Critical Study Of Paumacariyam

Author(s): K R Chandra
Publisher: Research Institute of Prakrit Jainology and Ahimsa
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/022643/1

Page #1

A CRITICAL STUDY OF
PAUMACARIYAM
Dr. K. R. CHANDRA

Page #2

Prakrit Jain Institute Research Publications Series
Volume 4
General Editor
Dr. NATHMAL TATIA, M.A., D. LITT.,
Director, Research Institute of Prakrit, Jainology & Ahimsa,
Vaishali, (Muzaffarpur), Bihar.
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAŃ
By
Dr. K. R. Chandra, M.A., Ph.D.
RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF PRAKRIT, JAINOLOGY
& AHIMSA VAISHALI, (Muzaffarpur), BIHAR.
1970.

Page #3

All Rights Reserved
Price: Rs.
PUBLISHED ON BEHALF OF THE RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF PRAKRIT, JAINOLOGY & AHIMSA, VAISHALI, (MUZAFFARPUR), BIHAR, BY DR. NATHMAL TAIIA, M.A., D. LITT., DIRECTOR. PRINTED IN INDIA, AT THE TARA PRINTING WORKS, VARANASI.

Page #4

The Government of Bihar established the Research Institute of Prakrit, Jainology & Ahimsa at Vaishali (Muzaffarpur) in 1955 with the object, inter alia, to promote advanced studies and research in Prakrit and Jainology, and to publish works of permanent value to scholars. This Institute is one of the five others planned by this Government as a token of their homage to the tradition of learning and scholarship for which ancient Bihar was noted. Apart from the Vaishali Research Institute, four others have been established and have been doing useful work during the last few years, namely, the Mithila Institute of Post-GraduStudies and Research in Sanskrit Learning at Darbhanga, the K. P, Jayaswal Research Institute at Patna, the Bihar Rashtra Bhasha Parishad for Research and Advanced Studies in Hindi at Patna, and the Nalanda Institute of Research and Post-Graduate Studies in Buddhist learning and Pali (the Nava Nalanda Mahavihara) at Nalanda (Patna).
As part of this programme of rehabilitating and reorientating ancient learning and scholarship this is the Research volume 4, which is the thesis of Dr. K.R. Chandra, Research Scholar of the Institute, approved for the Ph. D. degree of Bihar University. The Govt. of Bihar hope to continue to sponsor such projects and trust that this humble service to the world of scholarship and learning would bear fruit in the fulness of time.

Page #5


Page #6

GENERAL EDITOR'S NOTE
In the Jaina tradition Rāma has been called Padma also and so by Padmacarita or Paumacariya, Rāmacarita is meant. Allured by the great popularity of the Rāma-legend the Jaina poets also based their works upon it. Among these Vimalasūri is the pioneer. His Paumacariyaṁ is the first Rāmāyaṇa in the Jaina tradition and also the first epic written in Prakrit. His work has been the source for the later Jaina writers, on the Rāmāyaṇa, like Ravisena, Svayambhū, Śīlācārya and Hemacandra. Apart from the salient features of the Jaina religion Vimalasūri's epic contains enough cultural material pertaining to the contemporary life.
The present work is the approved thesis of Dr. K. R. Chandra. He worked on this subject for nearly four years as a Research Scholar of the Institute, first under its eminent ex-Director Dr. H. L. Jain, and then under the present Director and obtained his Ph. D. Degree from the Bihar University.
Dr. Chandra has divided his work in two parts. In the first part he has given a resume of the narrative materials in the Paumacariya and in the second he has dealt with its cultural and literary aspects. The author has duly classified and lucidly narrated the intervening stories. He has compared and contrasted the Rāma-Story as found in Vimalasūri on one hand and in Vālmīki and Tulsi on the other. The author endorses Vimalasūri's claim that he has purged the traditional Rāma-story of its lies—the irrational exaggerations-and cleared the characters of blemishes. One wonders whether the replacement of the mythical and unbelievable feats of the vānaras and the rākşasas by the equally unbelievable supernatural powers of the Vidyādharas

Page #7

(vi)
is rationalisation or sheer substitution of tweedledum for tweedledee, just one set of superstition for another.
The author's tracing of Vimalasūri's influence on the later authors of the Rāmāyaṇa is laborious, though in certain cases as in that of showing Tulsi's indebtedness to Vimalasūri he might have been guided more by his zeal than by the factual data.
Dr. Chandra's grasp of the text is thorough and he has dealt with the different aspects of the great epic. His literary evaluation of the text evinces his taste and his keen ears for Prakrit rhythm. We hope the work will prove valuable to the Scholars.
We here place on record our thanks to Professor R. P. Poddar for going through the Press Copy before it was committed to press and also to Dr. Nand Kishore Prasad, Research Fellow, for his hard task of arranging the material in proper order and undertaking the arduous work of reading through the proofs.
Vaishali,
Mahavira Jayanti April 19, 1970.
NATHMAL TATIA

Page #8

PREFACE
As I happened to be at Banaras in the month of April, 1957, Prof. Dalsukh Bhai Malavania of the Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, B.H.U. suggested me to make a special study of the Paumacariyam of Vimalasūri, the first Prakrit epic on the Rama-story. With this suggestion I wrote to my revered teacher Dr. H. L. Jain, M.A., LL.B., D. Litt., Director, Research Institute of Prakrit, Jainology & Ahimsa, Muzaffarpur, (Bihar), who was my Professor at Nagpur during my M.A. studies and was encouraging me since that time for higher studies. He was kind enough to give his consent for guiding me in my research work. In due course of time I joined the Institute in the month of November, 1957. The subject was properly selected and was titled as 'A critical study of Paumacariyam'. Duly the synopsis was prepared under his guidance and was registered with the Bihar University for the Ph.D. Degree.
During all these days of my work Dr. H. L. Jain took regular classes for guiding me in dealing with the various problems arising out of my thesis. His able and learned guidance as well as his paternal care inspired me greatly and made me able to withstand the difficulties and the long passage of time. It was often due to his timely stimulus that I could remain perseverant in my work and now I feel highly relieved that I have completed my thesis and am submitting it to the University of Bihar for examination for the Ph. D. degree.
In my work I have quoted now and then the work 'RamakathaUtpatti aur Vikāsa' of Dr. C. Bulcke. This work has helped me immensely. Without the help of that book it would have been difficult to collect all the material from works on Ramakathās in those various languages with which I am unacquainted and also from those works I could not make use of on account of their non-availability to me. I feel deeply indebted to Dr. Bulcke's work and express my gratitude to him.
I acknowledge my deepest gratitude to my revered guide Dr. H. L. Jain and refrain from the vain attempt to praise him because the words are beyond the power to express my feeling. I feel it my duty to record my gratefulness to Dr. Nathmal Tatia, the present Director of the Institute, who gave me all the possible help after

Page #9

(viii)
Dr. H. L. Jain left the post of Directorship. I express my gratefulness to all those Scholars, Profeessor, Institutes and Jain munis who extended their help to me whenever I approached them in connection with my research work. I acknowledge my debt of gratitude to the Government of Bihar for awarding me a Research Scholarship.
Mahavira Jayanti, April the 19th, 1970.
K. R. Chandra

Page #10

OUTLINE OF THE BOOK
The Thesis is divided into two parts. Part one deals with the comparative and critical study of the narrative material of the Paumacariyam and part two comprises of the cultural study. The whole work has been arranged into twelve chapters, the first six forming part one and the next six, part two.
The first chapter contains the critical survey of the text of Paumacariyam edited by Dr. H. Jacobi and the sect and the date of the author. The second is a summary of Paumacariyam chapterwise. The Third chapter contains a comparative study of the Rāmakatha of Paumacariyam with that of the Valmiki Ramayana and the Tulasi Rāmāyaṇa in particular to find out the points of agreement and disagreement. In the fourth chapter all the intervening stories of the Paumacariyam have been summarised and an attempt has been made to find out their sources and their influence. The fifth chapter is a comparative study of the origin and the genealogical lists of various Vamsas given in the Paumacariyan with that of the Brahmanical tradition. In the sixth chaper an attempt has been made to trace out the sources of the Rama-Katha of the Paumacariyam as well as of the intervening stories. The original contribution of Vimalasuri and his influence on various Jaina and non-Jaina, Indian and Foreign Rama-kathās have also been discussed.
The seventh chapter treats of the social conditions reflected in the Paumacariyam. Its first section deals with the Jaina and Brahmanical concept of caste or Jati, and the division of the ancient society into four Varnas and Aśramas. The second section is a study of the institution of family and the harmonious life of its members, their rights and duties. Various relations also have been noted. The third section treats of the functions and ceremonies of birth, childhood and marriage as well as the considerations on which marital alliances were settled, the types of marriages prevalent and the position of intercaste and inter-racial marriages. The fourth section comprises of the position of women in the family and society, as a maiden, a wife, a mother and a widow. Then their social status outside the family as weil as the political and religious status have been discussed. The sixth section includes the manners, customs and beliefs of the ancient society. The seventh section contains a discussion of the supernatural elements concerning heaven and hell and associated with the life of great personages.

Page #11

( x )
The eighth chapter comprises of the system of education, literature, sciences arts and the architecture. The first section contains topics on the teacher and student's relationship. The second section deals with the various sciences, such as writing, astronomy, astrology, medical science and cooking. The third section deals with the various kinds of arts such as clothing and ornaments, hair dressing articles of fragrance and the use of flowers. Then follows the exposition of fine-arts, viz., music, dance and drama, drawing and painting, terracota and plastering and sculpture. The fourth section gives account of the housing, architecture, town-planning, various types of buildings, palaces and others. The fifth section mentions the articles of furniture and decoration.
The ninth chapter is a study of the economic, political and religious conditions: The first section deals with economic conditions. It contains topics on agriculture, crops, animal husbandry, various other professions and services. Then it treats of the mineral products, forest yield, trade and commerce. The second section discusses the topics such as state, king, administration, policies of state, law, justice, army and warfare. The third section deals with philosophy and religion, including the Jain philosophy, ethics, and monks' and householders' rules. It further throws light on the rituals both Jaina and Brahmanical, as well as the popular worship.
In the tenth chapter the geographical places, peoples and tribes have been identified. Jain cosmology, various races such as the Anaryas or Mlecchas and Vidyadharas, Rakṣasas and the Vanaras are included in it.
The eleventh chapter is a study of the language, grammar and prosody and contains a literary estimate of the Paumacariyam.
The twelfth chapter is the conclusion which summarises the original contribution of Vimalasūri to the story of Rama, his cultural contri. bution, his indebtedness to others and his influence on the Jaina and non-Jaina Rama-Kathās as well as the cultural, historical and linguistic importance of the work.

Page #12

General Editor's Note
Preface
Outline of the Book Abbreviations
Part I
Comparative Study of Narrative Material
Introduction
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 2.
Section 1. Critical Remarks on the printed Paumacariyam
CHAPTER I
Section 2.
Author of Paumacariyam, His Sect and Date A. Author and His Works.
B. Sect of Vimalasūri
C. Date of Paumacariyan
Author's statement; External Evidences; Internal Evidences; Political Situations and Historical Data; Literary and Linguistic Evidences; Conclusion.
CHATER II
Summary of Paumacariyam
CHAPTER III
Comparative Study of the Rama-Story Section
1.
1-17
Text of 1-3
King Dasaratha, His Wives and Sons A. Queens of Dasaratha. B. Marriage of Kaikeyi and the Granting of a Boon. C. Birth of Rama and his brothers. D. Christening of Names. E. Rama's Teacher.
v-vi vii-viii
ix-x
XXV-xxviii
Birth of Sita and Her Marriage
A. The Family of Janaka. B. Birth of Sītā. C. Sita's Betrothal with Rama. D. Intervention of the Bow. E. Svayamvara of Sita. F. Marriage of Rama and his brothers.
(1-315)
4-17
18-32
33-117 33
42

Page #13

Section 3. Exile of Rama
(xii)
A. Dasaratha's Decision to crown Rama. B. Rama's Voluntary Exile.
C. Kaikeyi's Attempt to call back Rāma.
Section 4. Rama's Journey from Citrakūta to Danda
kāranya
A. Main work during the Journey.
B. Route of their Journey.
C. Account of Rama's Journey.
Section 5. Abduction of Sītā
A. Meeting a Vulture.
B. Death of Sambuka and Candranakha's Displeasure.
C. Battle with Kharadūşapa.
D. Forcible Removal of Sita by Ravana to Laikā.
E. Rama's Sojourn at Patalankarapura.
Section 6. Friendship with Sugrīva
A. Sugrīva's approach to Rama for help. B. Cause of Sugriva's Distress. C. Slaying of Sham Sugrīva.
Section 7. Mission of Hanumat
A. Reproach to Sugrīva and Ratnakesin's Help. B. Lifting up of Kotiśila and Selection of Hanumat for Mediation. C. Hanumat's Journey to Laikā. D. Meeting with Sitä and Mandodari's Interference. E. Discussion with Sītā. F. Capturing of Hanumat by Indrajit and the Former's wordy-duel with Ravana.
Section 8. Killing of Ravaņa
A. March to Lankā. B. Vibhīṣapa's Shelter under Rāma. C. First Casualties in Battle. D. Wounding of Lakṣmaṇa by the hit of a Sakti of Ravana. E. Visalya's Medical Aid. F. Ravana's offer for a Peace-treaty with Rama. G. Acquiring of Bahurupă Vidya by Rāvana. H. Ravana's plan to set free Sita. I. Rejection of Mandodari's Request by Ravana. J. Slaying of Ravaņa.
50
58
63
74
78
88

