Kuvalayamala Part 2

SR No.: 002778
Original Sutra Author: Udyotansuri
Author: A N Upadhye
Publisher: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan
Publication Year: 1970
Total Pages: 368
Language: Sanskrit, English
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Literature
File Size: 12 MB

Page 145

106
KUVALAYAMĀLĀ
he tells us that Indrāyudha was ruling (in) the North, Śrīvallabha, the son of
is that the place where he is writing, namely Vardhamana(-pura), is located in Sauramandala, also known as Saurāṣṭra-maṇḍala (as in the Una grants), roughly corresponding to Kathiawar. Vardhamana gets correctly equated with modern Wadhwan in that area. When any other place outside is suggested for identifying Vardhamana (-pura) the significance of mentioning Sauramandala, in addition to the general directions of the country with their rulers, is missed; and any such attempt, therefore is out of context. Thus in Saka 705, Jinasena associates Vardhamana(-pura) with the Punnața Samgha of his own and with the local chief Jaya Varaha.* In this connection, the Haḍḍālā grant is of special significance. This was discovered in Eastern Kathiawar. It refers to Dharaṇī Varaha resident in Vardhamana who was samadhigat aseṣamahāśabda-Mahāsāmantādhipatiḥ, and who through the favour of Rajadhiraja-ParameśvaraŚri-Mahipaladeva ruled the Adḍāṇaka-deśa named after his own grand-father.' It is dated in Saka S. 836. This Adḍāņa is the same as modern Haḍḍālā ‘a large village on the old road from Dholka to Dhandhukā, but belonging to Eastern Kathiawar.' The contents of this grant confirm what Jinasena says that there was a Varaha Samanta at Vardhamana, (a subordinate of Mahipaladeva); this Vardhamana is in Eastern Kathiawar and obviously to be identified with mod. Wadhwan (G. BÜHLER: The grant of Dharaṇīvaraha of Vadhvan, I. A., July 1883, pp. 190 f. H. C. RAY: The Dynastic History of Northern India, Vol. I, pp. 582-3, Calcutta 1931, P. C. BAGCHI: Baurah or Baruza? I. H. Q., XIX. iii. pp. 266 ff.). *Then in saka 853, Hariṣena, like Jinasena, belonged to the Punnaṭa Samgha and completed his (Bṛhat) Kathākosa while staying at Vardhamana(-pura). There are good reasons to believe that this Vardhamana(-pura) is the same as the one mentioned by Jinasena and referred to in Hadḍālā grant. First, Jinasena and Hariṣena belong to the Punnāța Samgha. Secondly, if Jinasena speaks about Vardhamana -(pura) as kalyāṇaiḥ parivardhamana-vipula-śrī-Vardhamane pure, Hariṣeņa adds kārtasvarāpūrṇājanādhivāse. Both Jinasena and Hadḍālā grant refer to the ruling local family of -varāhas; and the Haḍḍālā grant (in saka 836) and Harisena (in Saka 853) rightly refer to successive rulers Mahipala and Vinayakapāla. If Hariṣena has not mentioned any -varaha ruler, either he did not think it necessary or the rulers of that family had lost their prestige after Dharaņi Varāha. The linking is so perfect in the details supplied by Jinasena, Hadḍālā grant and Harisena that one is perfectly justified in identifying Vardhamana(-pura) with modern Wadhwan in Kathiawar.* The other locality which has been suggested (H. L. JAINA: Indian Culture, XI. 4, pp. 161 ff., April-June, Calcutta 1945; also Madhyabharati, No, 3, pp. 1 ff., Jabalpur 1965) for identification with Vardhamana(-pura) is Badnawar(Dhar): North of Dhar, on MhowNeemuch road; 12 miles from Baruanagar, a station between Rutlam and Indore on the W. Rly. Numerous remains like images, mosque, fort, temples etc. are discovered there (Central India State Gazetteer Series, V, P1. A 1908, and also The Bibliography of Madhya Bharata Archaelogy). The claims of this place to be identified are to be judged on their own merits. First, the corruption of Vardhamana (-pura) into Badna(war) is not at all intelligible: the proposed change is speculative acrobatics of vowel and consonant changes. The fact is obvious that Badnawar is a natural corruption or changed form of Vardhana(a)pura as local inscriptions mention it (Lekhas 1-3). Secondly, no clear-cut evidence has come forth from the locality to show that the place was called Vardhamanapura. The quotation from Dr. H. TRIVEDI's report only shows that Badnavar possesses Jaina antiquities. The inscription on which the proposed identification is based is Lekha No. 3 (of Sam. 1229, p. 168) which clearly mentions Varddhanapura and not Vardhamanapura, as claimed. In fact, Dr. TRIVEDI plainly says (Jaina Antiquary, XVII, p. 72, foot-note 10): The inscription is important as it records the ancient name of the place which is Vardhanapura'. A few months back I was in Ujjain. Shri SATYANDHAR SETHI is a zealous upholder of the view that Vardhamanapura-Badnawar. He showed me some images from Badnawar in the Ujjain Museum in a Jaina temple there, and gave me a typed copy of some 17 short and long inscriptions which cover those reproduced in the papers referred to above. On the images and in the inscriptions the reading is Varddhana(ā) pura. In some records there is a reference to Vardhamana-vara (-pura) anvaye, As a rule. an anvaya