________________
(30) would have been guilty of borrowing the lines of the Meghadüta. Under these circumstances it cannot be said that the stanza, quoted above, was interpolated after a long time since the date of the completion of the Pārśvābhyudaya. In my opinion, therefore, the conclusion, that the Pārśvābhyudaya was the last work of the author, is most probably correct. The inference that the dates of Acārya Jinasena and king Amoghavarşa deserve to be pushed back to the period prior to the year 700 of the śālivāhana Saka era, is, therefore, most probably correct. Moreover, in the stanza --
कल्याणः परिवर्षमानविपुलश्रीवर्धमाने पुरे श्रीपावलियनन्नराजवसतो पर्याप्तशेषः पुरा।। 979eTeaftFitten Afragtful Hama (?)
शान्तः शान्तगृहे जिनस्य रचितो वंशो हरीणामयम् ॥ the author of the Harivamśapurāņa has mentioned the name Nanna, who had patronized Puşpadanta, the great poet. This Nanna had been the minister of king Krşnarāja, the predecessor of king Dhruvarāja alias king Dhārāvarşa. It seems that this Nanna was not alive at the time of the completion of the Harivamśapurāņa. Moreover, the author of the Harivamsapurāņa is not found to have mentioned the name of Bharata, the father of Nanna. I, therefore, infer that poet Puşpadanta and his patrons Bharata and Nanna and king Kļşnarāja deserve to be assigned a date prior to the year 705 of the śālivāhana saka era i. e. 783 A. D. It also seems that king Krşņarāja whose name is mentioned by the author of the Harivamśapurāņa in the stanza, 71959 og at 9......' was also not alive in the year 705 [ 783 A. D. ), for his son, śri-Vallabha, is described by the author as having been on the throne at the time of the completion of the Purāņa. This king Kșşnarāja, the father of king Śri-Vallabha seems to be that king under whom Bharata
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
