________________
INTRODUCTION
LXIX
There is one more point which may be mentioned in this connection: Mallavādin has writtǝn a Țippani on Dharmottara's com. to Nyāyabindu. From this Tippani we learn that some Dharmottara has refuted the view expressed by Vinītadera who is another commentator of Nyāyabindu and whose date is said to be very near 700 A. D. Kailāśacandra in his intro. (p. 96 ) to Nyāyakumudacandra (pt. I says that Mallavādin is not right in attributing this view to Vinītadeva. It is some other author whose view is here challenged by Dharinottara. He further observes that Rāhul Sānkrityāyana in his appendix to Vādanyaya does not mention two Dharmottaras, and that he has assigned to Dharnottara’ and Vinitadeva the dates 725 A.D. and 750 A.D.
This finishes a rough survey of 492 works out of 99. All of them except Damsanasuddhi are surely the works of Haribhadra I, the author of AJP. As regards Damsanasuddhi I have some doubt; for, Sanghatilaka, its commentator, does not throw any definite light on its authorship. For the rest (50 works) there is no other proof except that they are mentioned by some writers old or modern.
Pandit L. B. Gandhi in his JAHIDENTIT Teatait mentions on p. 34 (14) FARTIT and (79) EVT. In his DCMJP (p. 5) he attributes the authorship of (51) alater to Harjbhadra ( the author of AJP). All of them may be from the pen of Haribhadra. For, not only the Mss. are available for the first two but they are so noted by Sumati Gani. This Gaņi mentions several other works such as (6) EC70074, (12) 371aeftaret, (13) 22 (18) 47-ea7169, ( 258 ) Taistearga, (31) ESTARE, ( 46 ) 97814fafe, ( 50 ) TRT77 and ( 77 ) AFHAFTATTORA,
Rājasekhara Sūri in his Caturvimsatiprabandha (p. 52) mentions the following four works :
1 Taranath in bis history of Tibet has said that Dharmottara was
alivo in 847 A, D., and that he was a contemporary of Vanapăla,
ruler of Kāśmira. 2 Their numbers are: 1-3, 5, 59, 7, 78, 8, 9, 11, 18, 21, 23-25, 29, 30,
33, 35, 38, 40, 43, 43, 44, 45, 47, 48, 51a, 51b, 54, 540, 55, 57, 58 61, 62, 63, 65, 68, 69, 74-76, 80, 82, 84, 85 and 87-89. Of these nos, 57 and 58 represent one and the saine work named in two
different ways, 3 Vide his com. on Ganaharasaddhasayaga. 4 Tais is different from Arhacclırīcīdāmani which is attributed to
Bhadrabāhu, which rewinds one of Panhāvāga rana (vido p. LXVI)
and which is published in Sanvat 1993. . $ Here there is mention of '700 pat yhich I have not noted.