Page #14

Section 9.
A.
Abandoning of Sītā
Back to Ayodhya: (i) Last Rites of Rāvana, (ii) Meeting Sitā, (iii) Back to Ayodhya. B. Lakṣmaṇa's Ardhacakravartītva: (i) Coronation of Lakṣmaṇa, (ii) Occupation of Mathura by Śatrughna, (iii) Laksmana's WarCampaign.
Banishment of Sītā.
1.
2.
A.
C.
D.
E.
(xiii)
Birth of the sons of Sītā and Her FireOrdeal: (i) Birth and Marriage, (ii) Battle and Fire Ordeal.
Intervening Stories
Renouncing the World: (i) Acceptance of Monkhood by the Principal Eight sons of Lakṣmaṇa, (ii) Death of Lakṣmaṇa, (iii) Accepting of Monkhood by Lavana & Ankusa, (iv) Attack on Rama's Territory (v) Rama's Nirvāņa.
Introduction
Informative Stories
CHAPTER IV
Caritas of Eminent Persons
(1). Ravana-carita (chs.5-19):
(a) Beginning of Hostility between the Ancestors of Ravana and those of Indra :
(i) Losing of Lanka by Sukeśa and its reoccupation by Mali, (ii) Killing of Mali and the occupation of Lanka by Vaiśravana; (b) Re-Occupation of Lanka by Ravana : (iii) Birth of Ratnāśarava and his marriage, (iv) Birth of Ravana and his Brothers. (v) Acquisition of Vidyas by Ravana, (vi) Marriage of Ravana and his Progeny, (vii) Con-duct of Kumbhakarna, (viii) Defeating Vaiśravana and Yama;
(c) Ravana's War-Campaign and his emergence as a Prativasudeva or Ardha-Cakravartin of Bharatavarṣa :
(ix) Abduction of Candranakha, (x) Raising of Kailasa Mountain, (xi) Ravana's conquest
103
118-198
118-120
120-159
120-152

Page #15

152-155
(xiv ) expedition, (xii) Defeat of Sahasra-Kirapa, the Māheśvara king, (xiii) Stopping the Yajña of Marutta, (xiv) Marriage of Manorama with Madhu, (xv) Defeat of Nalakūbara and Rejection of the Love-proposal of Uparambha, (xvi) Imprisonment of Indra, (xvii) Acceptance of a Vow under Muni Anantravirya, (xviii) Rāvapa's emergenee as Ardha-cakravartin after
the defeat of Varuņa. 2. Añjanāsundari and Hanumat (ch. 15-19) 3. Birth of Nārada (9.49-68) 4. Lord Mahāvira (2.21-98) 5. Lord Rşabha (3.61-4.88) 6. Ajita-swằmin (5.48-61, 123, 167) 7. Muni suvrata (21.11-28) 8. Duel between Bharata and Bahubali (4 36-56) 9. Death of the Sons of Sagara (5.168-203) 10. Sanatkumāra (20.114-132)
11. Harişeņa (8.143-210) B. Legendary kings of the Ikşvāku Varša
12. Vajrabahu's Renunciation (21.41.77) 13. Kirtidhara, Sahadevi and Sukošala (21.78-22.47) 14. Naghușa and Simhikā (22.50-71)
15. Saudása (22.71-95) C. Stories of Genesis
16. Origin of Brāhmanas (Mahapas) (4.64-84) 17. Parvataka, Vasu, and the origin of Yajña (11.6-45) 18. Srikantha and Puşpottara. (6.1-59) 19. Amaraprabha and Guñamati. (6.69-91)
20. Sumukha & Viraka (21.2-7) 3. Didactic Stories A. Religious-cum-Moral Stories 21. Muni Sañjayanta's torture at the hands of
Vidyuddamstra (5.20-26) 22. The Previous births (P. B.) of Sañjayanta and
Vidyuddamstra or Story of Srivardhana and
Jüalanasimha (5.26.41) 23. The P. B. of Purnaghana and Sulocana or the
story of Bhāvana and Haridasa (5.82-91) 24. The P. B. of Meghavāhana and Sahasranayana or
the story of Sasi and Avaliya (5.93-111)
155-159
159-198 159-195

Page #16

( xv )
The P. B. of Sagara or the story of Rambhaka (5.112-110)
26. The P. B. of Bhagiratha or the story of a potter and the Jaina Sangha (5.204-216)
The P. B. of Mahārakṣa or the story of Pritińkara (5.227-235)
28. The P. B. of Srikantha or the story of two Merchant Brothers (6.60-65)
29. The P. B. of Taditkeśa or the story of Datta and a Hunter (6.134-147)
30. The P. B. of Madhu and the Acquisition of SalaRatna or the story of Prabhava and Sumitra (12.10-35)
The (I) P.B of Indra or the story of Sahasrabhāga (13.21-31)
The (II) P. B. of Indra or the story of Ahalya (13.33-52)
The P. B. of Śrīśaila (Hanu) or the story of Damayanta (17.48-58)
The P. B. of Añjanasundarī Kanakodari (17.59-70)
or the story of
The P.B. of Bhāmaṇḍala or the story of Madhupingala and Kundalamanḍita (26.1-73) 36. The P.B. of Candragati along with Madhupingala, Kundalamandita and Citrotsava or the story of Vimuci, Sarasā Atibhūti, and Kayāna (30.60-77) The P. B. of Dasaratha, Janaka and Kanaka or the story of Upasti, Bhuri and Upamanyu (31.1-35)
25.
27.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
37.
38.
39.
40.
The P.B. of Deśabhuṣaṇa and Kulabhusana or the story of Udita, Mudita and Vasubhūti (39.36-126) The P. B. of a Mleccha Senapati or the story of two Farmer Brothers and a Bird (39.67-72)
The P. B. of Jatayu or the story of Dandaka (41.18-37)
41.
The story of Rucira and Pravara (41.40-6+) 42. The P. B. of Hasta, Prahasta, Nala and Nila the story of Indhana and Pallava (58.1-19) The P. B. of Visalya and Laksmana or the story of Anangasarā and Punarvasu (63.24-70): (A): Anangasarā and Punarvasu, (B) A Merchant, and a he-Buffialo.
43.
or

Page #17

( xvi)
44. The story of Aridamana (74.31-40) 45. The P. B. of Indrajit and Ghanavāhana or the
story of Prathama and Paścima (75.60-75)
Mayopākhyāna (Story No. 46-50). 46. The story of Agnila and Kararuha (77.73-80) 47. The story of Srivardhita and Mitrayasa (77.81-98) 48. The P. B. of Śrīvardhita or the story of Sumāla
(77.99-105) 49. The P. B. of Mitrayaśā or the story of a Hungry
Traveller (77.106-110) 50. The P. B. of Simhendu and Rativardhanā or the
story of Gohānika and Bhujapatrā (77.111-112) 51. The P. B. of Bharata and Tribhuvanāla kāra
Elephant or the story of Sūryodaya (Ramana) and
Candrodaya (Vinoda) (82.17-121) 52. The P. B. of Satrughna and Kệtāntavadana or the
story of Acala and Anka (88.1-43) 53. The story of Sakalabhūşana and Kiranamandala
(101.54-69) 54. The P. B. of Rama, Sitā, Laksmana, Rāvana,
Sugriva etc. or the story of Dhanadatta, Gunamati, Vasudatta, Śrīkānta, Vrşabhadhvaja etc.
(103.1-152) 55. The P. B. of Vali or the story of Maghadatta
(103.129-131) 56. The P. B. of Lavana, Ankusa and Siddhārtha or
the story of Priyankara, Hitaxikara and Sudarśana
(104.1-34) 57. The P. B. of Madhu and Kaitabha or the story
of Sikhibhūti and Vayubhūti (105.17-114) B. Stories of General Prudence
58. Yakşadatta and Mitramati (48.12-32) 59. Vinayadatta and a man mad after a Peacock
(48.63-76)
Ātmaśreyas and the Mystic Ring (48.77-96) 61. Giribhuti and Gobhūti (55.34-44) 62. Ahideva and Mahideva (55.84-44) 63. The battle between the Sons of King Śrīşeņa
(15.19)
195-198

Page #18

( xvii)
CHAPTER V
Origin & Genealogy of Various Vansas
1. Ikşavāku Vamsa 2. Soma Vamsa 3. Vidyadhara Varśa 4. Raksasa Vamsa
Vánara Vamsa : Origin, Adoption of Vanara
Emblem And Genealogy. 6. Hari Varsa
199-231
199 208 208 213
222 226
B.
CHAPTER VI Sources, Contribution & Influence of Pauma cariyam 232-315 Section 1. Sources of Paumacariya
232-278 A. A Critical Examination of Author's
232--234 Statements. Influence of Valmiki Rāmāyana and Counter- 234---251 Influence of Paumacariyaṁ 1. Vimalasūri's Acquaintance with the
Valmiki Rāmāyana ; 2. Elements of Agreement Between
VR & PCV; 3. Points of Difference: (a) Points of Alteration, (b) Deviating
Points, (c) Elements Absent, (d)
New Elements; 4. Obvious Influence of Valmiki
Rāmāyana on PCV; 5. Particular Version of VR that
Influenced Paumacariyam & Counter
Influence of Paumacariyam. C. Influence of the Ramopakhyāna of Mahābhārata on PCV.
251-252 D. What do the Peculiarities of the Paumacariya Reveal?
252—254 E. Jaina and Popular Tradition, Basic Foundation of PCV.
254–265 1. Critical Examination of Three
Probabilities: (a) Purging the Story of its Unrealistic Elements, (b) Empting the Story

Page #19

Section 2.
Section 3.
( xviii)
of its Brahmanical
Elements and Infusing it with Jaina Environment, (c) Reshaping the Story Befitting a New Plan & Pattern;
2. Jain as well as Popular Tradition, the Basic Foundation;
3. Why Rama named as Padma?
F. Two Jaina Traditions of Rama Story 1. Tradition of Paumacariyam;
2.
Other Jaina Tradition:
(a) Vasudevahindi, (b) Uttarapurāņa, (c) Earlier Stage of Jaina Rama-Kathā; 3. Nucleus of Rama-story of the Jaina Traditions.
G. Sources of Intervening Stories
1.
Probable Priority of Vasudevahinḍī; 2. Sources of Respective Intervening Stories of PCV:
(A) Jaina Sources and (B) Brahmanical Sources.
Contribution of Vimalasuri
Infiuence of Pauma cariyam
A. Influence on Jaina Works
1.
Ravisena's Indebtedness to Paumacariyam: (a) Vimalasuri, Predecessor of Raviṣeņa (b) Padmacaritam of Ravişena;
2. Svayambhu's Paumacariu;
3. Hemacandra's Trişaṣṭiśalaka-puruşacarita;
4. Ramapurana of Bh. Somasena;
5. Influence on Jinasenasuri & Hastimalla;
6. Minor Influence of PCV on the Mahapurana of Puspadanta.
B. Influence on Non-Jaina Works.
1. Works Composed in India: (a) Sanskrit works & (b) Works in Modern Indian Lauguages;
2. Works composed outside India: (a) South Asia & (b) Western Europe;
265-273
273-278
278-280
280-315
280-295
295-313

Page #20

( xix)
3.
A Note on the Previous Birth Stories of Dasaratha, Rama & Ravaņa; Influence on Tulasīdāsa..
4.
C. Conclusion
Part II
Cultural Study Of Paumacariyam
CHAPTER VII
Social Conditions
Section 1. Social Evolution, Castes and Stages of life A. Social Evolution:
Utsarpiņi and Avasarpiņi, Kulakaras, Bhogabhumi and Krtayuga.
Section 3.
B. Castes Origin, Duties, occupation and position.
C. Stages of Life.
Section 2. Family and Relationship
A. Family:
Fundamental Unit of Society; Father the Sole Authority; Faithfulness of Wife; Responsibilities of Parents; Duties of sons and daughters; Elder Brother's Responsibility; Mutual Affection between Brothers and Sisters; Place of Daughter-in-law and Joint Family System. B. Relationship.
Ceremonies of Birth, Childhood and 'Marriage A. Birth and Childhood:
Care of the Expectant Mother; Curiosity for the Birth of a Son; Birth Ceremonies & Other Rites and Nurses.
313-315
316-634
B. Marriage: Guardian's Responsibility; Wishes of Children; Due Consultations; Considerations in Marital Alliance; Parity in Age; Site of Marriage Ceremony; Types of MarriagesMaternal Uncle's Svayamvara, Marrying Daughter, Polygamy and Dowry, Inter-caste and Inter-racial Marriages.
316-403
316-332
332-338
338-349

Page #21

(xx)
Section
349-371
4. Position of Women
A. Family Status or Women Inside the House: Maiden; Wife; Mother; Widow; Dependency of Women. B. Social Status or Women Outside the House: Inherent Traits of Women; Weaknesses; Male Excesses and Women's Lot; Divorce; Consciousness of Self Respect; Outdoor Activities; Servants; Artists; Public Women; Nurses and Doctors. C. Political Status. D. Religious Status. E. Freedom of Movement & the System of
Purdah.
371—375.
Section 5. Games and Amusements
A. Outdoor Games :
Ball-play; Watersports; Boxing; Princely sports or Subduing the elephants and
horses; and Hunting. B. Indoor Games. C. Amusements:
Story-telling; Welcome-Celebrations; Madanotsava and Spectacles.
375-388
Section 6 Manners, Customs and Beliefs.
A. Manners. B. Customs.
Beliefs: Astrology; Fatalism; Prophecies, Nimitta
and Sakuna; Dreams, etc.
D. Lucky Physical characteristics. Section 7. Supernatural Elements
A. Supernatural Beings. B. Supernatural Elements Associated with the
Sixty-three Illustrious Persons of the Jaina
Faith. C. Supernatural Occurrences D. Superhuman Powers.
388-403

