________________
Couried the Mchaderepika at Padmăvai on 13 May 1635 while the Râştroda Gajasimha was ruling Marwar (1619-1638); the word harsena in the last verse may be an oblique reference to Sumatibarsa or to Harşaratna.
It is necessary now to consider again the question of the identification of Padmavati. That Puskara was called by this name in Jaina circles seems to be well attested; and Puşkara, like Vindhyāvali. had both Jaina and Saiva temples. However, Ajmer (and Puşkara almost certainly went with it) was in the possession of the Moghuls from 1556 till 1720, and this fact makes it difficult to explain Dhanaraja's claim to be writing under Gajasimha in 1635, unless some sort of control over it had been granted to Gajasimha as a faithful supporter of the Moghuls. Vindhyāvali, on the other hand, has some fainous Saiva temples dating back to the period of the Cauhānas, and an image of Parsvanātha was manifested there in the twelfth century: this fits in very well with the epithet given to Padmavati by Sumatiharsa in the Subodha, but neither is it known that Vindhyāvali was called Padmavati nor was it ever in Marwar territory. Thus, the identification of Puskara with Padmăvati must remain the more fikely explanation of the facts though Dhanarāja's mention of Gajasirnha remains a problem.
This is not the only problem of the Mahadevidīpikā. For in this work not only does Dhanarāja refer to Thursday 9 March 1637, but also in several different places computations are given for Sirohi in 1063 (the Baroda manuscript was copied a year earlier, in 1662). This date--Saka 1585- is confirmed by the statement that it is 480 years from Saka 1105, the epoch of Bhaskara's Karanakutühala. The explanation for its occurrence must lie in the fact that 480 years is eight cycles of sixty years, though none of them begins with Mahadeva's epoch, 1318 (Saka 1240). What Dhanarāja's connections with Sirohi might be are not as yet evident.
But we do possess some remnants of his activities as a teacher of jyotisa in the form of manuscripts copied by his successors in the Añcalagaccha; these are listed in the Sriprašastisangraha utilized previously.
1. p. 238 no. 888. The Şaspañcāśikā of Psthuyabas! with the vștti of Bhattotpala.” Copied by Subhāgyarāja, the pupil of Harsarāja, the pupil of Dhanarāja on Sunday 25 April 1669. The same scribe had the Jambūcaritra copied on Saturday 27 March 1669; p. 239 no. 884.
Copied by Jinaraja, the
2. p. 277 no. 1061. The Vasantarajasakuna of Vasantaraja with a vrtti. pupil of Hiränanda, the pupil of Dhanarāja on Wednesday 18 September 1706.
One final monument that these Jaina jyotisis of Ancalagaccha have left is one of the manuscripts of Dhanarāja's Mahadevidipika preserved at the LD Institute (7129). For it was copied by Buddhisekhara Gani, the pupil of Bhävasekhara Gani, at Rajanagara in 1672 for Rajasekhara Gani of the Ancalagaccha; Rājasekhara, as we have seen, was the scribe of a manuscripts of the Horāmak aranda and the pupil of Buddhisekhara. I have little doubt that future explorations of jyotişa manuscripts from Rajasthan will reveal much more concerning the activities of these teachers, commentators, and scribes of jyotisa works, though Sumatiharşa will undoubtedly remain their outstanding representative.
1. CESS, A4, 2126-221b. 2. CESS, A4. 277b-281b. 3. Prohably that of Bhānucandra: see CESS, A4, 292a-292b.
आचार्यरत्न श्री देशभूषण जी महाराज अभिनन्दन ग्रन्थ
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
