Book Title: Jain Shwetambar Conference Herald 1915 Book 11 Jain Itihas Sahitya Ank
Author(s): Mohanlal Dalichand Desai
Publisher: Jain Shwetambar Conference
View full book text
________________
261
The Date of Siddharshi.
Now I should like to put a case of contemporary evidence which though indirect is significant. The date of anî yai
can be put forth more certainly than any other thing. The well known incident of the redaction of faras with the companionship of 500 illustrious contemporary Acharyas is a great landmark in the history of Jain literature. The real version of the incident as supplied by an eminent scholar of the present day is that various heterogeneous matters were collected, determined, ascertained and redacted into the permanent form after consulting his illustrious companions by and not simply booked them as is popularly supposed. Whatever this may be, his date is certain historically; he himself more than once saying that the great incident happened in the year 980 or 993 after shri Vira. This difference of 13 years though insignificant for our present purposes is explained on the ground of the difference in fixing Vira with Vikrama era.
Now according to my contention the death of Haribhadra Soori occurred in the year 1005 Vira ( 535+470=1005). This is in accordance with the date put forth by Dr. Bhandarkar and Muniraj Atmaramji. (Prof. Peterson put forth 1055 Vira) Now the dare of a nearly tallies with this date. If what I say is correct they can be safely regarded as contemoraries. This देवर्धिगणि composed a चूर्णि ( a commentary in मागधी ) on श्री आवश्यक सूत्र and Haribhadra composed & टीका on the same work. Neither of them mention each other. Haribhadra is well known for his quotations from other ancient authors, nay he is very fond of it. By way of parenthesis I should say here that there is a recognised practice among ancient authors never to quote their contemporary authors however great they may With our present associations it is difficult to follow this generalisation, but there is not a single evidence known to me in which this recognised rule is deviated from. The generalisation is based upon important arguments and known rules of etiquette.
be.
Now this is the only explanation of the absence of any mention by Haribhadra of afm's commentary. On the other theory if a distance of 300 years can be established
