83. Aniruddha
Volume I: Part II pp. 727–730
An early and eminent Bengal writer - wrote Hāralatā and Piṭṛdayitā alias Karmopadeśinīpaddhati - contents of Hāralatā and of Piṭṛdayitā - authors and works named in them - personal history of Aniruddha - flourished in 3rd quarter of 12th century.
— Synopsis by P.V. Kane, from History of Dharmaśāstra
83. Aniruddha
##83. Aniruddha Smṛticandrikā (Gharpure's edition) and also pp. 366, 381, 463 of the Śrāddha section of the same work. Raghunandana often men- tions it; vide (vol. I) Tithi p. 100, Śrāddha p. 190, Āhnika p. 434, Malāmāsa p. 791; (II) Yajurvedī Vṛṣotsarga p. 642. The Madanapārijāta mentions it frequently – vide pp. 177, 180, 287, 288. Therefore the Smṛtyarthasāra must have been composed between 1150 and 1200 A. D.
##83. Aniruddha Aniruddhabhaṭṭha is one of the early and eminent Bengal writers on Dharmaśāstra. His Hāralatā was published in the Bibliotheca Indica Series (1909) and his Pitṛdayitā alias Karmopaśinīpaddhati was recently published by the Sanskrit Sahitya Parishad at Calcutta (No. 6).
The Hāralatā deals with impurity on birth and death, with the acts allowed to be done or forbidden during impurity, with periods of impurity on death in a distant land or on the deaths of infants and women, with rules when two periods of impurity overlap each other, with impurity on the death of sapiṇḍas, the meaning of sapiṇḍa, persons who have not to observe periods of impurity, cremation and burial, offering of water to the deceased, observances during mourning, persons entitled to perform rites after death, observances after the period of mourning, persons to whom no water should be offereḍ
The Pitṛdayitā is a work intended for the followers of the Sāmaveda. Its contents are:— the duties on rising from bed, brushing the teeth, bath, saṁdhyā, tarpaṇa, vaiśvadeva pārvaṇa śrāddha, eulogy of gifts, sāpiṇḍīkaraṇa and other śrāddhas, antyeṣṭi and rites during the days of mourning after death, the letting loose of a bull. The printed work appears to be the same that is described in the I. O. Cat. at p. 474 as Karmopadeśinī. But the India Office Mṣ appears to have certain various read- ings e. g. a reference to Kāmadhenu and Kalpataru at the end of the section on antyeṣṭi does not occur in the printed text.1 The first verse of the Hāralatā states that the author consulted the commentaries on Manu and other Smṛtiṣ2 Besides the well-known smṛtikāras such as Manu, Yājñavalkya, Nārada etc. the authors and works named in the Hāralatā are :— Asahāya as the Bhāṣyakāra of Gautama, Kāmadhenu, Govindarāja, Bhojadeva, Viśvarūpa and Śaṅkhadhara. The Pītṛdayitā3 says that it was composed after consulting the Gobhilagṛhyasūtra, the Chāndogyapariśiṣṭa, smṛtis, the śāstras of Gautama and Vasiṣṭha and various saṁgraha workṣ In the work itself, besides the above, Kātyāyana, Varāhapurāṇa and smaller ( svalpa ) Matsyapurāṇa are quoteḍ
From the last verse4 of the Hāralatā we know that Aniruddha was a resident of Vihārapāṭaka on the bank of the Ganges and was a student of the doctrines of Bhaṭṭa ( Kumārila ). From the colophons5 at the end of the Hāralatā and the Pītṛdayitā it appears that he was a Dharmādhyakṣa and a Cāmpāhaṭṭīya ( a section among Vārendras ) Brāhmaṇa of Bengal. The mṣ in the India Office has a colophon in which Aniruddha is styled Dharmādhikaraṇika ( Judge ). From the Dānasāgara of Ballālasena we learn (verses 6 and 7) that Aniruddha was a guru of the king of Bengal and rendered assistance in the composition of that work. The Dānasāgara6 was composed in śake 1091 (i. e. 1169 A. D. ). From this it appears that Aniruddha was at the height of his fame in 1168, i. e. his literary activity may be placed in the third quarter of the 12th century A. D. This 83. Aniruddha conclusion is corroborated by the fact that Hāralatā names Bhojadeva, Govindarāja, and the Kāmadhenu as authorities and is therefore later than 1100 A. D. The Hāralatā is named as an authority in the Śuddhīviveka of Rudradhara.7 The Śrāddha-kriyākaumudī of Govindānanda (about 1510–1545 A. D.) frequently quotes Aniruddha and includes him among ancient authorṣ8 In the Śuddhītattva of Raghunandana, Aniruddha is referred to in the plural as a mark of respect and his view is explaineḍ In several other places the Hāralatā9 is quoted and rarely criticized in the Smṛtitatva — vide (vol. I) Śrāddha p. 321 (cri.); (Vol. II.) Udvdha p. 108, Śuddhi pp. 238, 250 (cri.), 259, 262, 275, 291, 314. The Pitṛdayitā is frequently quoted by him, (vol. I). On Tithi (p. 13 cri.), p. 176; Śrāddha pp. 200, 202, 231; Āhnika p. 358 (stating that the Pitṛdayitā quoted Yogīyājñavalkya VII. 162–165, VI. 27–28), 289, 393, p. 421 (cri), 424; and (vol. II. Śuddhi p. 314, Yajurvedī-śrāddha p. 497 ). Aniruddhabhaṭṭa is frequently men-tioned without naming any one of his works in (vol. I) Śrāddha tattva pp. 209 (cri.), 220, 221, 222 (cri. as ‘heyam’), 241 (cri. as ‘pramāṇaśūnya’), 227 (cri.), Āhnika (p. 395), Mala° p. 801; Ekādaśī vol. II. p. 44. There is a commentary on the Hāralatā called Sandarbhasūcikā composed by Acyuta Cakravartin, son of Haridāsa Tarkācārya (vide I. O. Cat. p. 567, No. 1753 ). In JASB (New Sries) vol. XI. p. 362 the coṃ of Acyuta is described as Sandarbhasūtikā which seems to be a misprint for ‘sūcikā’.
Raghunandana in his Ekādaśītatva10 (vol. II. p. 44) makes a casual but very striking remark. The question is about what day as Ekādaśī should be observed when the latter is mixed up with Daśamī (tithi) or 12th. Vācaspati-Miśra relying on a verse in Viṣṇurahasya held that Ekādaśī mixed up with tenth should be observed as fast by one who does so for securing some object, while Ekādaśī mixed with 12th should be observed as fast by one who is niṣkāma (who has no object in view). Raghunandana replies that Viṣṇurahasya has been declared as apocryphal by the Dānasāgara claimed to have been composed by Aniruddha Bhaṭṭa (as stated in the Dānasāgrara itself). Raghunandana probably held and wants to suggest that the Dānasāgara was really com- posed by Aniruddha and allowed to be put forward in the name of his patron, king Ballālasena. This will be discussed under the heading ‘Ballālasena and Lakṣmaṇasena’.
In the proceedings of the ASB (for 1869 p. 317) a Cātur- māsyapaddhati of Aniruddha is noteḍ Mitra notices a work called Bhagavattattvamñjarī on Vaiṣṇava philosophy written by Aniruddha (Mitra’s Notices vol. III. p. 155, No. 2700).