Sambodhi 2005 Vol 28

SR No.: 520778
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Jitendra B Shah, K M Patel
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2005
Total Pages: 188
Language: English, Sanskrit, Prakrit, Gujarati
Classification: Magazine, India_Sambodhi, & India
File Size: 4 MB

Page 51

Vol. XXVIII, 2005 MAHĀVĪRA OF SATYAPURA IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
45
Śivacandra mahattara
Yakşadatta gani
Vațeśvara kşamāśramana
Tattvācārya
Krsnarși
Udyotana sūri (A. D. 778)
Jayasimha sūri (A. D. 859)
The Prakrit form of 'Yaksadatta' would be Jakkhadinna' which may have been simplified later in the Apabhramśa version as Jajjiga'. Possibly, the Yaksa-vasati of Mahāvīra in Jābālipura was named after this Yaksadatta gani (and to this pontiff, perhaps, may have been given that temple as a gift by king Nāgabhatta 1). To all seeming, Jajjiga sūri was a filiate of the caityavāsī or abbetial order of Jaina monks who, like their medieval Christian counterparts—the abbots, who owned abbeychurches along with their associated estates-owned the Jaina temples. And some of these Jaina abbots likewise formed a sort of diocese. Seemingly, Jajjiga sūri may have consecrated the shrines at Satyapura and Jābālipura in fairly advanced age. (If we do not assume this probability, then Yakșadatta gani cannot be contemporary of Nāgabhatta I. It is a known fact that the caityavāsi monks often lived for long, long decades.)
...The temple of Satyapura, being a royal foundation, may have had the pretension at grandeur, namely size and decorative excellence. The awesome dimensions of sanctity and, as a result, of glory achieved by it by the early 11th century A. D., leads to that surmise.
Jinaprabha sūri recounts that, in the year 1081 (A. D. 1025), Gajjanapati (Sultan Mahmūd of Gaznā) sacked Gūjjara (Gurjararāstra, Gurjararattra). On seeing (visiting) the Vira-bhavana (in Satyapura), he attempted to drag the image of Virasvāmī by elephants but failed. Unable thus to carry the image with him, the lord of the Mlecchas damaged it by striking the blows of hammer16. That Mahmud could have failed to take away the image, in the first instance seems an unlikely relality. However, Jinaprabha sūri's account in a way is supported by two earlier writers. For instance the following statement by Deva sūri, the disciple