________________
(29)
Pārśvābhyudaya had been indolent throughout the period of 38 years [i. e. from 700 to 738 ] ? An author like Acārya Jinasena, having thorough mastery of Sanskặt language, endowed with the capacity of writing excellent poetry and possessing extraordinary intellect cannot be held guilty of indolence. I think that the Pārśvābhyudaya could not have been written first and could not have got the name of king Amoghavarsa inserted in the colophons of it. Had the author of the Pārśvābhyudaya inserted the name of king Amoghvarşa after the completion of the Jayadhavalā commentary, what might have forbidden him from inserting the name of the king referred to above in the colophons of the Adipurāņa ? The Pārśvābhyudaya, therefore, must have been the last work of Acārya Jinasena. If it is acknowledged that the Pārśvābhyudaya was the last work of the author, his date deserves to be pushed back to the period prior to the year 700 of the śālivāhana saka era. Under these: circumstances, the date of king Amoghavarşa, who is said to have come to the throne in the year 736 of the Sālivāhana saka era, deserves to be pushed back to the period prior to the year 700 of the śālivāhana Saka era.
It cannot be said with certitude that the name of king Amoghavarşa was inserted into the colophons of the Pārśvābhyudaya after the completion of the Adipurāņa and the Jayadhavalā. commentary, for the stanza -
इति विरचितमेतत्काव्यमावेष्टय मेचं बहुगुणमपदोषं कालिदासस्य काव्यम् ।
मलिनितपरकाव्यं तिष्ठतादाशशाङक भुवनमवतु देवः सर्वदाऽमोघवर्षः।। , having the name of king Amoghavarşa referred to in it, cannot be proved to have been interpolaled in the Pārśvābhyudaya. The word gfa, employed in the stanza, refers to the bygone four cantos. It was obligatory on the part of the author to mention that the work covered all the stanzas of the Meghadüta, an excellent work of Kālidāsa, for had he not mentioned it, he
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
