History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s59.19

v1.c6.s59.19

⁶⁷⁴ शाके खनभसेनूद्भूदे आरेभेद्भुतसागरम् । गौडेन्द्रकुञ्जरालादस्तम्भबाहुर्महीपतिः ॥ ग्रन्थेस्मिन्नसमाप्त एव तनयं साम्राज्यरक्षामहादीक्षापर्वणि दीक्षयन् निजकृतेर्निष्पत्ति-मभ्यर्थ्य सः । नानादानमिनाम्बुसप्तऋलन्तः (!) सूर्यात्मजासङ्गमं गङ्गायां विरचय्य निर्जरपुरं भार्यानुयातो गतः॥ श्रीमल्लक्ष्मणसेनभूपतिरतिश्लाघ्यो यदुयोगतो निष्पन्नो-द्भुतसागरः कृतिरसौ बल्लालभूमीभुजः ॥ &c. folio 3a of D. C. ms. No. 231 of 1887-91. i. e. 1168-69) by Ballāla-sena and it was ultimately finished by his son Lakṣmaṇasena. That these verses are not spurious follows from a reference in the Ṭoḍarānanda-saṁhitā-saukhya about the position of the constellation of the Great Bear according to the Adbhutasāgara in the śake year 1082 (1160-61 A. D.) while Ballālasena was ruling.[^675] The Saduktikarṇāmṛta of Śrīdharadāsa[^676], who was a contemporary of Lakṣamaṇasena, furnishes us with the exact year of the accession of Lakṣamaṇasena viz: that śake 1127 corresponded with the 27th year of Lakṣamaṇasena's reign, i. e. he began to reign in 1178-79 A. D. Therefore the literary activity of Halāyudha, the author of the Brāhmaṇasarvasva, lies between 1175-1200 A. D. There is, I am aware, a very heated controversy about the dates of Ballālasena and his son Lakṣamaṇasena, but I am inclined to hold, particularly on account of the explicit reference contained in the body of the Adbhutasāgara[^677] itself and in the Ṭoḍarānanda, that Lakṣamaṇasena came to the throne about 1178-79 A. D. The Brāhmaṇasarvasva and the Paṇḍitsarvasva of Halāyudha are quoted by Raghunandana in the Āhnika (pp. 389, Jivananda, vol. I), Prāyaścitta (pp. 531, vol. I for Paṇḍitasarvasva) and other Tattvas. Sourindra Mohan Tagore (introduction to Kavirahasya p. I-II) says that Ādiśūra brought to Bengal five Brāhmaṇas from Kanoj of whom Bhaṭṭa Nārāyaṇa was the most famous and was the author of the Prayogaratna and also of the Veṇīsaṁhāra and that Halāyudha was 16th in descent from that Nārāyaṇa. These traditions of the matchmakers of Bengal and panegyrists of big families are entirely worthless for literary and chronological purposes,