Page #22

( xxi )
CHAPTER VIII
Education, Literature, Sciences, Arts & Architecture
Section 1.
Education and Literature A. Teacher and Pupil.
B. Subjects of Study and Literature.
Section 2.
Section 3.
Section 4.
Section 5.
Section
Sciences
C. Astrology,
A. Writing, B. Astronomy, D. Medical Science, E. Cooking (Food and Drinks) and F. Flora and Fauna.
1.
Arts
A. Clothing, Ornaments and Toilet
B. Music, Dance and Drama
C. Drawing, Painting, Terracota, Plastic and Sculpture
Housing and Architecture
A. Town Planning: Parikhā, Prākāra, Gopura Dvāra, Aṭṭālaka, Durga, Apaņa, Rathya and Marga, Catvaras and Trikas, Narendrapath, Types of Buildings, Windows, Rooms, Courtyards.
B. Royal Palaces: Inner-Appartment, Outer Apartment.
C. Some Architectural Terms.
D. Other Constructions for shelter etc.
CHAPTER IX
Economic, Political & Religious Conditions Section Economic Conditions
Utensils and Articles of Furniture and Decoration
General Conditions; Occupations and Professions:-Agriculture & Grops, Animal Husbandry, Other Professions, Services, Mineral Products, Forest Yield, Trade and Commerce, Trading Accessories and Conveyances. 2. Polity and Administration
A. State and King:
King; Queen; King's. Paraphernalia; Education; Qualities; Duties; Hospitality;
404-448.
404-408
408-426
426-439
439-446
63.
446-448
449-500 449-455
455-474 455-461

Page #23

(xxii)
Amusements; Heir; Consecration Ceremony. Types of Rulers:-Cakravartin, Ardhacakravartin, Mandalika; Maharaja,
Samanta and Tributary Kings. B. Administration
461-468 Council of Ministers. Other Officers: Purohita, Senāpati, Salarakşa, Bhandarika, Kañcuki, Mahattaras, Data, Carapuruşas, Lekhavahaka, Pratihāra, Dvārapāla, Udyānapāla, Lokapalas, Adeśadāyaka, Rāştraswämin,Grāmeyakas and Bhogikas.. Policies of State: Justice and Law; Police and Jail; Crime; Punishments and Divine
Ordeals. C. Army and Warfare
4684474 Army; Implements of War; other Equipment of Army; Musical Instruments; Banners and Ensigns; Battle; Ethics of War; Treatment Meted out to the Defeated Kings and Causes
of Battle. 3. Philosophy and Religion
475—500 A. Philosophy
-475-484 Jaina Philosophy:-Six Substances; Jiva or Soul; Classification of Jivas; Pudgal or Matter; Nine Principles; Doctorine of Karma; Path to Liberation or Ratna-traya. Jaina Ethics:-Monks' Conduct & Househol
ders' Conduct. B. Ascetic Life
484-489 (i) Jaina Ascetics: Causes of Renouncement; Eligibility for Becoming a Jaina Monk; Movements and Shelter; Austerities; Alms; Samlek hana (ii) Non-Jaina Ascetics.
Section
C. Rituals
489-500 (i) Jaina Rituals; (ii) Brahmanical Rituals; and (iii) Popular Worship.

Page #24

Geographical Places, Peoples & Tribes
Section 2.
Section 3.
CHAPTER XI
Literary Evaluation of Paumacariyam
Section 1.
Language and Grammar
Conclusion
(xxiii)
CHAPTER X
Cosmology; Jambudvipa; Bharatavarṣa & Some Geographical Terms.
1. Places and Peoples referred to in the main story or Associated with Rāma
2. Places and Peoples conquered by Lavana and Ankusa
522-531
3. Places associated with Great Jaina Personages 531-534 4. Places mentioned in the Intervening stories
534-543
5. Unidentified Places
543-544
6. Anāryas or Mlecchas
544-553
A. Phonology
B. Morphology C. Conclusion
Prosody
PCV as a work of art
A. Title of the Work, B. The Work a Carita or a Purana, C. Planning of the PCV, D.A Narrative Epic Poem and Its Style, E. Characterisation, F. Poetic Merits:-Descriptions; Emotions, Feelings and Rasas; Sentiments or Rasas; Figures of Speech; Maxims, Proverbs and Sayings.
CHAPTER XII
Part One
Part Two
Table of Paumacariyam's Influence
Bibliography
501-553
501-507
507-522
554-616
554-578
578--585
585-616
617-634
635-641

Page #25


Page #26

ABBREVIATIONS
AC—Abhidánacintamanikosa Aca. Cu—Ācārāngacūrpi Adh. Ram-Adhyatma Rāmāyana AIHT-Ancient Indian Historical Tradition AIU— The Age of Imperial Unity; B. V. Bhavan (1953) Amg-Ardhamāgadhi Ana. Răm-Anandarāmāyana Anuyoga-Anuyogadvāra Sūtra AP-Adipurāna Apa Apabhramba Ava N-Avaśyaka-niryukti Ava. Cū.-Avasyakacūrni Bhad-Samh-Bhadrabahu Samhita Bhag. Pu.-Śrimad-Bhāgawata-Mahāpurana Bhag. Su-Bhagawatisatra Bhā. Sa.-Bhārata Sávitrí BI-Buddhist India Br-Samk-Brhat Sainhita Bulcke-Rāma-katha by Dr. c. Bulke (First Edition). Bulcke-2-Second edition of Dr. C. Bulcke's Rāma Katha CAGI-Cunningham's Ancient Geography of India Chakladar-Social Life in Ancient India CHI-The Cambridge History of India Dasavai-Dasavaikālika Sūtra Das. Rama-The Rāmāyaṇa, An English Translation of Dr. H.
Jacobi's Das Ramayana. Dhur.-Dhørtākhyāna DKA-Dynasties of the Kali Age Dowson_Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology EAI_Education in Ancient India E. C.-Epigraphia Carnatica EDAD-A History of the Early Dynasties of Andhradesa EHA-An Encylopaedia of Hindu Architecture EHD-Early History of the Deccan EHVS_The Early History of the Vaishnava Sect EI-Epigraphia Indica GD-Geographical Dictionary of Ancient and Medieval India

Page #27

(xxvi)
GĖ-Geographical Essays Vol. I. GESM-Geographical and Economic Studies in the Mahabhārata GL-Gathā Lakşana GR. Su.-Gșhya Sūtras HAI–The Heroic Age of India, N.K. Siddhanta Handiqui-Yaśastilaka and Indian Culture HCLJ-A History of the Canonical Literature of Jainas Hem. Or Hc.- Prakstavyākarapa of Hemacandra HGAI–Historical Geography of Ancient India HIL-A History of Indian Literature Vol. II. HJM–History of Jaina Monachism HSI-A History of South India HSL-A History of Sanskrit Literature HVP-Harivaṁsa Purāņa HVPJ-Harivam apurāņa of Jinasenasūri IA Or Ind. Ant.-- Indian Antiquary IDETB3-India as Described in Early Texts of Buddhism and
Jainism IK-India in Kālidāsa (B.S. Upadhyāya) 1947 Indra.-The Status of Women in Ancient India IP-India as known to Panini JASG-Jaina Agama Sahityamān Gujarăta 7. Charpentier-Uttaradhyayana By J. Charpentier Jha. Comm. Vol.-Gangānātha Jhā Commemoration Volume JM., Imh.-Jaina Mahārāştri JP-Jambūdīvapappatti JPMS-Jain Philosophy and Modern Science JPS-Jambūdivapanpatti Sargaho FRAS- Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society JSI- Jaina Sahitya aur Itihasa FSIE-Jainism in South India and Some Jaina Epigraphs JSSI- Jaina Sahityano Sanksipta Itihāsa Kaut.-Kautilya's Arthasastra KC-Karakandacariu LAI–Life in Ancient India M.-Mahārāştri Manu.-Manusmộti Mg.-Magadhi Mar. Pu.-Márkandeya Purana Mar. Pu. T1.-Translation of Markandeya Purāpa by F. E.
Pargiter

Page #28

( xxvii)
MB or MB-Mahabharata MD7G-Manikchandra Digambar Jain Granthamala Mh. - Mahārāştri MP-Mahāpurāna MP Gupta-Tulasidasa By Dr. Mataprasad Gupta Mula.-Mülācra MWSEDA Sanskrit English Dictionary by Sir Monier Monier
Williams. Nandi. Su.-Nandi Sūtra with Malayagiri's commentary Naya-Nayadhammakahão Nayaku. Ca.-—Nayakumāra cariu Nisi. Cu. or Ni. Cu-Nistha Carni Niyama-Niyamsāra OGCI-Origin and Growth of Caste in India OJP_Outlines of Jaina Philosphy Para.- Paraskara Gșhya Sūtra PCR-Paumacariyaň PCS-Paumacariu PCV-Paumacariyam PHAI-Political History of Ancient India Pischel-Comparative Grammar of the Prakrit Languages PP.-Prāksta Phaingalam PSM-Paia-sadda-mahannavo PTS-Prācina Tirthamala Samgraha Ragku.—Raghuvamsa RE-Rock Edicts of Asoka RI -Rivers of India RKS-Rāmāyaṇa Kalina Sanskriti RKSj-Rāmāyaṇa Kalina Samāja RPS-Rāmapurāna of Bhattaraka Somasena. RR-The, Riddle of the Rāmāyaṇa S-Sauraseni Samava-Samavāyānga San. Sr. Su.- Śānkhāyana Śrauta Sutra Saur.-Sauraseni SBE-Sacred Books of the East SEPI-Studies in Epics and Puranas of India SGMI-Studies in the Geography of Ancient and Medieval India Shama- English translation of Arthaśāstra by Shama Shastry SI-Select Inscriptions SIT-Significance and Importance of Jatakas (1951)

Page #29

( xxviii) S78-Singhi Jain Series SRIGr.-Social and Religious Life in the Gșhyasutras SSThe Successors of the Sātavāhanas Stha-, Sthānānga Sukra-Sukraniti Su. Sam.-Suśruta Samhita TAI-Tribes in Ancient India Thana (Abhaya) - Thananga with the Commentary of Abhaya
devasüri Thana—Thānanga TP-Tiloyapannatti TR-Rāmacaritamanasa TS-Trattvārthastra TSP_Trişaşțiśala kāpuruşacarita UP-Uttarapurāna Uttara-Uttaradhyayanasūtra Uttara Ti.-Uttaradhyayana with the, Commentary of Nemi
candrasűri (Devendragapi). Va. Pu.-Váyu Purāna VC-Varanga Carita VGA-The Vakataka Gupta Age, Dr. A. S. Alteker (1954) VH-Vasudevahindi Vol. I. HP (Gud.) or VH Tr.-Introduction of Gujarati Translation of
Vasudevahipdi. Vn. Pu.-Visnu Purāņa Vr.--Prakrtaprakāśa ef Vararuci VR-Valmīki Rāmāyaṇa VRTP-Valmiki Rāmāyaṇa Ke Tīna Patha VSJ-Vșttajātisamuccaya VSS-Vaidika Sahitya aur Sanskrti VTK-Vividha Tirthakalpa Yajna-Yajñavalkya Smộti

Page #30

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
SECTION I
CRITICAL REMARKS ON THE PRINTED TEXT OF PAUMACARIYAM EDITED BY Dr. H. JACOBI
I have based my studies on the Text of Paumacariyam edited by Dr. H. Jacobi and published by the Jaina Dharmaprasaraka Sabha, Bhavanagara, in 1941 A. D. During my studies I came across some errors, mistakes and inconsistencies in the text. It would have been valuable to go through all the available manuscripts of Paumacariyam for preparing a critical edition of it. But that was a big task beyond the scope of my thesis. In the absence of an examination of the readings of various manuscripts, it would be hazardous to suggest corrections for what appeared to me to be defective readings in the printed text. Therefore, I have limited my suggestions for corrections to only those portions where they appeared to be quite obvious for consistency of topics, clarity in meaning, grammatical accuracy and regularity in metres. As regards these corrections, the Padmacaritam of Ravişeņa has also been very helpful. Other defects have been merely pointed out.
The defective portions, verses and words and my suggestions thereon are as follows:
A. Consistency:
*The contents of 1.65 should have occurred after 'vijjāņaṁ ciya lambham' in 1.58a in order to agree with the sequence of the topics described in the text.
14.15 to 14.98 should be 15.15 to 15.98. It is a printing mistake. The portions have been interchanged by oversight.
*98.38 should come after 99.4 and 98.39 to 98.55 should follow 99.5 (see PCR, 101.64-68 and 102.12-53). *98.38 and 99.2 are unsuited. Their correction necessitates help of some fresh manuscripts.
114. 27-29 needs correction in order to agree with the traditional age of Lakṣmaṇa (see PCV, 114. 29 and PCR, 119. 48-50).
*This mark indicates that the relevant portions in the Paumacariyam published from Prakrit Text Society, Varanasi, in 1962 A. D. and 1968 A. D. also need revision. Some of them can be corrected with the help of 'variant readings' noted under Appendix 7 of that edition.

Page #31

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
B. Context:
Some matter is missing between 77.70 to 77,72* (see PCR, 80. 152-158) and before 105.13*. In 9.1a "Āiccayara' should be Āiccaraya'. In 13.29* 'Manirae nayare' should be corrected in the light of PCR, 13.62. In 77.81* 'Hemantapure should be 'Hemankagahe' (see PCR, 80.168). In 82.33a* 'Caupavvartasuie should be "Vasupavvatayasuie' (see PCR, 85.57). In 82.56b 'Vanao' should be 'Dhanao'. In 118.42 Jaņayataņaya' should be Japayakanaya.' In 83.5a 'kāūpa' should be 'caiūna'. In 20.198a 'ti viddhu' should be 'tivittha'.
C. Grammar:
In 78.24b* 'gau' should be 'gao'. In 8.164* 'Uggasene' should be 'Uggasena'.
For the correction of the following instances given under D & E see infra Ch. 11. Sec. 2.
D. Grammar and Metre :
In 43.15 bahave' should be 'bahavesu'.
E. Metre:
In 107.15d 'tamha' should be 'tamha'. Some words or letters are missing or are unsuitable in 14.70*; 17.107* ; 53.115 and 106.1, because the verses should not depart from the running Gatha metre. Verses 14.72 b*; 52.29a*; 70.71c* and 109.26b* are defective.
F. Metre and Siddhānta :
In 2.30# 'aha ațịhakammarahiyassa' should be corrected to 'ahațțhaddhakammarahiyassa' (see infra Ch. 9. Sec. 3).
G. Siddhānta :
In 14.74* 'vicittasayaņāsapam' 'should be vivittasayaņāsaņa»'.
H. Clarity in meaning and in the light of the PCR :
In 5.44* 'Rattațho' should be 'Rattoțýho' (PCR 5.52). In 5.261* "Suvvanto' should be 'Suvvatto' (sse PCR 5.393). In 53.69b 'eņāṁ ditthu maṁ bhadde'='ee paṁdiddumā bhadde' (PCR 53.160).
This mark indicates that the relevant portions in the Paumacariyan published from Prakrit Text Society, Varanasi, in 1962 A. D. and 1968 A. D. also need revision. Some of them can be corrected with the help of 'variant readings' noted under Appendix 7 of that edition.

