________________
Specimen-extracts from ancient India Vol. II ..$
he was appointed as the governor of Saurastra. During his governorship, once the dam-wall of Sudarśan gave way causing much ruin and havoc. Sāliśūk got it repaired and got his name inscribed on the edict. Whenever Priyadarsin, to-gether with a large number of people, visited Girnār for religious purposes.", Sāliśūk used to make the finest possible arrangements for his brother. When Dasarath, the king-or the governor-of Magadh died-presum. ably childless-Sáliśūk was appointed in his place. His dynasty continued to rule Magadh upto 5th century A. D., though there were one or two breaks in it. One break occurred during the time of the Sungā king Pusyamitra, and another during the time of the Gupta emperor, Chandragupta I. The kings of this dynasty had acknowledged the suzerainty of emperor Samudragupta.
Another important personage who deserves our attention is Devpāl, the son-in-law of Priyadarsin, and the husband of princess Chārumatī. He had been appointed as the governor of the region, at present comprising Nepāl, Bhuţăn and Tibet. This territory was conquered by Priyadarsin during the 14th year of his rule, when he reached there while on his conquest touro and where stand to-day the rock-edicts of Nigliv and Rumindiāi. When he visited the region again during the 20th year of his reign, he had taken with him princess Chārumatie , and on his way back, he returned alone leaving the princess with her husband. The princess was very religious-minded and had got many vihāras and temples built. 62 At last she entred the Jaina holy orders and
(59) See the rock-edict of Babhra-Vairāt.
(60) That Samprati was a Jain, who visited this place as a holy centre of pilgrimage, proves that the Nigliv and Rumindiai are not Buddhist religious places, but Jaina ones. (Vide the account of Priyadarsin; pp. 31 to 38, where many arguments have been given.
(61) Bhāratiya Prachin Rajavamsa, vol. II, pp. 132:--This is taken as a myth there. But the reasons are not stated by the author. He must have dubbed it as a myth because he could not find out any reference to it in the account of Asoka; and it could not be found there because it pertains to Samprati, whose name is not mentioned in the Buddhist books.
(62) Jainism Aourished there before their time; because it was conquered by the son of Prasenjit of Kośal.
Shree Sudharmaswami Gyanbhandar-Umara, Surat
www.umaragyanbhandar.com
