The is a (legal 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 court in the late eleventh and early twelfth century.. Along with the Dāyabhāga, it was considered one of the main authorities on Hindu Law from the time the British began administering laws in India. The entire , along with the text of the , is approximately 492 closely printed pages. Author Vijñāneśvara lived at Marthur near kalaburagi (Karnataka), near the end of the eleventh century during the reign of Vikramaditya VI of the Cālukya dynasty of Kalyāni, one of the great rulers of the Deccan. He was a "profound student of the Purva-Mimamsa system," a system of exegetical thought focused on the interpretation of the Vedas. Contrary to Derrett's opinion based on Yajnavalkya 2.4 and 2.305 that Vijñāneśvara was a judge, Kane holds that these passages about characteristics of judges do not reflect a social or historical reality, but rather an interpretation based upon Mimamsa. Date and historical context Kane places the between 974 CE and 1000 CE, but he says, "there is no evidence to establish the exact time when the work was undertaken." He places it after 1050 CE because it names Viśvarūpa, Medhātithi, and Dhāreśvara, other commentators, as authoritative sources. Derrett places the text between 1121 CE and 1125 CE, a much shorter time frame than Kane, but Kane claims that this time frame is purely arbitrary, and Derrett does not provide the evidence to support his claim. Lingat, however, is content to place the simply at the end of the eleventh century. Historically, Vijñāneśvara was attempting to clarify and explain parts of the , and he was criticizing and discussing earlier commentaries on the same text in an attempt to reconcile differences and further explain the meaning and the significance of the text. Sources and topics Vijñāneśvara's commentary "brings together numerous passages, explains away contradictions among them by following the rules of interpretation laid down in the Purva Mimamsa system, brings about order by assigning to various dicta their proper scope and province...and effects a synthesis of apparently unconnected injunctions." In this sense, the commentary is similar to a digest (nibandha) in that it attempts to draw into the commentary outside opinions about the same passages of the text which he is commenting on. Although he is