Page #32

INTRODUCTION . ADDENDA
On the above considerations the following additional defective readings and my suggestions thereon are as follows :
.. इन्दिस्स १९४७ = इन्दस्स । अह दोणि २।५१* = दह दोणि । कुकइणोमि (ई) मूढा ३।१५ = कुक इणो मूढा । वयममेयं ८।४४ = वयणमेयं । गुचवर ८८८ = गुजवर । पुण्णोदयमि ८।२०१ = पुण्णोदयम्मि। सिविणयं ६।२६ = सि विणयं । सुलखरणसमग्गो ११।१०६ = सुलक्खणसमग्गो। उच्चिठ्ठ १२।५८ = उच्छिट्ट। कुमारवरा १५।९३ = कुमारवरो । पाल्हनो १६।३० = पल्हाप्रो । मायाचित्तं १७।२१ = मायावित्तं । भोगमिद्धि १८१५७ = भोगसमिद्धि । हणुवईणं १६७ = दणुवईणं । इन्दतरू वरमालो २०।२९* = इन्द तरूवरसालो। रिक्खया २०१४५* = रक्खिया। नरवइन्द २२१७० = नरवरिन्द । समन्ता २४।११* = भमन्ता । माधावित्ते हि २८।९६ = मायावित्तेहि । केगईपुत्तं २८।१३० = केगई पुत्तं। विरणीया पुरिम्मि ३२।५० = विरणीयापुरिम्मि। सीहोयर ३३६६ = सीहोयरं । पणमिज्जयइ ३३।१३० = पणमिज्जइ । महिलियाएउ ३६।४५ = महिलियाए उ। बद्धा ३९।११६* = बद्धो। मानेणं ४५।१५ = नामेणं । मुजइ ४७॥३६ = मुचइ । पडहिय-निरुविया ४८।८९ = पडहिय निरूविया । मूलमाईसु ६३।२६ = सूलमाईसु। अंणंगसरो ६३।३४ अणंगसरा । इन्हो ६५॥३३ = इन्दो। मालाउऊल ६८११६ = मालापोऊल । दुग्गन्ध ७७। १०१ = दुग्गन्धं । पायारगोयर* ८०।६१ = पायारगोउर । सामण्णापडिभग्गो ८२।२४ = सामण्णा पडिभग्गो। महिहरंमि ९२।१ = महरिहमि । महामइं ६४।१३ = महासई। जम्मूसव ९७१८ = जम्मूसवं । सेव्वे १०२।१५ = सव्वे । काहेमि १०३।८६ = साहेमि । जन्नचक्क १०३।१२२ = जन्नवक्क । कान्तासोगो १०३।१२९ = कन्तासोगो। अइ रामा १०५।२७ = अइरा मा। विमलसरीरा ११६।१७ = विमलसरीरो। मह महीहिं ११७।२८ = सह सहीहिं।
The following defective readings and verses need correction in the light of the other manuscripts :
मरणं ११५६* ॥ ११।११७* । खेमञ्जलीपुरंरं तं ३८।२४ । कहसि १०३।१५७ ।
The following instances need correction in the light of the PCR.
5.248* at Tavanayavaliyarayana (PCR, 5.373). Verses 5251*;9.18. and 77.111-112* (PCR, 5.377;9.37-38 & 80.200-201 respectively). 11.62 at 'vimufica' and 'anaccha' (PCR, 11.149-150). 101.18* at candamuttie (PCR, 104.34).
*
This mark indicates that the relevant portions in the Paumacariyan published from Prakrit Text Society, Varanasi, in 1962 A. D. and 1968 A.D. also need revision. Some of them can be corrected with the help of 'variant readings' noted under Appendix 7 of that edition.

Page #33

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
SECTION II AUTHOR OF PAUMACARIAM, HIS SECT AND DATE
A. Author and his works :
The author of Paumacariyaṁ mentions in the Prasasti appended to the work that his name is Vimala (sūri). He is a disciple of Vijaya and a grand disciple of Acārya Rahu. He belongs to the Nailavamsa (PCV, 118. 118). He mentions thrice in the PCV that he is the author of it (PCV, 1.31, 90; 118. 118). No other work composed by him has so far come to light. It is Uddyotanasūri who for the first time mentions Vimalasäri. In his Kuvalayamala (p. 3, 11. 27-29) he pays tributes to Vimalasūri and refers to him as 'Harivaṁsuppattikārayam padhamam' and 'Harivamsam ceya Vimalapayaṁ.' It indicates that he had composed a work, namely, Harivamsa also (see JSI, p. 113). B. Sect of Vimalasäri:
Vimalasuri, the author of Paumacariyan does not mention any particular sect to which he belonged. Evidences available in the work do not prove his bias for any particular sect because some elements support the Digambara tradition, some the Svetāmbara tra. dition and some deviate from both the traditions. Therefore, it is difficult to put our author into any sectarian group.
Here we make a survey of various types of elements.
[1] The elements which agree with the Digambara or Svetāmbara tradition or are in conformity with some Digambara or Svetāmbara works can be arranged as follows:
Digambara Tradition:
1. There is mentioned in the PCV, 3.67 that Dhanada (Kubera) starts showering gems (rayanavutthi) fifteen months before the birth of the first Tirthařkara. According to the Svetām bara tradition it so happens only on the day of the birth of a Tirtharikara.
2. Lord Mahavira's soul is said to have descended directly into the womb of Trišala (PCV, 2.22).
3. The style of enumerating parentage, birth-places and naksatras associated with the Tirtharkaras (PCV, 20. 27-50) is like that of the TP (4.526ff) and not like that of Avaśyakaniryukti, 323-391.
4. The description of the Atisayas (PCV, 2.31-37; 4.34; 75.25-26) associated with the Tirtharkaras is generally on the line of the TP (4.896-914).

Page #34

5
5. The order in which the names of fourteen Kulakaras are given in the PCV (3.50f) has greater agreement with that of the TP (4.421f) than with that of the JP (Su. 28), Samavayanga (Su. 156) or Sthananga (7.566).
INTRODUCTION
6. The height of the first three Kulakaras is given as 1800, 1300 and 800 bows respectively. Thereafter every succeeding Kulakara has his height 25 bows less than the preceding one (PCV, 20. Ava N (156). 95). It agrees with the TP (421-495) and not with In the Jaisala meriya manuscript1 the whole verse has been replaced agreeing with the Ava N but the other two manuscripts K and Kh do not follow it.
7.
named Tirthankara Aranatha's mother is Mitra (PCV, 20.44). This name is identical with that in the TP (4.543). The Sacred trees Samava. (Su. 157) and Ava N, 386 mention Devi. namely, Sarala and Priyangu associated with Tirthankara Abhinandana and Padmaprabha respectively (PCV, 20.30,32) agree with those in the TP (4.916) while the Samavà (Su. 157) mentions Priyaka and Chatrabha respectively.
8. The householder's vow of Samadhimaraņam is mentioned under last Sikṣāpada ( PCV 14.112-115). The Caritrapahula of KundaKunda (22-25). also does the same thing.
9. Abstention from taking food at night is enumerated as sixth apuvrata of householder's conduct (PCV, 6.120). This sixth apuvrata is referred to in the Sarvarthasiddhi (7.1) and Rajavārtika (7.1). The Acarasara of Viranandi (5.70) and the Căritrasara of Cămundaraya include it into the sixth aņuvrata.
10. The names like Muni Kulabhūṣaṇa and Deśabhuṣaṇa whom Rama pays obeisance on the Vamśagiri hill (PCV, ch. 39), are popular in the Digambara tradition.
Śvetambara Tradition:
1. Lord Mahāvīra, after attaining omniscience, is said to have delivered sermons while on his way to Vipulagiri (PCV, 2.36). According to the Digambara tradition, Mahāvīra delivered his first sermon on the Vipulagiri itself. (See Int. p. 7 of Padmapurana of Ravişena Pt. Pannalal Jain).
2. Mothers of Tirthankaras are said to have witnessed fourteen dreams (PCV, 3.62; 21.12).
1.
See revised edition of PCV by Prakrit Text Society.

Page #35

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
3. The verse referring to the fourteen dream-objects (PCV, 21.13) is identical with that occurring in the Nāyādhammakahão: Gayavasahasīhaabhiseyadāmasasidinayaramjhayamkumbham/ Paumasarasagaravimāṇabhavanarayanuccayasihiṁ cal/-Nāyā, I, p.9.
4. The categorical reference to twenty factors necessary for acquiring Tīrthankaragotrakarma (PCV, 2.82) is in conformity with the description of the same in the Nāyādhammakahão (8.69).
5. Cakravartins are stated to have 64000 wives (PCV, 4.58;5.168) The Digambara tradition mentions 96000 wives.
6. Acala and Padma are referred to as first and eighth Baladeva and Rama as ninth (PCV, 5.154). According to the Digambara tradition, Acala, Rāma and Padma are second, eighth and ninth Baladevas respectively (TP, 4.517). But, the Vasudevahindi names Dāśarathi Rāma as Rāma and not as Padma.
7. The verses (PCV, 5.154 & 155) referring to the names of nine Baladevas and nine Vasudevas bear similarity with those of the Samavāyānga (Su.159 with Abhayadeva's commentary).
8. A number of verses from PCV are quoted by Pt. Parmanand Shastry suggesting their similarity with those of the Digambara Tattvărthasūtra But, in our opinion some of them bear similarity with those of the Svetāmbara works. Compare PCV, 102.101 with Svetāmbara TS, 3.7; PCV, 102.67 with the Bhāşya on the TS, 3.2, PCV, - 14.75 with Uttarādhyayana, 30.30 or Samavă, (Su. 6) and PCV, 102.140 with Uttară, 36.207.
9. Visņusri, the name of the mother of Tirthankara Śreyāmsa (PCV, 20.37) is found also in the Samavă, (Su. 153) and in Ava N 385, whereas the TP (4.536) mentions Venudevī. Malli, the sacred tree associated wiih Puspadanta (PCV, 20. 35) is mentioned in the Samavā (Su. 157) but TP (4.916) refers to the Akşa tree.
10. There is a reference to only three ramparts of the Samosarana of a Tīrtharikara (PCV, 2.50). The Digambara tradition mentions four ramparts, the fourth being that of the mud (TP, 4.733).
[II] There is no ground to maintain that the following elements show any bias for the Digambara or the Švetāmbara tradition.
1. In the PCV the story of Rāma (Padma) is introduced as narrated by Indrabhūti Gautama to king Srenika (3. 14). It is in agreement with the Digambara tradition because, according to the
1. Anekanta, Varsa 5, kirana 10-11, Paumacariya kā Antaḥpariksaņa.'

Page #36

INTRODUCTIONS
Svetambara tradition Sudharmasvāmin narrates to Jambūsvămin. But in the Vasudevahindi we find both the traditions of introducing the narratives. (i) Tattha tāva Suhammasāmiņa Jambūnāmassa padhamāņuoge
...... Vasudevacariyaṁ kahiyaṁ-VH, p. 2. (ii) Tato Bhayavar Seņiyassa ranno savvannumaggeņa dhammi
llacariyaṁ kaheumāraddho-VH, p. 27. 2. There is a reference to Anudiśa Vimānas (tāņa vi anuddisaim purao āiccapamuhāim, PCV, 102-145) situated above the Graive yaka Vimānas. They are four-Vijaya, Vaijayanta, Jayanta and Aparājita. Then Sarvărtha is called the best of Ahamaindra vimāna (ahamindavaravimā ar savvattham ceva nāyavvaṁ PCV, 102.146). These vimānas are not referred to as Anudiša in the Svetāmbara tradition, The Tiloyapannatti states that there are three layers of Kalpātīta Vimānas-Graiveyaka, Anudiśa and Anuttara (TP, 8.117-gevajjamaniddisayarn anuttam iya huvamti tivihappā). But in the Jaisalameriya manuscript of PCV the reading is 'lāņa vi ya uddisāmi purao purao aicchapamuhāim' and so the reference to anuddisāim. Next at 102.171 and at 2.84 the PCV does not make any difference between Anudisa and Anuttara but all the five are mentioned as Anuttaras. The PCR also calls them as Anuttaras (105. 170). Therefore, it can not be maintained that the PCV is following the Digambara works exclusively.
3. The PCV (20.57-58) states that Mahāvīra renounced the world as a Kumārasīha. Kumārasīha does not mean that he did not marry but it indicates that he renounced the world before becoming a king (see JSI. p. 100-101).
4. It cannot be maintained that there should be 'vattha' in place of 'tattha' in the PCV (83.5) to justify that Bharata gave up ornaments and clothes just before renouncing the world to observe nudity. At 114.13-15 & 108.46 Rāma and Hanumat are referred to as giving up their ornaments but there is no reference to any clothe.
Anumannio gurūpam Bharaho (Kauna?) mottuna tattha lankāram/ Nissesa sariga rahio luñcai dhiro niyayakesel-PCV,83.5.
The reference to 'nissesangarahio' cannot be taken as nudity as suggested by Pt. Parmanand Shastry (See op. cit. Anekanta).
In the Uttaradhyayana (Ch. 35) it is laid down that when one gets ordained he should give up all the 'sangas' but, there the giving up of saugas does not mean accepting nudity.
1. See revised Edition of PCV by Prakrit Text Society

