________________
XXIV
INTRODUCTION
at least one Puvua was known to some one or ones. He corroborates this statement by referring to the verses 1018–1020 and 1110 of Pañcavatthuga and their commentary by Haribhadra wherein he deals with the permission to explain the ways of examining dharma, and to explain Tharaparinnā extracted from Ditthivaya. Over and above these arguments, somo one construes the phrase "aat gyselanggaraca Triaatteet" used by Abhayadeva Sūri in his commentary (p. 1") to Pascāsaga to imply that in the time of Haribhadra some one knew one Puurce or so.
If this view can be accepted, Haribhadra may be said to have flourished in the 7th century A. D. But there are reasons to doubt this date as will be seen from tlie following discussion :
Out of the names of various works and authors we come across in different works of Haribhadra Sūri, the following are here selected, as they can help us in fixing his date :Author
Date?
Work 1 Dharmakīrti 600-650 A, D. Vārtika, Nyāyabindu
and Hetubindu 2 Dharmapāla 635 A. D. 3 Bhartrhari 600-650 A. D. Vākyapadiya 4 Kumārila 620-680 A. 1). Mimāṁsāślokavārtika 5 Subhagupta 640-700 A. D. 6 Sāntarakṣita 705–762 onwards Tattvasangraha
If these dates are reliable, we may infer that Haribhadra has not flourished in the 7th century A. D. The late Prof Jacobi once held the view that the laksana of pratyakşapramana mentioned in Saddars'anasamuccaya has been borrowed by Haribhadra from Nyāyabindu of Dharmakirti. This is a debatable point. But the inference drawn by Prof. Jacobi to the effect that IIaribhadra has flourished after Dharmakīrti is quite valid when we see that he has mentioned Dharmakirti and his work Vertika in Anekuntajayapatākoddyotaclipikā (vide p. 229).
1 The dates are here mentioned as givon in the l'oreword (pp.
xov-XCVI) to Tattvasangraha. 2 He is referred to on pp, 366 and 387.
