On the Date of Harsakirti's Kalyanamandirastotratika

Summary

Claus Vogel’s contribution is an exercise in historical detective work. It focuses on the dating of the Kalyāṇamaṇḍirastotrāṭikā, a commentary (ṭikā) attributed to the Jaina scholar Harṣakīrti on the Kalyāṇamaṇḍirastotra, a celebrated hymn praising the ‘Temple of Auspiciousness’. The stotra itself has been tentatively dated to the eleventh or twelfth century, and the date of its ṭikā has been uncertain. Vogel marshals evidence from colophons, intertextual references and external historical events to propose a plausible time frame for Harṣakīrti’s activity. The article begins by summarising what is known about the principal text. The Kalyāṇamaṇḍirastotra is a devotional hymn in ornate Sanskrit, likely composed by a Digambara monk to be recited in temples. The commentary explains difficult metaphors, cites earlier authorities and occasionally digresses into philosophical discussions. Vogel notices that Harṣakīrti cites the works of Vaṭṭakera and Nāgavarman but not those of later authors like Nemicandra, suggesting a terminus ante quem. He also notes that the commentary mentions a certain king whose reign can be correlated with inscriptions in the Deccan region. Combining these clues, Vogel argues that Harṣakīrti flourished in the late twelfth or early thirteenth century, perhaps around 1180–1220 CE. The article further examines how the commentary reflects the sectarian environment of its time. Harṣakīrti emphasizes Digambara doctrines and criticizes Śvetāmbara interpretations, a feature that became more pronounced in the post‑twelfth‑century polemical literature. Vogel also remarks on linguistic features that point to a transitional stage between classical and late medieval Sanskrit. By situating the ṭikā in its historical context, Vogel not only narrows down its date but also sheds light on the development of Jaina devotional exegesis. Finally, the note lists manuscripts of the Kalyāṇamaṇḍirastotrāṭikā held in libraries in India and Europe and calls for a critical edition that would take into account the variant readings. Although brief, this study exemplifies how meticulous analysis of internal and external evidence can yield insights into the chronology of medieval Indian texts.