ix tions exist between sruti, smriti, and purána, there the sruti is preferable; but where a contradiction exists between a smriti and a purána, there the smriti is to be held in preference” (Vyasa). “If two texts (of Rishis) differ, reason (or that which it best supports) must in practice prevail” (Jàgnyavalkya. ) 歌 The various digests have not however treated of all parts of the Dharma shastra, nor have they arrived at the same conclusion. The variations in the doctrincs of the digests have led to the formation of the different schools. The digests, with reference to the discrepancies existing among them, may be said to be of five classes, each of which has been adopted as authority in some particular part of India, and thus have been formed the five divisions or schools of Hindu law. These schools are-thể Gowriya (Bengal), the Benares, the Mithilá (North Behar), the Maháráshtra (the Marhatta country,) and the Drávira“. The original smritis are of course conimon to all of them, but they have each given the preference to the doctrines inculcated in particular digests; and the texts of the sages must be used in the same sense as propounded in the particular digests adopted in each of the schools. Of these five schools two may be said to be the principal,—the Benares and Bengal : the other three bcing in most respects assimilated to the Benares school. The Mitsiksharā of Vigyāneshwara is the chief guide of the Benares school. • “ The range of its authority,” says Mr. Colebrooke, “is far greater than that of any of the other digests; for it is received in all the schools of Hindu law from Benares to the southern extremity of the Peninsula of India, as the chief ground work of the doctrines which they follow, and as an authority from which they rarely dissent.” The law books used in the different provinces, except Bengal, agree in generally deferring to the authority of the Mitaksharā, in frequently appealing to its texts, and in rarely and at the same time modestly dissenting from its doctrines on particular questions. That dissent consists in inculcating certain doctrines not contained in. nor sanctioned by, the Mitakshari. 3 and the adoption of some of these doctrines and the use of the books inculcating such doctrines distinguish each of the minor schools from that of Benares. The other works which concurrently with the Mit&kshards are preferentially respected in the province of Benares are the Piramitrodaya by Mitra Misra, the Parasurdimaidhava, the syrzvahára2ntidhava, the commentaries on the Mitäkshard by Vireshwara Bhatta and Bálam Bhatta, and the Pīvāda-tändava and other works of Kamala.kara. The leading authorities of Mithifi are the Vāvāda-ratnākarai, and Piedda-chintamanif. The Pivdida-chandra by Lakshmi or Lakshima Devi is likewise much respected in that schoolS. The works which concurrently with the above are of great weight in Mithild are the treatise on
- The Drăvira school is that of the whole of the southern portion of the Peninsula of India. It is
termed by Sir William Macnaghten “the school of Dekhan” which is a corruption of the Sanskrit word e/akshima (soutla.) g + Vivāda-ratnākara was compiled under the superintendence of Chandleshwara, the minister of tro" Sinha Deva, king of Mithilá. Chandeshwara himself is also the reputed author of some law tracts. ᎢᏂᏯ• Wyavahār-ratnākara, compiled under the superintendence of the same minister, is also of great authority." ΑΜέέλεΞά. t This work was composed by Vāchaspati Misra, who was also the author of several other works, namely, th” syavahára-chined mani, &c. commonly cited by the name of Misra : these also are of great authority in MithiloMr. Colebrooke says:—“No more than ten or twelve generations have passed since he flourished at S* in Tirhoot.” Coleb. I)ig. pre. p. xv. § This learned lady set, the name of her nephew Misaru. Afisra to all her compositions on law and philosophy, and took the titles of her works from the then reiguing prince Chandra Sinha, grandson of Hara Sinha Deva. Ibid. pre. pp. 15 & 16. to
