81. Pradīpa

Volume I: Part II pp. 724–725

Chapter eighty-one of P.V. Kane's 'History of Dharmaśāstra' is dedicated to a significant text identified as the 'Pradīpa'. This work stands out as an independent treatise, suggesting its unique contribution rather than serving as a commentary on, or a direct digest of, a specific prior authority. Its period of composition is estimated to fall between 1100 and 1150 C.E., positioning it within a pivotal phase of Dharmaśāstra literature's evolution. The 'Pradīpa' is characterized by its broad engagement with various facets of Hindu law and custom. Its thematic scope notably encompasses *vyavahāra*, which addresses judicial proceedings and civil law; *śrāddha*, detailing the important ancestral rites; and *śuddhi*, which outlines the essential purification rituals. Furthermore, the text explores a range of other topics, indicative of its comprehensive approach to the intricate principles and practices of *dharma* during the early medieval period.

— Synopsis by P.V. Kane, from History of Dharmaśāstra

81. Pradīpa

The Smṛtyarthasāra of Śrīdhara enumerates the Pradīpa among its authorities after the Kāmadhenu.¹ The Smṛtican- drikā in a highly paronomastic verse appears to refer to a work called Pradīpa.² The Sarasvatīvilāsa³ quotes the Pradīpa that even the suretyship debt of a person must be paid by his grandsoṇ The Jīvatpītṛka- nirṇaya⁴ of Rāmākṛṣṇa (about 1600 A. D.) quotes the Pradīpa on the question that when brothers are separated they should perform separately the annual śrāddha of their father and other ancestorṣ Nandapaṇḍita in his commentary on the⁵ Ṣaḍaśīti cites the view of the Pradīpa that the sūtra of Paithīnasī (a woman delivered of a son bathing after twenty nights from delivery is entitled to perform all religious rites, while one who is delivered of a female child is so entitled after a month) applies to the wife of one who is not a dīkṣita (one who has consecrated the Vedic fires ). It has been shown above (note 881) how the Pradīpa criticizes Bhāvadeva, according to the Vīramitrodaya, which, in several places, cites the views of the Pradīpa ( vide pp. 78, 89, 215 etc.).

The foregoing discussion shows that the Pradīpa was probably an independent work on vyavahāra, śrāddha, śuddhi and other topicṣ Being mentioned by the Smṛtyarthasāra and Smṛticandri- kā, it cannot be later than about 1150 A. D. As it criticizes Bhāvadeva it cannot be earlier than 1100 A. D. Hemādri⁶ refers to the explanation of the word kāla occurring in a text of Gārgya offered by a Smṛtipradīpa. It is not unlikely that he means the same work as is referred to by others as Pradīpa.

Vide note 839 above. ↩
पदे पदे प्रस्खलतां प्रदीपपादिसिंतावपि । दृष्णां दृग्विषये चन्द्रिका प्रविन्यन्ये ॥ प्रदीप (lamp and a word) and चन्द्रिका (moonlight and the स्मृति- चन्द्रिका) are paronomastic. ↩
प्रातिभाव्यागतमपि पौत्रैणापि दातव्यमिति प्रदीपः । स. वि. p. 253; vide p. 361 for another reference to प्रदीप. ↩
प्रदीपेषि । विभक्तास्तु पृथक् कुर्युः प्रतिसंवत्सरादिकम् । एकनैवाविभक्तेषु कृते सर्वेषु तन्नृकम् ॥ folio 20b of जीवत्पितृकर्णनिर्णय । (in Bhadkamkar collection ). ↩
पैठीनसिः । सूतिकां पुत्रवर्तीं विंशतिरात्रेण स्नातां सर्वकर्माणि कारयेन्मासेन श्रीजन- नीमिति । इदमपि सर्ववर्णसाधारणमिति प्राज्ञः । अदीक्षितस्त्रीविषयमिति प्रदीपः । षडशीतितीका folio 8a (in the Bhadkamkar collection); vide folio 38b for another reference to प्रदीप. ↩
यदाह गार्ग्यः। यज्ञकालस्तिथिधैर्ये षट्कालो यदि लक्ष्यते । पर्व तत्रोत्तरं कार्यं हीने पूर्वमुपक्रमेत् । कलात्र मुहूर्त्तं न तु घटिका । ...स्मृतिप्रदीपकृताञ्जन्य कलाशशब्दस्य मुहूर्त्ततोक्ता । चतुर्वर्ग० (काल) p. 355. ↩

80. Aparārka 82. Smrityarthasāra of Shrīdhara