________________
--- [ Holy Abu shrine, belong to the same style and age, which must be of Kumārapāla. The inference is further supported by a study of figure sculptures on the outer walls of the Jaina shrines at Jālor fort and Tārangā, built by Kumārapāla, which show the same style in figure sculpture. The four Vidyādevīs-Cakreshvarī, Rohiņi, Prajñapti and Vajrashsakhalā carved in a group in another ceiling of the Bhamatī of Vimalavasahī, also belong to the age of Kumārapāla. This means that the ceilings of the Bhamati have at many places undergone several repairs.
Again, the Vimalavasati-Prabandha in the PurātanaPrabandha-Samgraha, says that Chāhila, the son of Vimala, erected the Rangamaņdapa of this shrine. Though it is not certain whether Vimala ever had a son and though the Prabandha itself seems to be a much later one, it shows that there was a belief that the Rangamandapa was a later addition. It is hoped that this point of view will be borne in mind by students of Chālukyan and later sculptures in outlining the sculptural art in its various phases from c. 1000 A. D. to c. 1500 A. D.
Pșthvīpāla, the Minister of Kumārapāla, was a descendant of Nedha, the brother of Vimala Saha. An inscription on the wall of cell 14, Vimala Vasahi ( see Ābu, vol. II, inscription no. 72) states that Pșthvīpāla, the son of Ānanda did the tīrthoddhāra (extensive repairs and conservation) of this shrine in V. S. 1206 (c. 1150 A. D.). It is, therefore, natural to expect sculptures of the age of Kumārapāla in the shrine erected by Vimala, the Dandanāyaka of Bhīma I. Fortunately, reliable contemporary literary evidence, supporting our inferences, is preserved in the Prashastis of three unpublished works of Haribhadra sūri whose writing activity was patronised by Pșthvīpāla.
· P. 52. (Published in Simghi Series).