Page #37

: 100
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYA
5. At 83.12 Kaikeyi is said to have attained liberation (siddhipayam uttamaṁ patta). At 95.26 it is said that she had ascended to some celestial abode (tiyasavimānuttamaṁ patta). In the light of the latter reference 'siddhipayam' is an interpolation. In the Jaisalamerīya and other two manuscripts the reading is 'sammottar' in place of 'siddhipayam'.
6. The preceding fact leads us to believe that a single reference in the whole work to a Svetambaramuni at 22.78 (siyambaram) is perhaps an interpolation. Even, if it be not so, the reference cannot be exclusively taken as a proof of Vimalasūri's belonging to the Svetāmbara sect.
[III] Besides that, some statements in the PCV are contradictory in themselves and some elements neither favour the Digambara nor the Svetämbara tradition.
1. It is mentioned at 105.16 that a period of 64000 years elapsed between the events of Ramayana and the Mahabharata”. At 20.81 it is mentioned that a period of eleven lakh years intervened between the advent of Munisuvratanātha and Nemi during whose tirtha-kālas Rama and Kyspa were born respectively.
2. At 20.203 Madhukaitabha and Nisumbha are mentioned as • fourth and fifth Prativāsudevas respectively but, at 5.156 they are mentioned as fifth and fourth Prativasudevas respectively.
3. At 20.44 Aranātha's birth place is mentioned as Prathamapuri i, e. Ayodhā while at 95.34 it is mentioned as Kuñjarapura i. e. Hastinapura
4. Tirthankara Mallinātha's mother is named Rakşitā (PCV, 20. 45) and the Sarala tree is associated with lord Mahāvīra (PCV, 20.50) but the Samavā (Su. 157) Ava N (386) and the TP (4.544 & 4.917) mention Prabhāvati as the mother of Mallinātha and associate the Sala tree with Lord Mahāvīra.
5. The birth time naksatra of Vāsupūjya is said to be Satabhisaj (PCV, 20.38) but, the TP mentions Visakha (4.537). The names of the celestial abodes (PCV, 20.22-25) from which the Tīrtharikaras descended into the wombs of their mothers do not agree generally with those given in the TP (4.522-25),
6. The names of the mothers of the three of the nine Baladevas (PCV, 20.196) and those of fathers and mothers of two out of nine
1. See revised edition of PCV by Prakrit Text Society, 2. In the new edition of Punyavijayaji (1968) it is more than 6 lakh years.

Page #38

INTRODUCTION
9
Nārāyaṇas (PCV, 20.182-185) do not agree with those mentioned in the Samaväyānga (Su. 158). The previous birth-names of the Baladevas and their teachers (PCV, 190-193) generally do not agree with those referred to in the Samavāyānga (Su. 158).
The above survey poses a question whether Vimalasūri can be assigned to any particular sect of the Jainas. There are elements which support the Digambara as well as the Svetāmbara tradition equally and there are some verses which show affinity with the works of both the sects. Hence it will be quite hazardous to bind him to any particular sect. It is clear that he had no bias for either sect. He while describing the universe mentions 12 Kalpas only (PCV, 102. 143-144), which are in agreement with the Svetāmbara tradition but at 82.76 he mentions Brahmottara Kalpa also (devo bambhuttare kappe), which is one of the 16 Kalpas of the Digambara tradition. Shri Nathuram Premi suggests that Vimalasūri might have belonged to the Yāpaniya Sarigha (FSI, p. 101). But this suggestion also does not solve our problem because Vimalasūri states in the colophon at the end of the Paumacariyam that he belonged to the Nailavamsa. It is the Kalpasūtrasthavirāvali which mentions that the Nailasākhā originated with a disciple of Vajrasena. Vijaya, the preceptor of Vimalasūri is referred to as Nailakulavamsanandiyara (PCV, 118. 117). It is the Nandisütra Pattāvali (Su. 38-39) which refers to Bhūtidinna, a. pupil of Arya Nāgārjuna, with the same epithet. Thus we find that the Nailavamsa finds a place in the works of the Svetāmbaras whereas the Digambara tradition does not refer to the Năilavarśa and the Yapanīyasarigha as a branch of the Digambara sect. Now Svayambhū, a Yapaniya, mentions 16 dream-objects in his Paumacariu whereas Vimalasūri refers to 14 objects only. It is also to be noted that the Naila-sakhā originated in the first century A. D. when the schism between the Digambaras and the Svetāmbaras had not taken place. Thus it becomes problematic to assign any particular sect i.e. Digambara, Svetāmbara or Yapaniya to Vimalasuri. Therefore, the only safe position as far as the evidences go, is that Vimalasūri was a Jaina monk and a liberal author without having any bias for any sect. This trait of Vimalasūri is further strengthened when we find him addressing the Tirthaikaras with the names of Brahmanical deities (PCV, 5.122; 28.48; 109. 12) (See also Infra. Ch. 9 Sec. 3 Jain Rituals). c. Date of Paumacariyam:
It has been a problem for various scholars to assign a uniform date to the author of the Paumacariyar. The date given in the Prasasti of the work does not stand the test of the linguistic evidences, historical parallels and other elements in the PCV as well as so late

Page #39

10
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
mentioning of Paumacariyaṁ such as by the author of Kuvalayamala. We shall critically examine the statement of the author about the date, the views of other scholars, external and internal evidences to find out the correct date of the work. Author's Statement :
The Prasasti appended to the Paumacariyan states that the work was composed 530 or according to another manuscript> 520 years after the emancipation of Lord Mahāvīra. These dates come to 4 A. D. or 6 B. C, and according to Jacobi's date of Vira-nirvāna, to 63 or 53 A. D. Prof. Leumanno regards 4 A. D. as incontestible date but the history of the advent of monastic lineage of Vimalasūri goes against it. Vimalasūri states that he belonged to the Năilavamsa and addresses his preceptor Vijaya as Nāilakulavassanandiyara. 4 The Nandisūtra Patļāvali (Su 38-39) refers to Bhūtidinna, the pupil of Arya Nagarjuna with the same epithet. Nagarjuna's time is fixed at about 356 V. S. It shows that the Năilakulavamsa was in existence during the last quarter of the 3rd century A. D. The Kalpasūtrasthavirāvali mentions that the Nailasākhā originated with a disciple of Vajrasena. Dr. Jacobi places Vajrasena at about 580-600 A. V. and states that Vimalasūri was, therefore, removed from the founder of the Nailasākha by some generations and he cannot have lived before the later part of the 7th century A. V. i. e. 2nd century A. D. In the colophon at the end of the Paumacariyaṁ, Vimalasūri is called a "Pūrvadhara (Puvvaharena) but the Nandisūtra, the Avacūrni of Oghaniryukti and the Anuyogadvārasūtra have no reference to any Vimalasūri as a Purvadhara. Different dates of composition of Paumacariyaṁ given in the manuscripts, the late origin of Năilasākhā and the absence of any reference to Vimalasûri as a Pūrvadhara create suspicion about the authenticity of the colophon and the statement about Vim alasūri's date given in the Prasasti. Therefore, we shall examine external and internal evidences to find out the probable date of Paumacariyan. External Evidences :
The Kuvalayamālā of Uddyotanasūri of 778 A. D. is the first work which? refers to Paumacariyam of Vimalasuri. It shows that the
1. See U pamitibhava prapancakatha Preface p. 10 2. See HIL Vol.II, p 477, f. n. 3. 3. See PCV's Colophon. 4. PCV, 118.117. 5. See Parisista parvan, Int. p. xix. 6. See Int. of Paumacariyam chs. 27-28 ed. by S. C. Upadhyaya 1934. 7. p. 3, b. 27; see also S1, p. 88.

Page #40

INTRODUCTION
11
Paumacariyam was composed earlier than 778 A. D. Uddyotanasūri refers to the Padmacaritam of Ravişeņa also. Shri K. H. Dhruva? maintains that the Paumacariyaṁ was composed later than the Padma. caritam. He states that some metres employed in the PCV are modern and the test word Vimala used in the work is also not an old practice. But, these elements cannot be a sure guide in determining the date of the work. The Setubandha also uses a test word though, not the name of the author and we have proved that the Padmacaritam is an enlarged Sanskrit version of the original Paumacariyama. The date of Padmacaritam” is 677 A. D. Therefore, the Paumacariyam must date earlier than the Padmacaritam.
Internal Evidences :
The PCV refers to Dināra at 68.32 on the occasion of mock auctioning of Ravana by Angada. Dr. V. S. Agrawala 4 says that it were the Imperial Kuşāņas who first introduced the name Dināra to their coins. Kuşāņa King Kadphises (45-78 A. D.) is said to have struck the Dināra coins. Particularly in the south the Nāgārjunikonda Inscp. No. 2 of Virapurnşadatta of the time of second half of the third century A. D. refers to such coin and that also as Dinārīmāśaka. The Angavijjā also refers to the Dināri?. It is the Gupta gold coins which are known as Dīnāras. All these evidences prove that the Dināras became prevalent not before the last quarter of the 1st century A. D. Further the PCV (14.115) mentions Sallekhana under the fourth Siksā pada of the house holder's conduct. The Caritra. pāhuda of Kundakundācārya (v. 25) whose date ranges between first to fifth century A. D. is perhaps the first work which includes Sallekhanā into the Sikşāpadas. The PCV refer to a Švetāmbara monk once only (22.78). At 83.12 it is said that Kaikeyi attained liberation and at 95.26 it is mentioned that Kaikeyi attained some celestial abode. It seems that the first reference is an interpolation and in this light the word Svetāmbara also may be an interpolation. Even, if it is not so then we find that both the traditions, Svetāmbara as well as Digambara hold that the schism took place at 136 or 139
J. Jain Yuga, Pustaka 1, Anka 5, Poga--1982. 2. See Infra. ch. 6. sec. 3. PCR, 123.181. 4. See Angavijja Int. pp. 92-93. 5. See Coins of India, p. 45. 6. SI. Vol. I. p. 222.: 7. Op. cit. 8. Collected works of R. G. Bhandarkar. Vol. Irp. 46.

Page #41

12
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
V. S. i. e. 81 or 85 A. D. Therefore, the specific mention of Svetāmbara or Digambara must not have occurred before 81 or 85 A. D. Muni Kalyānavijayajia opines that the specific reference to a particular sect had started not before the 7th century of V.S. i. e, later half of the 6th cent. A. D. and according to that view Vimalasuri's date should not fall earlier than that period. But, the epigraph of Śrī Vijayaśivamsgesa Varma (470-488 A. D.) at Devagiri refers to the 'Svetapaļamahāśramaṇasargha'. It proves that on this basis Vimalaśuri cannot be relegated to so late a period of the 6th century A. D. The PCV (22. 24-27) further refers to not less than twenty kinds of penances. Generally the Jaina Canonical literature and the Malăcăra do not refer to most of them. Dr. S. B. Deo4 writes that a large number of tapas is probably a later development. The puspikā at the end of the praśasti of Paumacari yaṁ refers to Vimala as a Sūri. The Kalpasūtrasthavirāvali and the Nandisūtra-patțăvali do not refer to any Sūri. The general epithets are Thera and Ajja (Sthavira and Ārya). The early Jaina Inscriptions of Mathurā also do not refer to any Jaina Sūri of early christian era. Dr. S. B. Deo states that it is the Gacchāsāra which explains 'Sūri' as a sole supporter of a gaccha. He further mentions that Süri seems to be a later term for Ācārya as it is seldom found in the earlier portions of the Jaina canon and in the Mülācāra also there are very scanty references to the term 'Sari'. He says that closer we come to the medieval period we have the predominance of the Súri etc. All these evidences create difficulties in believing the prasasti's claim that the work was composed in the first century A. D.
The PCV gives the planetary position existing at the time of the birth of Hanumān (17.107-112). The position of the planets is not accurate. Are these verses interpolated by some mediocre scribe or does accurate plenatory position given in the Padmacaritam of Ravişena indicate that the portion in the PCV is not an interpolation but there are some defective readings in it ? Prof. N. Shastry writes to me that in the PCV only seven planets are taken into consideration, so the system seems to be old whereas the tungatva of the planets in zodiacs
1. See JS1, p. 97. 2. Sramana Bhagawan Mahavira, p. 307. 3. Insep. No. 98 vide Faina Sirālekha Songraha, Pt. II; see also VGA p. 219 and
SIE, p. 193. 4. HJM, p. 187 ff, p. 563. 5. Ibid pp. 232, 237. 6. Ibid. p. 514.

Page #42

INTRODUCTION
13
Dr.
indicates that it is in affinity with the system of Varāhamihira1. Jacobi on the evidences of the word Dināra, some ancient peoples and astronomical terms places the Paumacariyam between the 3rd and the 4th century A. D. On the basis of the above material we cannot agree with Winternitz maintaining that Vimalasūri is a very early Prākṛt poet.
Political Situation & Historical Data:
The political situation as obtained, the historical parallels available and the references to some ancient peoples in the PCV indicate that the work was not composed in the first century A. D. The Paumacariyam mentions that Rudrabhūti, the chieftain of the Kagonanda tribe kidnapped Balikhilya, the ruler of Kuvavaddapura. The latter's minister requested Simhodara, the king of Ujjain to get Balikhilya released, but Simhodara expressed his helplessness. When Rama and Lakṣmaṇa reached there, they were requested for the same. They crossed the river Narmada, entered the Vindhya forest, subdued Rudrabhūti and got Balikhilya released. (PCV, 34.25-49). The ancient history of India1 reveals that Kṣatrapa Rudrasimha I ruled over Ujjain. He received material assistance from the Abhīras. With their help, he dethroned his nephew Jīvadāmana and became a Mahākṣatrapa. The Gunda Inscp. dated 181 A. D. refers to Rudrabhūti, an Abhīra General who is considered to be one of the allies of Rudrasimha. Later another Abhira leader Isvaradatta came into forefront and carved a principality for himself at Nasika. He deposed Rudrasimha I and himself became a Mahākṣatrapa. But within two years Rudrasimha ousted the conqueror and again became a Mahākṣatrapa. Ruprabhūti is mentioned in both the above evidences while the names, Rudrasimha and Simhodara can be equated on the law of metathesis. Simhodara's refusal to extend his help to Balikhilya against Rudrabhuti can be compared with the historical fact that Rudrasimha could not dare to oppose Rudrabhuti for the latter was powerful and had previously helped Rudrasimha. Abhira Iśwardatta's separate principality at Nasika can be compared with the stronghold of the Kagonanda chief in the region south of Narmada. Thus the political situation of the 2nd century A. D. has a fair parallel in the Paumacariam.
The PCV mentions that Rama had his allies in the people of Śrīparvata, Mahendra and Malaya region (Mahindamalayatīra siri
1. Vide A letter from Prof. Nemicandra Shastry Arrah, dated 17.2.61.
2. Upamitibhavaprapañcakatha, p. x.
3. HIL, II, p. 477.
4. See VGA, p. 45.

