Political History of Northern India

Author(s): Gulabchandra Chaudhary
Publisher: Sohanlal Jain Dharm Pracharak Samiti Amrutsar

Page 74

44
POLITICAL HISTORY OF N. INDIA FROM JAIN SOURCES
1003 or 946 A.D., he is described as the father of Mahendrapāla (II)." It appears, therefore, that the name of the contemporary king mentioned in a peculiar way by Harişena would be Vināyakapāla. Explaining the reading 'Vinayādikapālasya' of the text, Dr. A. N. Upadhye, the learned editor of the Brhat Kathākośa, stated that "the text would give the name Vinayapāla or Vinayakapāla while the king's name is Vinayakapāla. The author seems to have been in the habit of using K-suffix, but, in all probability, the original reading might have been Vināyādika palasya (apparently meaningless, if one is not aware of the name of the king) which gives the name Vināyakapāla. He further assumes that it is quite likely that Vināyādi was easily corrected into Vinayādi by some copyist, who could not make out any thing from Vināyādi and who thought that his was a meaningful improvement of Vināya into Vinaya."
I may, however, humbly suggest here that the reading should be corrected as Vināyakädipālasya instead of the correction Vināyādikapālasya, which is certainly more meaningful in the light of the History of the Pratīhāras of Kanauj. Dr. Kielhorn and Prof. D. R. Bhandārkar and following them the other scholars held the view that Vināyakapāla, Herambapala and Kşitipāla are the various names of the one Mahīpāla, son of Mahendrapāla and the successor of Bhoja (II). In this context if we interpret the reading as Vināyakādipālasya, it certainly denotes that a pāla having such names as Vinayaka-Ādi=Vināyaka etc., naturally comes out as Mahipāla.
The king referred to by Harişena was certainly a suzerain king and not any local chief and this is implied by the adjective 'Sakropamānake'.
Leaving this controversy aside, we can conclude this much from the above reference that the Vardhamanapura in the Jälāväd division of Kathiawar was included in the Pratihăra empire in A.D), 931. Before this there are the Haddalā copper plates dated Saka 836 of the Cäpa-mahāsāmantādhipati Dharani-Varäha, a feudatory of the Rājādhirāja Mahīpāladeva, issued from Vardhamăn. Pratihāra empire was a big one, extending from Kāthiāwar to the borders of Bihar and the "Government was more or less feudal in nature and its rapid dissolution was due to the centrifugal tendency which is still observable among the Rajputs."
MAHENDRAPĀLA II: Mahīpāla had two sons Mahendrapāla II and
1 EI., XIV, pp. 176-186. 2 Brhat Kathākośa, Introduction, p. 122. (SJGM., XVII).
% See for full discussion - JDL., X, pp. 59-62; H. C. Ray, DHNI., Pt. I., No. 572-576; R. S. Tripathi, History of Kanauj, pp. 258-59.