Parshvabhyuday

Author(s): Jinsenacharya, M G Kothari
Publisher: Gulabchand Hirachand Doshi

Page 25

(20)
back to the period prior to the year 759 by some years. In the stanza अडतीसम्हि सासिय विक्कमरायम्हि एस संगरमो ।...॥ of the Prasasti of the Dhavalā the word watafiz is already there. Keeping the year 759, in which the completion of the Jayadhavalā was effected, in mind, one can determine the year to be 738. It cannot be said that the year referred to in the stanza is 638, for there cannot be a difference of 156 years between Acārya Virasena and Acārya Jinasena, the immediate desciple of Ācārya Virasena, So, in my opinion, the year 738 to be assigned to the completion of the Dhavalā, is correct. It is to be decided that whether the year belongs to the Vikrama era or not. Most of the scholars, who have tried to fix the dates of Acārya Virasena and his desciple, Acārya Jinasena, hold that the year belongs to the śālivāhana saka era. I do not think that this opinion is beyond question. In my opinion, the year belongs to the Vikrama era. We have seen that, owing to the reference to king Indrāyudha, king Vatsarāja and minister Nanna, the noble son of minister Bharata, made by Jinasena, the author of the Harivamśapurāņa, in his work, there is no other alternative left but to push back the dates of Puşpadanta, Bharata, Nanna, king Kșşşarāja alias Akālavarşa, Ācārya Gunabhadra and his revered preceptor Ācārya Jinasena to the period prior to the year 700 of the śālivāhana saka era. The opinion that the year 759 is of the śālivāhana saka era, does not hold good. In my opinion, therefore, the year 759 should be taken to be belonging to the Vikrama era. Taking this view into consideration, the year 738 also should be considered as belonging to the Vikrama era which is clearly stated in the Praśasti of the Dhavalā commentary by the author himself. In my opinion, therefore, the completion of the Dhavalā commentary was effected in the year 738 of the Vikrama era i. e. in the year 603 of the śālivāhana saka era.
When it is proved that the Pārśvābhyudaya is the last work of Ācārya Jinasena and when the work is referred to in the