Gommateshvara Commemoration Volume

Author(s): T G Kalghatgi
Publisher: Parshwanath Shodhpith Varanasi

Page 68

Lord Gommatesvara of Sravanabelgola
43
Similarly, the advocates of the 1028 A. D. date seem to have paid no heed to contemporary historical facts and even ignored the fact that the image was already in existence in 993 A.D. Prof. H. L. Jain even tried to support his contention by stating that Nemicandra, the author of Dravya-sangraha, whom he believed to be identical with the author of Gommafasāra, lived in the reign of King Bhojadeva (circa 1019-1042 A. D.) of Dhārā. But, it has been proved that the author of Dravya-sangraha is a different and later Nemicandra, and not the same person who wrote the Gommațasāra." Hence the date 1028 A. D. may as well be dismissed.
The difficulty is that there is no record of the date of the consecration of this Bāhubali image except in the Bahubali-caritra or Bhujbali-sataka of Doddayya (1550 A.D.), which gives it as Sunday, the 5th day of the bright-half of the month of Caitra of year 600 of the Kalki era, when the Samvatsara was Vibhava, also supplying certain astral indications of the time, viz., Sambhagya Yoga, Mrgasira nakşatra, etc. The details so minutely and precisely given appear to have been based on some well-founded tradition. But, the Kalki era commenced in 431 A. D. with the coming of the first Kalki who flourished at the end of the first millennium after the Nirvāņa of Mahāyira (527 B. C.), dying in M. E. 1000 (or 473 A.D.) after reigning for 42 years. This would mean that the Kalki year 600 fell in 1031 A. D., which as we have already seen, cannot be the date in question. Therefore, all the scholars ignored the fact of the Kalki era, and arrived at their dates on the basis of the remaining data supplied by Dodayya, which according to S. C. Ghoshal corresponded to 2nd April, 980 A. D., and according to M. Govind Pai and Nemicandra Sastri to 13th March, 981 A. D. The latter date, however, is the most plausible one, and we have also arrived at the same date in our own way.
In fact, the Kalki year 600, which has been so baffling to scholars, presents no difficulty if we remember three factors that in Karnataka in the middle ages there was a general belief, though mistaken, that the era of M. E. 605 was started by the Saka King of the name of Vikrama. Hence, they equated it with the popular Vikrama era and pushed up the date of Mahāvira's Nirvāna by 135 years, that is, to 662 B. C.-some people persist in continuing to believe so even now. Secondly, they thought that the Kalki appeared in M. E. 1000, forgetting that his 42 years reign was also included in that period. Thirdly, they believed that all the ancient eras commenced with the death of their founders, not from their birth or accession to the throne. Keeping these three things in mind, we find that according to them the Kalki appeared in (1000-662=)338 A.D., reigned for 42 years, and died in 380 A.D., when his era commenced. The year 600 of the Kalki era would, therefore, be equivalent to 980 A.D. But since the year changed with the first day of the bright half of Caitra, the fifth day of that fortnight would fall in the next year or 981 A. D. Thus, the date of the consecration of the Bahubali colossus at