Medhātithi is one of the oldest and most famous commentators on the , more commonly known as the

Laws of Manu The ''Manusmṛti'' (), also known as the ''Mānava-Dharmaśāstra'' or the Laws of Manu, is one of the many legal texts and constitutions among the many ' of Hinduism. Over fifty manuscripts of the ''Manusmriti'' are now known, but the earli ...

. The text is a part of the Hindu

Dharmaśāstra ''Dharmaśāstra'' () are Sanskrit Puranic Smriti texts on law and conduct, and refer to treatises (shastras, śāstras) on Dharma. Like Dharmasūtra which are based upon Vedas, these texts are also elaborate law commentaries based on vedas, D ...

tradition, which attempts to record the laws of

dharma Dharma (; , ) is a key concept in various Indian religions. The term ''dharma'' does not have a single, clear Untranslatability, translation and conveys a multifaceted idea. Etymologically, it comes from the Sanskrit ''dhr-'', meaning ''to hold ...

Location

There is some debate over the exact location in which Medhātithi composed his commentary, but there is significant evidence which places him in

Kashmir Kashmir ( or ) is the Northwestern Indian subcontinent, northernmost geographical region of the Indian subcontinent. Until the mid-19th century, the term ''Kashmir'' denoted only the Kashmir Valley between the Great Himalayas and the Pir P ...

. Julius Jolly argues that he was an inhabitant of

Southern India South India, also known as Southern India or Peninsular India, is the southern part of the Deccan Peninsula in India encompassing the states of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Telangana as well as the union territories of ...

, while Georg Bühler argues (and P. V. Kane tends to agree) that he was a Kashmirian, or at least an inhabitant of Northern India. Robert Lingat does not acknowledge a debate about Medhātithi's origin, stating explicitly "one knows nothing about him save that he lived in Kashmir."

Dating and historical context

As with most ancient texts, the exact date that Medhātithi's commentary was written is unknown. Kane argues that, because Medhātithi names several other commentators that are dated earlier than he is, and because the author of the

Mitākṣarā The is a ' (legal Commentary (philology), commentary) on the Yajnavalkya Smriti best known for its theory of "inheritance by birth." It was written by Vijñāneśvara, a scholar in the Western Chalukya, Kalyani Chalukya court in the late elevent ...

(a commentary on the Yajnavalkya Smriti) considers him as authoritative, he has to be writing later than 820 CE and before 1050 CE. Lingat places him in the ninth century or in the early tenth century at the latest. David Brick, in his 2010 review of historical literature on widow burning, places him about 1000 CE.Brick, David (April–June 2010). "The Dharmasastric Debate on Widow Burning". Journal of the American Oriental Society 130 (2): 203–223

Notes

References

* Indian Sanskrit scholars 11th-century Indian scholars Indian legal scholars {{Hindu-bio-stub