redac- 

 tions, one followed by the Dattakamimamsa and the Dattakacandrika, 

 the other by the MS. and the other books mentioned. I cannot believe 

 that this circumstance is accidental, especially as it repeats itself in 

 the use of the Baudhayana-parigishta, where the Samskarakaustubha 

 and my MS. are likewise opposed to the Dattakamimamsa and Dattaka- 

 candrika. Devandabhatta and Nandapandita are both Southerners, 

 and the authors of the Mayukha and of the Samskarakaustubha, as 

 well as the possessors of the originals from which my copies are taken, 

 are all Maharashtradeshastha Brahmans, it would therefore seem that 

 both in the case of the Qaunaka-karika and that of the Baudhayana, 

 there existed, two redactions, a Maharashtra and a Southern. 



I give here the text of the former, as it is the shorter one. and the 

 additions of the latter in the notes, 

 21 