Page #43

14
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
pavvayahaṇuruhāīya PCV, 55.16) while fighting against Ravana. All these three regions are situated in the south. The PCV (85.26) further refers to Hanumat as the lord of Śrīpura situated in the valley of Śriparvata. It is said that Hanumat was named as Śrisaila because in his childhood he had fallen down from the aerial car on the slab of a hill (sañcunpio ya selo 18.49). This frequent mention of Śrīparvata and its people as allies of Rama indicates that our author was haunted with the memory of the Śriparvatiya-Andhras of the Puranas, identical with the Iksvakus of South Andhradeśa, who ruled during the 3rd century A.D.
The PCV (55.17) further mentions the Keligilas as the allies of Răma. The PCR (55.29) mentions them as Kailikilas. They are the Kilakilas who are historically known as the ancestors of the Vākāṭakas. Vākāṭaka king Vindhyaśakti (223-275 A.D.) came into power after the Kilakila kings. Therefore, the Kilakilas seem to have ruled before the first quarter of the 3rd century A.D.
The PCV mentions (98,66) that Lavana and Ankuśa subdued the Anandas on their way to the Digvijaya. Historically the Anandas rose in the fourth century A.D. They succeeded the Bṛhatphalayanas and ruled over the Guuṭūra region in the south Andhradeśa for a long period.
There are references to more political tussles, one between Ujjaina and Daśapura and the other between Ayodha and Nandyāvartapura. It is narrated in the PCV (ch.33) that Vajrakarna, lord of Dasapura and a bhṛtya of Simhodara of Ujjaina was violating the code of a feudatory. Hence, Simhodara attacked Vairakarna and made him his prisoner. Rama and Lakṣmaṇa helped Vajrakarna and defeated Simhodara. The territory as well as the treasury under Simhodara was divided between Vajrakarna and Simhodara and latter accepted the suzerainty of Bharata of Ayodhya. It reveals that Dasapura (Mandasora) was trying to be indepedent of Ujjain's overlordship. The inscriptional reference to Daśopura, perhaps for the first time, is found in the Nasika cave Inscp. of the time of Nahapana. It is referred to as a place of pilgrimage (119-124 A.D.). It has no political importance. The town comes into political significance
1. Ibid. pp. 9, 60.
2. See EDAD, p. 39.
3. See VGA, p. 89.
4. See EDAD, pp. 215,233, 836; VGA, pp. 64-65.
5. Seel SI, Vol. I. p. 161.

Page #44

INTRODUCTION
15
during the Gupta period. Dr. A.S. Altekar states that Dasapura was ruled by Jayavarman and Simhavarman as independent rulers during the later half of the 4th cent. A.D. Naravarman and Visvavarman (404 & 423 A.D.) were also independent rulers of Mandasora (aśapura) and there is nothing to show that they acknowledged the supremacy of the Guptas The last record of Mandasora (No. 52) mentions Kumāragupta as overlord of Daśapura, which was being ruled by Bandhu-varman, the son of Visvavarman. He says that Bandhuvarman was probably a feudatory chief of Kumāragupta I ruling from 414 to 454 A.D. He further remarks that towards the close of the reign of Kumăragupta I, his kingdom was disturbed by wars but the exact adversaries are not well established. The Gupta emperor was threatened with utter ruin. Dr. H. C. Rayachauduris associates the title Vyāghraparakrama with Kumāragupta. In the Paumacariy am the king of Ujjaina is named as Simhodara. Both the terms have some similarity. These events reveal that Daśapura came into political importance in the 4th and 5th century A. D.
The PCV (Ch. 37) narrates that when Ativīrya of Nandyāvartapura sought a battle with Bharata of Ayodhyā, Rama and Lokşmana left Vijayapura for helping their brother and subdued Ativīrya. The Poona Copper plate Inscp. of Prabhāvati Guptă refers to Nandivardhana which is identified with modern Nagardhan or Nandardhan near Ramateka about 13 miles north of Nāgapura. 4 Nandivardhana was the capital of the Vakāțakas. Pravarasena II shifted his capital from this place to Pravarapura in about 430 A. D. Narendrasena, the son of Pravarasena II is said to have been overwhelmed with a debacle on account of the invasion of his dominions by Bhavadattavarman, a Nala king about the middle of the 5th century A. D. Thus the history reveals that there was some political tussle in that area and the PCV also speaks of a political tussle in that area.
Haradeva Bahari? regards that the evidences such as Dināra, Svetāmbara and planetary position might be interpolations and hence the date third or fourth century A. D. assigned to the Paumacariyan cannot be maintained. But we have to say that the above stated
1. See VGA, pp. 166, 167. 2. Ibid. pp. 159-160. 3. See PHAI, p. 489 (Fourth edition) vide VGA, p.161. 4. Scc AGAI, p. 323 & SI, Vol. I, p. 407. 5. See VGA, p. 105. 6. Ibid.p. 107. 7. Praksta aur Usakā Itihāsa, p. 66.

Page #45

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
political situations and refernces to historical people, cannot be regarded as interpolations, therefore the date of Paumacariyaṁ cannot go before the 5th century A. D.
Literary and Linguistic Evidences :
in the genealogical list of the Ikşvāku vamśa given in the Paumacariyaṁ, the number of the ancestors of Daśaratha is generally in agreement with that of the Brahmanical Purăņas and not with that of Valmīki Rāmāyaṇa. The Prasasti of Paumacariyaṁ mentions that of besides other things, Kāma, Artha, Dharma and Mokşa' from the constituents of a Purāna. This definition is not in full agreement with the early definition of a Brahmanical Purāņa, but it is in agreement with the later developed definition o! a Brahmanical Purāņa. 3
The gathā metre employed in the Paumacariyan shows an advanced stage as the nicest rules of metres are applicable to it. The time of the advent of Mahārāștri language is generally held to be the second century A.D. but the Mahārāştrī language of Paumacariyam reveals an advanced stage and there is some influence of Apabhraíša on it. 4 We have evidence of the use of Apabhramśa dialect in one of the Arkas of Vikramorvast of Kalidasa (i.e. 4th, 5th century A. D.).
Conclusion:
Thus we conclude that the Nailavamsa originated in the second century A.D. The references to the Dināra, Vimala as a Sūri, Suranga and the astronomieal term take us to still a later date. The inclusion of Sallekhana by the PCV into the twelfth vow a householder bears similarity with the Caritrapāhuda of Kundakunda. The recognition of abstaining from taking meal as the sixth anuvrata of householder's conduct (PCV, 6 120) is mentioned as late as in the Sarvărthasiddhi (7.1) of Pajyapāda. The references to the Sriparvatiyas, Kilakilas and the Anandas take us between the 3rd and the 4th century A.D. The political situations around Daśapura and Nandyāvartapura reveal historical parallels of the first half of the 5th eentury A.D.
1. See Infra. Ch. 5. 2. PCV, 118. 111. 3. See Infra ch. 11 Sec. 3B. 4. See Infra. Ch. 11. See, 1; See (Variant Readings and Orthographie-Seribal
tendencies of the PC, Paumacariyan, Pt II, Prakrit Text Society, 1968. pp.13..

Page #46

INTRODUCTION
17
The character of the language reflects the middle stage of the MiddleIndo-Aryan. In the light of the above evidences the genuineness of the date mentioned in the Prasasti of Paumacariyam becomes doubtful. I am tempted to suggest that the date mentioned, really may belong to the Krta or Vikrama Era which was converted into Nirvana era by mistake* or even may be deliberately. Thus the correct date of Paumacariyam1 come to (530-57 = 473 A.D.).
* A parallel to such a mistake can be quoted from the Jaina tradition. The date of the fall of Vallabhi empire is given as 845 V. S. in the Vividhatīrthakalpa (p 29), whereas the Prabandhakosa (p. 74) refers to 845 A. V. and the former is the correct date (see Maitraka Kalina Gujarata by H. G. Shastri Pt. I, p. 157 ff.).
1. Readers are also referred to my article, New Light on the Date of Paumacariyam, Journal of the Oriental Institute Baroda, Vol. XIII, No. 4, pp. 378-368,.
2

Page #47

CHAPTER II
SUMMARY
1. The author commences his work with salutation to the Tirthankaras and declares to narrate the story of Padma (Paumacariyam) as it has come down traditionally. He mentions his name and speaks of the form and the style of his work. Then after giving the contents of the work he tells us again about the form and the style as well as the traditional way in which the story has been handed over.
2-4. Then follows a brief biography of Lord Mahāvīra, his arrival at mount Vipulagiri and the homage paid by king Śreņika to the Lord. Next day Śrenika again calls on Gautama (first Gapadhara of Lord Mahāvīra) and expresses his doubts in the Rama-story as it (Ramayana) has been popularised by the heretics. He requests Gautama to narrate the true story. Thereupon Gautama begins to relate the true story. He gives a brief account of the Universe, the Cycle of Time and the advent of fourteen Kulakaras. He recounts1 the biography of Lord Rṣabha, the establishment of three social orders (Ksatriya, Vaisya and Sudra), the assignment of the region of the Vijayardha mountain to Nami and Nemi, the episode of the battle of the two brothers, Bharata and Bahubali and the formation of the fourth social order, namely, the Brahmaņas (Māhaņas).
5. Thereafter Gautama narrates the origin of the Ikṣvāku, Soma and the Vidyadhara dynasties and their genealogies. He relates the biography of Lord Ajita, the installing of Meghavāhana, a Vidyadhara king as the first ruler of Lankapuri as well as Pātālankarapura, the episode of the death of the sons of Cakravartin Sagara and the origin of the Raksasa dynasty.
6. Gautama continues the narration with the installing of Vidyadhara Śrīkantha as the first king of Kişkindhipura situated in the Vanaradvipa. Amaraprabha, a descendant of Srikantha establishes Vanaravamsa, by adopting the figure of monkey as the emblem of his state. Then follows the wresting of Kişkindhipura and Laňkāpuri by
1. The main story commences with chapter 22.101 while the chapters preceding it contain the biographies of some Tirthankaras, the origin of various dynasties, the episodes or stories relating to some of the descendants of those dynasties, the early career of Ravana and the story of Añjanasundari. Here a passing reference has been made to them as they are dealt with in a separate chapter,

Page #48

SUMMARY
19
Asanivega, a Vidyadhara ruler of Rathanupura from Vanara Kişkindhi and his Rakṣasa ally Sukeśa respectively. Later on Malin, the son of Sukeśa, reoccupies his ancestral Larkā.
7. Malin gets jealous of the growing power of Indra, the grandson of Asanivega and the son of Sahasrara. He attacks Indra but the latter slays him. Indra appoints Soma, Varuna, Kubera and Yama as governors of four quarters and installs Vaiśravana (Vesamaņa or Dhanada 2.53) as ruler of Lanka. Sumalin the younger brother of Malin staying in terror at Pātālaṁkārapura, gets blessed with a son, named Ratnāśrava. The latter marries Kaikasī. She in due course gives birth to Daśamukha (Ravana), Bhanukarṇa (Kumbhakarna), Candranakha and Vibhiṣaṇa. Rāvana attains mastery over various lores (vidyās) to reoccupy his ancestral Laikā.
8. Gautama then relates the marriage of Mandodarī and many other girls with Ravana and further describes the valorous feats of Rāvana. He defeats Dhanada, subdues Bhuvanalaňkāra elephant, conquers Yama and restores Kişkindhipura to Adityarajas, the son of Kişkindhi.
9. Next follows the narration of the kidnaping of Candranakha by Kharaduṣaṇa, the hostility of Ravana with the son of Adityarajas namely, Vāli for marrying the latter's sister and the resultant renouncement of the world by Vali, as well as the raising of the Aṣṭāpada (Kailasa) mountain by Ravana to disturb the monk Vali and the former's discomfiture at the hands of the latter.
10. Rāvana subjugates many Khecara chieftains and reaches Pātāla kārapura. There he is greeted by Kharadūṣaṇa. Further Ravana launches a war-campaign, imprisons Sahasrakirana, the Maheśvara king, and overpowers various other kings.
11. He stops the animal-sacrifice organised by Marutta (Maruya), the king of Rajagṛha and marries the latter's daughter, Kanakaprabhā. She gives birth to Kṛtacitră.
12-13.
Ravana marries Krtacitra to Madhu, the prince of Mathura. Then he proceeds to Durlanghyapura and defeats Nalakübara. Uparambha, the wife of Nalakübara, had a design to secure the love of Ravana. At first Rāvana accepted her proposal with a view to subjugate Nalakübara. But later he rejected her proposal, rubuked her and thus helped preserve her character. Thereafter Ravana conquers Indra, a Vidyadhara king.
14. Rāvana pays homage to omniscient Anantavirya and accepts a vow not to enjoy with any lady without her prior consent.

