1nspite of these shortcomings the communtary has got its own value. Several points of dispute the tuth१)r has settled with cogent arguments and has prnounced tht frmal verdict in clear and forcible langu:ge. As such, the commentary has t() be taken as an infallible authority (on ।le Waikha॥asasutra. The author does not १uote or refer to authors (f more recen॥ times; but in one instance he mentions- he Karikas 011 the W:aikha masa Smarasutra comp0sed by his materाual grandfather Sri (0ur author has compoxed a brief commentary (writti) (011 the Srautasutra the first three chapters. of which are available. He has commented upon the seventh chapter of Vaikharasa mantra samhita k10wn as Paramatmika prasna and this volumi॥८)us work has been published already in three different edit॥६॥ the fam10us w()rk kn()wn as Tithinir:1ayakarika which was publi shed in 1876 i। 1he fir९l instance ant has urlderg11e + recent ]He has also written a commentary o!॥ the Badarayana's Brahma Sutras in accordance with the Waikhanasa school of thought and |he is revered as Bhashya-kara by Waikhanasas, In his Uttama-brahma widya he has established that worship of Vishnu in idols (Samurtacaram) is the only way for attaining 1iberation (Moksha) and an essence of this great work 1amely Uttamabrahmavidyasara has been published already. There he maintains that the word Brahmavit can refer only to the performer of Acts i.e. Worship of Vishnu in idols. He has also writte॥ another work 'Sri Vaikhanasa mahima manjari wherein, as tle title 3. cf. Prasna 3, Khandam 17 (p. 464} तत्कर्म यन्न बन्धाय स विद्या या विमुक्तये । आयासायापरं कर्म शिद्याऽन्या शिल्पनैपुणम् ।। श्रीविष्णुपुराणम् १-१०-१९ . क्रियायोगं समाचक्ष्व भवदाराधनं विभो' । श्री भागवतं ११-२७-१, इत्यादि । आत्मक्रीड आत्मरतिः क्रियावानेष ब्रह्मविदां वरिष्ठः । मुण्डकोपनिषत् ३-४
