________________
The Date of Siddharshi.
274 q
Annon
period not a single author of good renown comes out. What I mean is that the character of the blank, supposed. or real does not affect the elucidation of the date of Haribhadra. ___I will send you न्यायालोक of सिद्धसेन दिवाकर as soon as it is out.
सिद्धसेनगणी in his तत्वार्थवृत्ति of 502 pages mss at page 121 says as follows yagtarth HIITT Ii Fesztia aftuga i gat निरुपितमिदं नंद्यां सूत्रव्याख्याने हेतुकालदृष्टिवादोपदेशक्रममुत्तरोत्तराविशुद्धमपहाय किं कालिक्यादौ व्यवस्थापित्येवमाक्षिप्तेऽभिहितमुत्तरं संज्ञा संज्ञीति सर्वत्र श्रुते कालिक्या संज्ञया प्रायः संव्यवहारः क्रियते अतः क्रमविशुद्धिमनाहत्य सूत्र मुपनिषद्धं ।
This is the way in which Haribhadra soori is corroborated from his afganTreyA. The said quotation occurs in the तत्त्वार्थवृत्ति composed by Siddhasena. in the second अध्याय while commenting on the Sootra संशित: सममस्का: To me this appears to prove conclusively that Haribhadra is prior in date to Siddhasena
On further inquiry I find that what I stated in my last letter that Haribhadra the well known composer of 1444 books and known as of ACTIES: is different from Haribhadra, the contemporary of Yashobhadra who was also the composer of the art of acard was not right. The fact is further corro borated by style, language and antiquity of this gra. I should have said that this Haribhadra is different from Haribhadra who wrote a small go on ngatia stot known as wale composed in the year 1185 Vikrama (@apit i7c2 &ICHTP864 av Faaraais gatoir. ) .
Haribhadra, the composer of afgivare being the sane us Haribhadra, the great original writer of 377, ht25742191, retain ACT &o., it is almost absurd to suppose him to quote from faran who is undoubtedly posterior in date to his illustrious predecessor Haribhadra.
The confusion appears to have been caused by supposing this सिखसेन the same as सिडसेनदिवाकर the contemporary of forfalfr. I should like to bring to your notice one faot that
