Kirti Kaumudi tatha Sukrut Sankirtan

SR No.: 002505
Original Sutra Author: Someshwar Mahakavi, Arisinh Thakkur Kavi
Publisher: Singhi Jain Shastra Shiksha Pith Mumbai
Publication Year: 1961
Total Pages: 168
Language: Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Literature
File Size: 10 MB

Page 77

Professor G. Bühler's critical study
son, and of the Chaulukya prince Rāji, is unhesitatingly accepted, though it contains the absurdity of Rāji's marriage having taken place and his son having grown up, within these seven years. It is plain from Arisimha's statements that the Therāvali does not stand alone in its representations, but rests upon older traditions. Since Kộishṇāji's Ratnamālā is perhaps as old as the Sukyitasamkirtana, 'the two contradictory accounts of the Chāudā kings existed at least in the thirteenth century, and probably earlier still. It must be left to the future to establish their real history when authentic documents are found. For the present we must be content with the conclusion that the version current in India, through Forbes's Rās Mālā, has no particular claim to be received and was not uncontested in the tradition.
The notes about the Chaulukya kings in Sarga II, are considerably fuller. Of the first king Mülarāja it is related that he particularly venerated Somanātha, and it is said, verse 3:-“ Which hero (Mülarāja ), plainly proving his veneration, prostrated himself every Monday before Somanātha and obtained great splendour and fame from the hot flames out of the eye on the forehead of that god."
Possibly Arisimha knew the absurd legend of the Prabandhachintāmaņi, P. 43, according to which Mūlarāja made a pilgrimage every monday to Somanāthapațțaņa near Verāval, until the god, to please the king, settled first nearer Anhilvād in Mandali or Māndal, and at last came even into the capital. Mūlarāja's worship of Siva is proved besides by his presentation of land. The following verse 4 seems to refer to the erection of the Tripurushaprāsāda in Aṇhilvād. From among the military, undertakings of Mūlarāja, the victories over Bārapa and Laksha, king of Kachh, are mentioned. The former is made a general of the king of Kanyakubja. Of the next king Chamunda, vv. 8-9, Arisiṁha has nothing positive to say. On the other hand, a victory of Vallabharāja over the king of Mālvā is celebrated in verse 13, and in verse 14 the remark is made that Vallabha had the biruda or Jagajjhampana, which does not occur elsewhere. The Kirlikaumudi, which also mentions the probably apocryphal victory, II.11, gives him the biyuda of Jagatkampana. It says of Durlabharāja, vv. 15-16, that he was very modest, and was ashamed when bis court poets compared him to Kțishņa. In the Kirtikaumudi also Durlabha is praised for this virtue. Of his successor Bhima I, we are told only that he conquered the celebrated king Bhoja of Dhārā. This statement agrees again with that of the Kirtikaumudi, II.17-18, and also with those of the later Prabandhas whilst it does not occur in Hemachandra's Dvyāśrya, Bhima's son Karna, vv. 20-23, is praised for his beauty, mentioned also by Hemachandra in the Prasasti to his Grammar, verse 17, in the Ratnamālā and in the Kirtikaumudi, 11.21. Then Arisimha states that Karņa conquered the king of Mālvā and brought home from there a statue of Nilakantha or Siva. It says, verse 23:-“Who (Karņa) conquered the king of Mālvā with his army and truly brought with him Nilakantha; the fame of him for whom the number of paths through the river on the head of this god was multiplied, he extended in the three worlds.”
Most Prabandhas and even Hemachandra's Dvyāśraya mention no kings during Karna's reign. The latest discoveries, however, shew that this silence is by no means justified. Bilhaņa's drama, Karnasundari, which was found by Pandit
I first drew attention to this atrocious nonsense in the Indian Antiquary, Vol. VI. pp.
1. 181-182.