Disclaimer: This translation does not guarantee complete accuracy, please confirm with the original page text.
## 152
Swami Samantabhadra.
Although a mistake has been made, it is clear from the above mentions that this opinion of Premiji is not new - even a thousand years ago, there were people who held this opinion, and among them were Acharyas like Devasena and Amitagati. If this opinion is correct and it is also correct that Vikram was born physically 470 years after the Nirvan of the Tirthankara, then it must be accepted that the Vikram Samvat began approximately 550 (470 + 80) years after the Nirvan of the Tirthankara, and approximately 2531 (550 + 1981) years have passed since the Nirvan of the Tirthankara; because Vikram's age is said to be around 80 years. In this situation, the time of Umaswati comes out to be 220 or 220 according to the above verse, and then Samantabhadra also becomes a scholar of the third century of Vikram or the second and third centuries of the Christian era.
In this way, due to the three possibilities of the birth, reign, and death of Vikram Samvat, there are also three possibilities of the Nirvan Samvat, and based on that, there is also a difference in the time of the Acharyas whose time is determined based on it.
A scholar named George Charpentier, in the June, July, and August 1914 issues of the Indian 'Antiquary', wrote a detailed article.
* Acharya Devasena has also mentioned the death year of Vikram in his 'Bhavasangraha', and it is also found in the Bhavasangraha of Pandit Vamdeva as follows:
Satrimshe sate'abdaanaam mrte vikramarajani |
Saurashtre vallabhipuryam abhut tat kathyate maya || 188 ||
1 This article and its refutation article have not been found by us yet.