Page #49

20
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
15-19. He wages a battle with Varuņa but his forces are overpowered by the enemy. Ultimately with the help of Pavanañjaya, a Vanara king, he succeeds in making truce with Varupa. But during the truce Răvaņa keeps preparing for war. After some time, with the help of Hanu, the son of Pavanañjaya, he defeats Varuņa. Thereupon he becomes the sovereign of the three divisions of Bhāratavarşa (tikhandahivo i.e. ardhacakravartin).
20. Here king Śreņika requests Gautama to tell him about the great persons of the Jaina faith (Jinacakkaharāņa-uppatti), particularly about the origin and life of eighth Baladeva (i.e. Padma or Rama). Gautama then enumerates the birth-place, parentage, intervening period, age, height, etc. of the sixty-three illustrious persons (trişaşțišalakāpuruşa)
21-22. Gautama before relating the life of Rāma, narrates the origin of Harivamsa and gives in brief the life-sketch of Tirtharikara Munisuvrata who belonged to Harivaṁsa. He further tells us that Vásavaketu, a descendant of the same dynasty, ruling over Mithila begot a son, named Janaka on his wife Ilā. He narrates the episodes of some Ikşvāku rulers of Saketa, namely, Vajrabāhu, Kirti dhara, Sukošala, Naghusa and Saudāsa. He further enumerates their descendants up to Anaranya who begets two sons, Anantaratha and Dasaratha on his wife, Pệthvi. When his elder son becomes a monk, Anaranya enthrones Dasaratha and he himself renounces the world. Dasaratha marries Aparajitā and Sumitra.
Main Story 23. Gautama continues to narrate that once Nárada informs Dasaratha about the plot of Vibhīşaņa to assassinate Dasaratha and Janaka for saving Ravana from being killed by the would-be son of Dasaratha. Janaka was to beget a daughter, Sítā, who was destined to be the cause of Rāvana's death. So Dasaratha and Janaka leave their territories and wander incognito. Now at Saketa an effigy of Dasaratha is instituted in the palace. Vibhişana goes to Saketa, cuts off the head of Daśaratha and returns to Lanka with satisfaction.
24. Daśaratha, along with Janaka happens to reach Kautukamangalapura. There princess Kaikeyi (Kegai), the daughter of Subhamati, selects Dasaratha as her husband in her svayamvara ceremony. Some disgruntled candidates give a fight in which Dasaratha emerges victorious on account of the dexterity of Kaikeyi in driving his war-chariot. Dasaratha marries her, returns to Sāketa and grants her a boon in recognition of her war-services,

Page #50

SUMMARY
21
25. In due course Padma (Rama) is born to Aparajitā, Lakṣmaṇa (Lakkhana) to Sumitra and Bharata (Bharaha) as well as Satrughna (Sattuggha) to Kaikeyi. All of them receive general education and training in archery under preceptor Airakucchi.
26-27. Gautama continuing the story narrates that queen Videhā (Videhi, Vaidehī or Videhā), the wife of king Janaka of Mithila, gives birth to Sītā and a son who is immediately abducted by a celestial being and is thrown into a garden. Khecara Candragati, the Vidyadhara king of Rathanupura, happens to see that babe. He takes it to his wife and adopts it as his own son, naming him as Bhāmaṇḍala. Now it so happens that some Mleccha tribes of the Ardhabarbara country invade the territory of Janaka. He demands help from Dasaratha. The latter sends Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa who chase away the Mleccha hordes. Janaka gets pleased with the valour of Rāma and he settles Sītā's betrothal with the latter.
28. When Narada comes to know of this relation, he with a desire to see Sītā, enters her palace. Sītā gets frightened at the dreadful look of his matted hair and makes a cry of alarm. At this her warders have a scuffle with him and he flees away from there. Thus being insulted, he prepares a portrait of Sita and places it somewhere in the garden of Rathanupura to put her in trouble. When Bhamandala catches a glance of that portrait, he gets at once smitten with the flowery arrows of cupid. His father, Candragati, makes a plan to marry Bhamandala with Sītā. He sends a Vidyadhara to Mithila, The latter, in the disguise of a horse, abducts Janaka to Rathanupura. Candragati demands Sītā for his son but Janaka does not agree to break Sita's betrothal with Rama. Thereupon Candragati gives him a divine bow named Vajrāvarta and tells him that if Rāma is really a mighty person he shall prove his prowess by stringing the bow. Then
only he will be entitled to marry Sītā. Janaka returns to Mithila with that bow and arranges for the svayamvara-ceremony. Out of many prospective princes Rama only emerges successful in stringing the bow. Laksmana also strings that bow and some Vidyadharas offer their daughters to him in marriage. At this moment Bharata becomes gloomy over his inferiority. Kaikeyī quickly guesses the cause of his depression and tries to remove his disgust. She through Dasaratha, requests Kanaka, the brother of Janaka to arrange for the svayamvara of his daughter, Subhadra. Immediately the ceremony is held and Subhadra selects Bharata. Thus Rama and Bharata marry Sītā and Subhadra respectively and return to Sukośalapura (Saketa).
29.
Gautama further relates that once on the occasion of a religious festival, Dasaratha sends the bath. water of Jina to his chief

Page #51

22
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
queen through his chamberlain. His queen does not receive the sacred water in time. Dasaratha rebukes the chamberlain for the delay. The chamberlain with his trembling limbs explains to Dasaratha that his pitiable old age handicapped him in the quick delivery of the bathwater. At this the heart of Dasaratha gets moved and he develops a feeling of detachment. After some days monk Sarvasattvahita happens to arrive there. Dasaratha pays his obeisance to him, listens to the religious discourse and returns to his palace.
30. Now Bhamandala being afflicted with the pangs of separation from Sita starts for Saketa. In the way as soon as he reaches Vidarbhanagara (Viyabbhanayara), he remembers his previous birth and comes to know that Sītā is his sister. He then along with his father, Candragati goes to Saketa and pays homage to Sarvasattvahita. Candragati becomes a disciple of Sarvasattvahita. At that time Dasaratha also happens to come over there with his family members and listens to the previous life-accounts of Candragati and Bhamandala narrated by the monk. Dasaratha then embraces Bhamaṇḍala. On getting news from Dasaratha, Janaka and his wife also come over there and feel happy to see their son. All of them return to their respective places.
31. Once Daśaratha listens to the account of his previous birth from Muni Sarvasattvahita and gets enlightened. He informs his ministers about his decision to enthrone Rama and renounce the world. At this Bharata also desires to become a monk. Kaikeyi gets perturbed to learn it. She finds it impossible for her to live in separation from both her husband and son. She thinks of a plan to keep Bharata tied to the worldly life. She requests her husband to fulfil her boon by coronanating Bharata as the king of Saketa. Dasaratha readily gives his consent and informs of the same to Rama and Lakṣmaņa. When Bharata learns it he expresses his unwillingness in transgressing over the right of his elder brother. Thereupon Rama decides to leave the territory for removing the scruples of Bharata and keeping up the honour of the words of his father given to Kaikeyi. Lakṣmaṇa first gets agitated by this decision, but he pacifies himself with the idea that he shall not interfere in the work of the elders. When Rama departs from Sāketa, Sītā and Lakṣmaņa also accompany him.
32. Rama along with Sītā and Lakṣmaņa proceeds towards the west, enters the Pariyātra forest, crosses the river Gambhīrā and sojourns on its bank. There in Saketa Dasaratha coronates Bharata and himself renounces the world. Consequently Aparajita and Sumitra get very much aggrieved on account of their separation

Page #52

23
SUMMARY from their husband and sons. Kaikeyi is unable to bear the agony of her co-wives She sends Bharata and follows him to call Rāma back. When she meets Rāma, she weeps, implores the latter to forgive her, asks him to return to Saketa and occupy the throne. But Rāma does not return. He coronates Bharata there in the forest itself and proceeds towards the south. Bharata goes back to Saketa and waits for the day of Rāma's coming back when he will accept ordination throwing off the burden of kingdom.
33. Rāma on his way comes across the hermitages of recluses, traverses the Citrakūta hill, enters the territory of Avanti and proceeds to Daśapura. Lakşmaņa there subdues Simhodara, the king of Ujjain and restores Daśapura to the latter's feudatory, Vajrakarna Lakşmana promises to marry later the maids offered to him by both the kings. Rāma then reaches Kūvavadda (Kūvarapura) on his way to Malayagiri.
34. There Lakşmana promises to Kalyānamālā, the princess of that town (iving in the disguise of a male) to rescue her father, Balikhilya from the capitivity of the Mleccha chief Rudrabhati and to marry her later. Proceeding further they cross the river Narmada and enter the Vindhya forest. There they have an encounter with Rudrabhūti, the chief of the Kagonanda tribe. Lakşmana subdues him and gets Balikhilya released from his captivity.
35. Then traversing the region of the river Taptī they enter Arunagrāma and go to the residence of Brahmin Kapila to quench the thirst of Sītā. When Kapila insults them for polluting his sacred house, they decide never to take shelter in the house of any one but to sojourn outside a settlement. Then they repair to the forest. There they stay in the colony of Rāmapura, conjured up specially for them by Vināyaka Pootana, a Yakşa lord.
36. After some days as they resume their journey, the Yakşa presents Rāma, Lakşmapa and Sītā with a necklace, a pair of earrings and a braid-jewel respectively. He gives them a lute also. They reach Vijayapura which was ruled by Mahidhara. Lakşmaņa rescues princess Vanamālā who was about to commit suicide losing all her long-cherished hopes of marrying the former. Lakşmapa promises to marry her.
37. Rāma and Lakşmapa come to know that Bharata is attacked by Ativīrya, the king of Nandyāvartapura. They move to the battlefield and imprison Ativīrya by the trick of disguising themselves as dancing girls. Ativīrva renounces the world.

Page #53

24
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
38. His son, Vijayaratha accepts the suzerainty of Bharata, engages his sister Ratimālā to Lakṣmana and marries his other sister Vijayasundari to Bharata. Rāma along with Lakṣmaṇa and Sītā return to Vijayapura. From there they reach Kṣemañjalipura (Khemañjalipura). There Lakṣmaṇa wins the hand of Jitapadma, the daughter of king Śatrudamana.
39. From there they proceed to Vamśagiri and protect two monks, Deśabhüşana and Kulabhuṣana from a calamity (uvasagga) brought upon them by a celestial being. Another celestial being, Garudadhipati appears there and promises to Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa his help in difficulty.
1
40. Suraprabha, the king of Vamsasthalapura greets Rāma and constructs many Jina-shrines on that hill at the request of Rama. The hill comes to be known as Ramagiri.
41. Thereafter they resume their journey and enter the Dandakaranya. Two monks, Sugupti and Trigupti arrive there. They worship these monks and offer alms to them. In the meanwhile a diseased vulture (Jaṭāyū = Giddha, Jaḍāgi or Jaḍāu) falls down there. It gets cured by the touch of the foot-wash-water of the monks. The monks entrust it to Siti and depart from there.
42. Rama along with Sita and Lakṣmaṇa reaches the river Krauñcarava and sojourns there.
43. Once Lakṣmaṇa curiously proceeds towards the direction from which some fragrant smell gushes forth. He comes across a grove of bamboos and sees there a divine sword. He lifts it up and as soon as he cuts off the thicket, a severed head falls out of it. He soon repairs to Rāma and acquaints him with the sad incident. Now Candranakha, the sister of Ravana with the hope of calling on her son Šambuka who had entered the Daṇḍakaranya to obtain a divine sword, called Suryahāsa, by performing some penance, gets stunned to find there her son slain. While in search of the murderer she gets a glance of the handsome figures of Rama and Lakṣmana. Being smitten with cupid's arrows she transforms herself into a young and beautiful lady and proposes to marry Rama. At this Rama and Lakṣmana are taken aback. Not finding any favour from them she gets enraged and returns to Patalankarapura.
44. She instigates her husband, Kharadūṣaṇa to take revenge upon the murderers of their son and further gives a false report that she had, with great difficulty, rescued herself from being molested by them. Kharaduṣaṇa sends a message to Rāvana and himself proceeds

Page #54

SUMMARY
25
arrives there.
with his army to the site of the incident. Lakṣmana proceeds to meet the enemy, asking Rama who was scheduled to stay with Sita, to come to his help if he makes a lion's roar. In the meanwhile Ravana also As soon as he catches sight of the beautiful figure of Sītā, he gets overpowered by cupid. By the power of his lores he recognises Sitä and comes to know the signal of danger proposed by Lakṣmana. He utters a lion's roar. At this signal Rama leaves Sītā under the protection of Jatayu and hastens to help his brother. Taking advantage of the situation, Rāvaņa immediately removes Sītā by force, overpowers the intimidating Jatayu and speeds up towards Laikā in his aerial-car (Puspaka-Vimāna). As he is conscious of his vow of not enjoying with any lady without her consent, he makes no attempt to rape her. When Rama reaches the site of the battle-field, Laksmana gets surprised to find his brother there. He at once sends him back with a caution to safeguard Sitā. When Rāma returns, he does not find Sītā there. While searching for Sītā he finds Jatayu in a precarious condition. Jatayu dies there and Rama bewails the loss of Sītā.
45. There, by chance, Lakṣmaņa gets an ally in Vidyadhara Viradhita, an enemy of Kharaduṣaṇa. He kills Kharadūṣaṇa and takes Viradhita to Rama. Lakṣmaņa now comes to know of the sad incident. Viradhita commissions his soldiers to make search for Sita, but in vain. In the meanwhile Ravana in his flight is interrupted by Khecara Ratnajațin. The former overpowers the latter by seizing his lores and resumes his flight with Sita who is all the time crying very bitterly. There Viradhita escorts Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa to Patālaṁkārapura. They defeat Sunda, the other son of Candranakha and occupy his palace. Sunda and his mother flee away to Lanka.
46. Ravana also reaches Lanka and keeps Sītā in the Devaramaņa park. Sītā takes an oath to observe abstinence from food until she gets some news about her husband. Ravana goes to his palace, consoles Candranakha and sends his wife, Mandodari to persuade Sītā to marry him. Mandodari's attempts prove futile. Ravana also fails in frightening Sita by conjuring up many terrible objects. Vibhīşana gives a sympathetic ear to the grief of Sītā. He requests Ravana to desist from such an indecent behaviour but in vain. Ravana then arranges for her residence under the Aśoka trees growing abundantly in the Padmavaraudyana. Finding Ravana completely drowned in the ocean of sensual lust, Vibhişana gets Laňkāpuri fully prepared for any emergency.
47. Gautama continues to narrate that Sugrīva, the Vanara king of Kişkindhipura, along with his minister, Jambunada goes to Patălankarapura to seek help from Rama. Jambūnada tells Rama that

