A ground-plan of the Vyaviharakaṇḍa (9) If the explanations of the treat- ises lay additional emphasis on a point explained by earlier authors, this expla- nation has been quoted in certain places. prétation of Aparärka is in accordance legal procedure (H) had been with the obvious meaning and therefore printed. The corrections of MM. Ganga no quotation has been elicited from it. nath Jha are of great importance, but, we have to request scholars to study. the comparative table of his corrections: and that of ours which forms Appendix. 1 of this Introduction. (10). The order of explanations in the case of contemporaneous treatises, writ- ers, or commentators has been fixed with regard to convenience of arrange- ment, e. g. in the case of those from व्यवहारमयूख, विवादताण्डव and व्यवहारोद्योत, which are contemporaneous. (11) While reading an anthology of Vedic literature it must be remembered that few direct statements about legal usages are to be found there and that it is only incidentally, for instance in meta- phors or in connection with other matters, that there are any references to legal facts and that even these are not at all definite or specific, some of them being vague and some of a general order. It is the definite and the particular statement which can be of use for historical conclusions. (12) The incorrect readings of the printed texts have been corrected. There are, for instance, several incorrect read- ings in the Bhasya of Medhatithi on Manu VIII and IX as printed by the late Mr. V. N. Mandlik and by Prin. J.R. Gharpure. We have corrected the mistakes in several places and relegated the in- correct readings to the foot-notes. The text has been collated with that of three Mss. from the India Office library and one belonging to the proprietor of the Gujarat Printing Press; but in several places the readings of Mss. were found to be corrupt and the readings have been fixed very often with reference to the context by the editor. The corrected text of Medhãtithi, by MM. Ganganath Jha was to hand only after the Medha- tithi quotations in the elements of the (13) Prof. Jolly has left off a considera- ble portion from the Bhasya of Asahaya, probably because it was evanescent and obscure. A good deal of this portion appears, in an amended form, in this work. The corrupt portion, however, has not been printed in the foot-notes, as in the case of Medhatithi, but, appears in an independent appendix. For the text. of the Bhagya of Asahaya the only available Ms, was the one in the Mss. Library of the Bhandarkar Institute and corrected by one Kalyanabhatta. (14) The Bhäs'ya of Asahaya, the commentary of Vis'varupa, the Bhagya of Medhatithi and the Mitakşară have been fully utilized. Even where the Vis'varupa and the Mitakşarā agree, the Mitakşarā passage has been quoted, for, most succes- Sors of Vijnanes'vara quote only the Mitakşara, The Govindarajiya also has been quoted in full, although, it is very often a reproduction of Medhatithi, for the reason that the Bhasya of Medhatithi is of ten unintelligible. In portions where the commentary of Govindaraja was corrupt, that of Kullakabhatta, which agrees with it in principle, has been substituted instead. There are many vitiated passages in the sections on भाषा, उत्तर and मुक्ति in the व्यवहारमातृका of जीमूतवाहन, edited by the late Sir As'utoşa Mukerjee. Some portions of it that were serviceable have been quoted in an amended form, and the portion that was hopelessly corrupt has been left out. 2. (15) The order of passages quoted from the extant Smriti works such as Manu and Yajňavalkya has not been adhered to, while classifying them, topically.
