9058009369

DIIARMA SURI - GUNACANDRA ENCOUNTER 141

the Raja-gaccha, still unpublished, ¹⁶ may also have referred lo the Ajmer disputation; however_f it is hardly necessary to summon these sources as addilional evidence attcsting to the incidenl, sińce those quoted in the foregoing are sufficiently early, authenlic, elear, and dcpendable.

As for Gunacandra, an inscription on the Digambara marblc image of Jina SantinStha dated S. 1195/A.D. 1139, reported from NaugSma in the erstwhile Alwar State, records its making by Pandita Gunacandra for Gauptanandi.¹⁷ Considering the datę and the provenance (about 150 kms. from Ajmer), it is likely, indeed to a fair degree, that this Pandita Gunacandra and the Digambara disputant, Gunacandra or Gunendu of the 12lh and the 13lh century Svetambara Jaina writers are idenlical.

The next ąuestion concerns with the probablc datę of the Ajmer encounter. It doubtless has to be placed sometime inside the reign-period of Arnor2ja (A.D.l 133-1154) as all major sources clearly indicate. The Mudrita-Kumudacandra-prakarana'* allusion to this contcst would have us believe that it precedcd the Anahillapataka debatę which took place in the time of Jayasiihhadeva Siddharaja who had passed away in A.D. 1144. In other words, the datę of Ajmer debalc must be narrowed down between A.D.l 133, the datę of accession of Arnoraja and A.D.l 144, the datę of the end of Caulukya Siddharaja’s reign. The obstacle in acccpling this bracket is the statement in the Prabhavakacaritra of PrabhacandracSrya of Raja-gaccha (S. 1333/ A.D. 1277) that the disputation between Deva Suri and Kumudacandra took place in S.l 181/ A.D.l 125, which is some cighl years prior to the accession of Arnoraja ! We must then believe that either Yaśaścandra*s reference lo the Ajmer debacie of Gunacandra is anachronistic in relation to the Patan context, or the datę mentioned for the Anahillapataka debale, namely A.D.l 125 by Prabhacandra, musi be incorrecl. While arguments can be advanced both for and againsl this specific (latter) datę¹⁸, they do not help reaching a firm conclusion in favour of one or the other possibility. At any ratę, it is a dctail which does not challenge the central fact of such an encounter to have taken place at the Ajmer court in Arnoraja*s time.

Rajasthan of the Cahamana, rather than Gujarat of the contemporaneous Solartkls, seems to be the main sphere of activilies of Dharma Suri.¹⁹ Raja-gaccha emanated from Dhancśvara Suri who is said to be the former Kardama king of Tribhuvanagiri (Tahangadh) in Rajasthan in the gurvźvafis. Indeed, exceedingly few inscriptions of Raja-gaccha have so far bccn found from Gujarat.²⁰ Ajayameru (Ajmer), the Caham&na Capital from the 12lh century A.D., therefore, seems to be the focal cenlre of the religious activities of Dharma Suri as the leading ponlilT of the Raja-gaccha.

Supplementum

A colophr.i of the manuscript of the Niśllha-Sutra, dated S. 1217/ A.D.