the footprints of Kumarila.  Amongst the numerous other followers of Kumarila, the names of Sucarita Mis’ra the author of Kas’ika and Somes’vara the author of Nyayasudha deserve special notice.  Ramak@r@s@na Bha@t@ta wrote an excellent commentary on the Tarkapada of S’astradipika called the Yuktisnehapura@ni-siddhanta-candrika and Somanatha wrote his Mayukhamalika on the remaining chapters of S’astradipika.  Other important current Mima@msa works which deserve notice are such as Nyayamalavistara of Madhava, Subodhini, Mima@msabalaprakas’a of S’a@nkara Bha@t@ta, Nyayaka@nika of Vacaspati Mis’ra, Mima@msaparibha@sa by K@r@s@nayajvan, Mima@msanyayaprakas’a by Anantadeva, Gaga Bha@t@ta’s Bha@t@tacintama@ni, etc.  Most of the books mentioned here have been consulted in the writing of this chapter.  The importance of the Mima@msa literature for a Hindu is indeed great.  For not only are all Vedic duties to be performed according to its maxims, but even the sm@rti literatures which regulate the daily duties, ceremonials and rituals of Hindus even at the present day are all guided and explained by them.  The legal side of the sm@rtis consisting of inheritance, proprietory rights, adoption, etc. which guide Hindu civil life even under the British administration is explained according to the Mima@msa maxims.  Its relations to the Vedanta philosophy will be briefly indicated in the next chapter.  Its relations with Nyaya-Vais’e@sika have also been pointed out in various places of this chapter.  The views of the two schools of Mima@msa as propounded by Prabhakara and Kumarila on all the important topics have

_______________________________________________________

____________

[Footnote 1:  Mahamahopadhyaya Haraprasada S’astri says, in his introduction to Six Buddhist Nyaya Tracts, that “Kumarila preceded Sa@nkara by two generations.”]

372

also been pointed out.  Prabhakara’s views however could not win many followers in later times, but while living it is said that he was regarded by Kumarila as a very strong rival [Footnote ref 1].  Hardly any new contribution has been made to the Mima@msa philosophy after Kumarila and Prabhakara.  The Mima@msa sutras deal mostly with the principles of the interpretation of the Vedic texts in connection with sacrifices, and very little of philosophy can be gleaned out of them.  S’abara’s contributions are also slight and vague.  Varttikakara’s views also can only be gathered from the references to them by Kumarila and Prabhakara.  What we know of Mima@msa philosophy consists of their views and theirs alone.  It did not develop any further after them.  Works written on the subject in later times were but of a purely expository nature.  I do not know of any work on Mima@msa written in English except the excellent one by Dr Ga@nganatha Jha on the Prabhakara Mima@msa to which I have frequently referred.