Porbandarna Shantinath Jinalayna Be Shilalekho - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Porbandarna Shantinath Jinalayna Be Shilalekho" by M. A. Dhaky, based on the provided pages:

The book discusses two important inscriptions found at the Shantinath Jinalaya (Jain temple) in Porbandar, Gujarat.

Historical Context of Porbandar:

Porbandar, famously known as the birthplace of Mahatma Gandhi and Sudamapuri, is considered one of the most ancient cities in Gujarat, possibly as old as Prabhas.
However, historical references to Porbandar are relatively late. The oldest mention dates back to the inscription of Bapkaldev in Dhumli, around 988 CE, which refers to "Paurvelakul," meaning Porbandar.
There's a gap of about two and a half centuries between this early mention and later archaeological evidence. The next available inscriptions are from the Vaghela period (13th century).
While these Vaghela-era inscriptions (one from 1304 CE on the pedestal of a Vasupujya idol, another from 1315 CE that is now lost, a nominal one from 1327 CE, and a worn one from 1331 CE) don't provide extensive historical details, they confirm Porbandar's existence during that time.
After the Vaghela period, there's a lack of significant inscriptions until the Mughal era, particularly during Jahangir's reign.
Porbandar came under the rule of the Jetahra Ranawhich migrated from Dhumli and Ranpur, and it became their capital.
The city's commerce and maritime activities began to flourish during this period. It was during this era of peace and prosperity that the Shantinath Jinalaya and a similar Vaishnav temple dedicated to Gopalal were constructed.

The Two Inscriptions: The text focuses on two significant inscriptions engraved on marble on the southern wall of the Gudhamandapa (inner sanctum) of the Shantinath Jinalaya.

Inscription 1 (Larger Inscription):

Language and Script: Primarily Gujarati with some Sanskrit mixed in, featuring archaic linguistic and grammatical features (e.g., "nipano" instead of "nipajyo," "sevai mahi" instead of "sevama"). The inscription is described as flawed in writing and script, with some parts being illegible. The author suggests the composer was not a learned Jain monk but someone familiar with the merchant dialect of Saurashtra's Kanthal region. The orthography and meter also have errors.
Date: Samvat 1691 (corresponding to 1635 CE).
Significance: This inscription is considered highly valuable for the north-central medieval history of Saurashtra.
- Jetahra Dynasty Genealogy: It provides a genealogy of the Jetahra kings, allowing for verification of genealogies previously documented in the Kathiawar Gazetteer. This is the first post-Vaghela historical inscription related to the Jetahra dynasty, acting as a crucial link between Ranaka Bapkaldev of Dhumli and the later Jetahra Ranawhich of Porbandar.
- Genealogical Details: The inscription lists six ancestral generations preceding the present rulers. A comparison with the genealogy recorded by Watson in the Kathiawar Gazetteer reveals discrepancies in the initial names and slight variations in others.
- Historical Events: The inscription implicitly mentions key events:
  - The supposed sonless death of Ranaji and the succession of Bhanaji (son of Mehji), contradicting the inscription's direct lineage.
  - The inscription omits Ranaji from the direct line of succession.
  - There's a tradition that the second Ramji was murdered by Jam Satuji of Navanagar, leading to the kingdom's seizure.
  - Bhanaji, Ramji's son, is said to have died during a period of instability.
  - Kallabai, the brave queen of Bhanaji, mentioned in the inscription, is credited with fighting battles with the help of Mehra tribe after a major defeat of the Mughals at Bhuchar Mori, reclaiming a significant portion of the lost Jetahra territory. The epithet "Vairimukhbhanjan" (destroyer of enemies) for Rana Khimaji might refer to this event, as Khimaji was likely a minor at the time.
- Vikramji's Accession: The inscription sheds light on Vikramji's accession. While Watson estimated it to be 1626 CE, the 1635 CE inscription refers to Vikramji as "Yuvraj Padvi Kunwar" (Prince Vikramji), suggesting he was the heir apparent or managing affairs in the final years of Rana Khimaji's reign.
- Jetahra Rule in Porbandar: The inscription indicates that in 1635 CE, Porbandar was under the rule of Rana Khimaji and his son Vikramji, contradicting Watson's claim that Rana Sultanji (Vikramji's successor) took control of the port from Mughal authority. It suggests Mughal sovereignty might have been nominal, perhaps limited to port duties.
- "Bardh Adhipati": The epithet "Bardh Adhipati" (Lord of Barda) used for Rana Khimaji indicates the Jetahras' authority over the Barda region.
Temple Dedication: The inscription doesn't explicitly state the deity of the temple. However, it is currently known as the Shantinath temple, and a manuscript from 1777 CE also mentions the Shantinath of Porbandar.
Porbandar's Name: The city is referred to as "Shri Purbandir" in the inscription. Later inscriptions on images from the same temple use variations like "Porbinder," "Porbindir," and finally the modern "Porbandar."
Patronage: Savji Parekh, who oversaw the construction of the temple and whose five generations are mentioned, was a prominent and influential figure of the era. He was the Nagarseth (chief merchant) of Porbandar. He successfully represented Porbandar in Delhi to reduce the port's tax from 6% to 3%. The royal decree related to this tax exemption and a document from the Subedar of Junagadh are still preserved. Rana Sartanji, pleased with Savji Parekh's success, granted him hereditary privileges through a copper plate inscription in 1659 CE.
Architect: The temple was built by Ganapati, the son of Gajadhar Govinda. The use of "Gajadhar" instead of "Sutradhar" for the architect is noted as being prevalent in Rajasthan around the same time.

Inscription 2 (Shorter Inscription):

Content: This inscription is shorter, with 7 lines. It mentions the construction of a Jain temple (possibly the Garbhagriha of Rishabhdev) by Indrajikalyanji's wife Rukhmani, perhaps with significant expenditure ("lakha kharchi ne?").
Linguistic Feature: It also uses a similar archaic linguistic style, like "potanai dravyai" instead of "potana dravya thi."
"Vaso Dhalam": The meaning of "Vaso Dhalam" is not fully understood.
"Sanghau": It states that the temple was built "Sanghau," meaning on behalf of or by the Jain Sangha (community).

Notes and Further Information:

The text includes footnotes that provide additional context, such as the mythological references to Sudamapuri in various Puranas, the history of the Ashvamati river, and the present status of the Kedarnath temple and Kedarkhand.
It also mentions that earlier surveys of Porbandar's Jain temples by Shri Vallabhji Haridatt Acharya and Shri D.B. Diskalkar did not include a visit to these specific temples, which is considered surprising.
The lineage of the Parekh family is also provided, showing Savji as a prominent member.

In essence, these two inscriptions are crucial historical documents that illuminate the political, social, and religious landscape of Porbandar during the 17th century, particularly highlighting the role of the Jetahra dynasty and the prominent merchant families in the city's development and the patronage of Jain religious architecture.