________________
३१०
आ. शांतिसागरजी जन्मशताब्दि स्मृतिग्रंथ
Dhanañjaya and his DS or RP have to be distinguished from Srutakīrti and his RP. First, Dhananjaya was a householder, while Srutakrīti, a vratin and later an Ācārya. Secondly, neither Dhananjaya nor the sources which mention Śrutakirti give any evidence to suppose that the two names stand for the same poet. Thirdly, a verse from Dhananjaya's Namamālā is quoted by Virasena (A. D. 816); and his DS, specifically mentioning the name Dhananjaya, is referred to by Bhoja (c. 1010-62 A. D.), while the period of Śrutakirti ranges from 1100 to 1150 A. D. Lastly, if the DS of Dhananjaya is already famous to be ranked with the work of Dandin and to be referred to by Bhoja (middle of the lith century), it cannot be the same work as that of Śrutakirti who was an Ācārya in 1135 A. D. So this identification has no basis; and therefore, the date, based on this identity proposed for Dhanañ jaya, namely 1123-40 A. D., has to be given up.
E. V. Vira Raghavacharya's suggestion of the date for Dhananjaya (c. 750-800) is nearer the point, but it is not known why he puts Kavirāja earlier than Dhanañjaya when Kavirāja specifically refers to Muñja of Dhārā (973-95 A. D.).
Prof. Venkatasubbiah's thesis, viz., that Dhananjaya, the author of DS, is identical with Hemasena because the later is mentioned as Vidyā-Dhananjaya in the Sravana Be!go! Inscription, cannot be accepted. Vādirāja is mentioning in his poem earlier authors and teachers and not necessarily his pontifical predecessors. That Dhananjaya therefore, was a pontifical predecessor of Vadiraja and identical with Hemasana is not justified. First, Dhanañjaya was a householder. He has not at all mentioned his ascetic line, nor does he speak about his ascetic predecessors; he cannot, therefore, be a pontifical predecessor of Vădirāja. Secondly, nowhere in his works, has Dhananjaya given his name as Hemasena. Lastly, it is very doubtful whether Vidyā-Dhananjaya is a proper name, for it could be read as well vidyā dhanam jayapadam visadam dadhāno. It is also possible that Dhananjaya here means Arjuna; so Hemasena is Vidyā-Dhananjaya. If at all Vidyā-Dhananjaya is a proper name, then, it means that it only distinguishes Hemasena from some other Dhanañjaya who flourished earlier.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