Page #55

26
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
some Dănava in the disguise of Sugrīva wants to establish sexual relations with Sutārā, the wife of Sugrīva. He further continues that Hanu's help was sought to chase away the sham Sugrīva, but he was in a fix for he could not recognise the real Sugrīva. He further implores Rāma's help. Rāma agrees to help Sugrīva and the latter reciprocates with a promise to find out Sītā as soon as possible. All of them then go to Kiskindhipura. In the first duel between both the Sugrīvas, the real one is overpowered because Ráma could not distinguish between the real and the sham. During the next duel as soon as Rāma appears on the scene, the sham Sugriva loses his lore and appears in the real figure of Sahasagati. Rāma kills nim with his arrows and restores Sutārā to Sugrīva. Then the daughters of Sugrīva try to please Rāma but Rāma in separation of Sita does not find any pleasure with them and passes time in grief.
48. Sugrīva forgets his promise in merriment with his wife. Laksmana rebukes Sugrīva and makes him alert on his duty. The latter now sends his soldiers in all the quarters and an envoy to Bhāmandala with a letter from Rāma. He also goes in search of Sita. He meets Ratnajațin on the Kambudvīpa and takes him to Rāma. Ratnajațin informs Rāma that Sītā has been kidnapped by Rāvana. All the Vānaras get stupefied hearing the name of Rāvana and express their disinclination at withstanding the powerful forces of Rāvana. When Rāma and Lakşmaņa encourage them, Jambūnada informs Rāma of the prophecy made by monk Anantavīrya that one who lifts up the Kotisila will be the slayer of Ravana. Lakşmana immediately goes to Sindhudeśa, raises up the proposed slab and comes back.
49. Hanu is called to Kişkindhipura and appointed for persuading Rāvana to release Sītā. Rāma gives him his finger-ring to be handed over to Sītā and asks him to bring her braid-jewel. Hanu departs from there with a band of warriors.
50. On his way he overpowers his maternal grandfather, Mahendrarajan, the king of Mahendranagara to take revenge of his mother's banishment by the latter.
7 51. At the advice of Hanu, Mahendrarājan along with his wife and son, Pratisūrya goes to Rāma and meets his daughter, Añjanā, the mother of Hanu. Hanu proceeds further and meets Gandharva, the king of Dadhimukha island and informs him about the death of Sahasagati. Gandharva takes his daughters to marry them to the killer of Sahasagati as fore-told by a sooth-sayer.

Page #56

SUMMARY
27
52. Hanu on his way to Laikā kills Vajramukha, the chief guard of the rampart of Laikāpuri and wins the love of Laikāsundarī, the daughter of Vajramukha.
53. Gautama continues to narrate to śreņika that next day Hanu enters Laikāpurī, meets Vibhișaņa and learns from him about the obstinacy of Rāvaņa. He enters Padma-udyāna, hands over the ring to Sītā and delivers the message of Rāma. In the meanwhile Mandodarī happens to arrive there. She deprecates Hanu for siding with Rāma. Sītā rebukes Mandodarī for uttering abusive words. Mandodarī quarrels with Sitā but Hanu intervenes and Mand odarī has to depart from there with a sorry figure. At the request of Hanu, Sītā breaks her fast by taking food, but denies to accompany him for she does not think it proper on a chaste lady's part to go along with a third person whosoever he might be. She hands over her braid-jewel and tells him that she will go along with Rāma and nobody else. At the time of his departure Hanu has an encounter with the soldiers of Rāvana. He overpowers them and upsets the whole garden in anger. He further damaging various constructions reaches the palace of Rāvana. Indrajit soon nooses him and produces him before Rāvana. Rāvana abuses Hanu for his deplorable alliance. Hanu on the contrary rebukes Rāvana for his malicious intentions. Rāvana orders his warriors to harass Hanu, but the latter tears asunder the nooses and flees away to Kişkindhipura after damaging the palace of Rāvana and various other buildings.
54. After reaching Kiskindhipura Hanu hands over the braid-jewel and conveys the message of Sītā to Rāma. On the fifth day of the dark fortnight of Mārgaśīrṣa, Rāma along with Lakşmaņa and the army of the Vānaras proceeds towards Lankā. On the way Samudra, the king of Velandharapura is conquered by Nala, a Vānara chiel. Samudra offers his daughters to Laksmana. The army of Rāma reaches Haṁsadvīpa lying in the vicinity of Laikā, situated in the sea. Rāma conquers Hamsarath a, the chief of that island and encamps there. A fresh message is sent by Rama to Bhamandala.
55. Now in Laukā the war-drum is beaten to face the enemy. Vibhisaņa tries to dissuade Rāvana from waging war. Indrajit retorts Vibhīşana for his cowardice. There follow a hot exchange of words and a physical duel between Rāvana and Vibhișana. Rāvana exiles Vibhișana who with his meagre force of soldiers seeks Rama's shelter, In the meanwhile Bhāmandala also arrives there with his army.
56-58. In the ensuing battle between the armies of the Rakşasas and the Vanaras, Hasta and Prahasta, the two Rākşasa generals are slain by Nala and Nīla, the Vánara generals.

Page #57

28
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
59. The battle continues and this time Bhamandala and Sugrīva are noosed by Indrajit and Meghavāhana, the sons of Rāvaņa. At this discomfiture as soon as Lakşmaņa remembers the celestial Garudādhipati, the latter appears there and provides them with divine lores, chariots and weapons.
60. With the help of these war-appliances, Bhāmandala and Sugrīva are rescued from the enemy.
61. Now Indrajit and Bhānukarna are captured by Lakşmaņa and Rāma respectively. Following that Lakşmapa is struck in the chest by the missile (Amoghavijaya) hurled by Rāvana. He faints and falls down on the ground.
62. Rāvana repairs to Lanka while Rāma gets overpowered with depression. Jāmbata (Jambūnada) consoles Rāma and advises him to find out some remedy for Lakşmana before the sun-rise. A temporary war-colony is erected and Lakşmaņa is removed to that place.
63. In the meanwhile Khecara Candramandala arrives there. He requests Rāma to procure the bath-water of Višalyā, the daughter of Dronamegha for the recovery of Lakşmaņa.
64. Accordingly Bhāmandala, Hanu and Angada, the son of Sugrīva proceed to Bharata and apprise him of their need. Bharata sends for Višalyā but in vain. Then Kaikeyi herself goes to her brother (Dronamegha) and sends the latter's daughter escorted by Hanu, Angada and Bhamandala to the war-colony of Rāma. Višalyā cures Lakşmaņa as well as other wounded soldiers.
65. Now Rāvana through his envoy offers to Rāma to have a peace-treaty on the condition that the latter should not demand Sita and for that he will get a part of the territory of Rāvana. Rama straightway rejects the proposal.
66. Rāvana then performs meditation in the shrine of Jina Śánti for attaining mastery over Bahurupā Vidyā, a very powerful and unvanquishable lore.
67. Getting this opportunity the Vanara warriors cause confusion in the city of Lankā.
68. Angada tries to disturb Rāvana in his meditation but in vain. Ravapa succeeds in his undertaking.
69. Then he approaches Sītā and frightens her with the power of his lores and the spectacle of his strong army. At this Sīta gets depressed. She requests Rāvana not to kill Rama and Bhamandala

Page #58

SUMMARY
29
and soon faints down on the ground. At this Rāvana feels remorseful of his own cruelty and determines to restore Sitā to Rāma but only after defeating the latter, for he thought that people would take him for a coward if he submitted.
70-73. Ravana visits his weapon-hall. Mandodarī reminds him of his vow and his destined death at the hands of Lakşmana, the Prativasudeva. Ravana, without paying any heed to the words of his wife, leads his army to the battle-field. A gruesome battle follows in which various missiles and counter missiles are hurled from both the sides. Lakşmana severs the head and the arms of Rāvana but to his surprise he finds that they go on multiplying as many times as he cuts them off. It was happening due to the power of Rāvapa's Bahurupa-Vidya. Ultimately Rāvana hurls his disc (Cakraratna) at Lakşmaņa. But instead of killing Laksmana, the disc begins to obey his commands. Vibhișana once more tries to persuade Rāvana to restore Sita to Rāma but in vain. Finally Rāvana is slain with the disc hurled at him by Lakşmaņa, in the afternoon of the eleventh day of the dark fortnight of the month of Jyeștha.
74. Vibhīşaņa and Ravana's wives mourn the death of Rāvapa.
75. Rāma and others perform the funeral rites of Rāvana. On that occasion monk Aprameyabala arrives there. He attains omniscience and delivers a religious discourse. Indrajit, Ghanavāhana, Bhanukarņa, Mandodarī, Candranakha and many others renounce the world.
76. Rāma along with Lakşmaņa enters the city of Lanka, meets Sīta and takes her along with him.
77. Rāma then goes to the palace of Ravana and consoles Sumálin, Málavanta, Ratnāśrava and Vibhișana, the grandfather, grand uncle, father and brother of Rāvana respectively. At the request of the wife of Vibhișana, Rama visits her palace. He refuses to become the king of Larkā when a request to this effect is made by Vibhișana because the former considers himself to be a subject of Bharata. After some days Rāma and Lakşmaņa send for all those girls who were engaged to them during their journey and duly marry them there.
78. In due course Nārada delivers to them a message of grief of Aparājitā and Sumitrā.
79. Consequently Rāma along with Sītā, Laksmana, many Khecaras and Rākşasas returns to Sāketa driving in the PuşpakaVimāna. There Rama, Lakşmaņa and Sitā are accorded a warm welcome by Bharata and their mothers.

Page #59

30
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
80-84. As the days pass, Bharata again develops an intense desire for renunciation. Rama tries to keep him attached to the worldly life but in vain. On that very day the elephant Trilokamandana (Bhuvanāla kāra) who was associated with Bharata in his previous birth, remembers his previous life and muses over the ephemeral nature of the world. On that occasion two monks, Desabhuṣaṇa and Kulabhuṣaṇa arrive there. All the members of the royal family attend their religious discourse. Bharata and Kaikeyi renounce the world and in due course attain salvation. That elephant also performs austerities and attains some celestial existence.
85. In due course at the suggestion of Rāma, Lakṣmaṇa is coronated as the king of Ayodhyā. Rāma, Sitā and Visalya are also consecrated. Vibhīṣaṇa, Sugrīva, Maruti (Hanu), Pratisurya, Nila, Candrodaranandana, (Virādhita), Ratnajațin and Bhamandala are recognised as the rulers of Trikūṭaśikhara (Laikā), Kişkindhipura, Śripura (Sriparvata), Hanuruhapura, Rkṣapura, Pātāla kārapura, Devopagitanagara and Rathanupura respectively.
86-89. Then Rama declares Śatrughna to be the king of Mathura which was being ruled by Madhu. Satrughna leads his army to Mathura, defeats king Madhu, kills his son Lavana and occupies Mathura.
90. Lakṣmaṇa demands Manorama in marriage but Ratnaratha, her father, ruler of Ratnapura rejects the proposal. Thereupon a battle issues between them. Manorama intervenes and stops the battle. She and her sister Śrīdāmā are married to Lakṣmaṇa and Rāma respectively.
91. Following that Lakṣmaṇa launches a war-campaign, conquers various rulers and becomes (Ardhacakravartin) the master of seven jewels.
92-96. In due course Sita becomes pregnant. She expresses her longing for paying a visit to various Jina temples. Accordingly Rāma arranges for a religious ceremony and sojourns in a garden outside the city. There some of his officers inform him that the people are suspicious of the character of Sita on account of her staying with Rāvana for a very long period of time and are further questioning his (Rama's) wisdom in accepting Sītā. Rāma calls for Lakṣmaṇa and expresses his decision to abandon Sītā. Lakṣmaṇa opposes it but in vain. Rāma commissions Kṛtāntavadana, the General of his army to carry Sită to the terrible forest of Simhaninada, situated beyond the river Ganges under the pretext of escorting her to the sacred mountain Sammeta for

Page #60

SUMMARY .
31
the purpose of visiting the Jina shrines. The general leaves her behind in the forest as he was ordered to do. Sítā screams there in agony and terror. Vajrajangha, the king of Pondariyapura, happens to pass by that way and listens to the pitiable cry of Sīta. He approaches her, consoles her, escorts her to his capital and looks after her as a brother.
97-100. In course of time Sítā gives birth to two sons, Lavana and Arkusa (Aņaigalavana and Mayana ikusa). They receive education under Kșullaka Siddhartha (Siddhattho nāma cellao). Lavaņa marries Saśicūlā, the daughter of Vajrajaigha while Aukusa marries Kanakamalā, the daughter of king Pșthu of Pịthvīpura after defeating him in the battle. Then they conquer various countries and return to Pondariyapura. Thereafter learning from Närada about their mother's miserable fate and getting it corroborated from their mother they attack Sāketa despite Sīta's opposition. In the ensuing battle the weapons of Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa become ineffective against Lavana and Arkusa, hence the formers get depressed. At this Siddhārtha and Nārada intervene and acquaint them with the parentage of Lavaņa and Aukusa. Rāma along with Lakşmaņa greets his sons and returns to Sāketapurī along with them.
101-105. Rāma at the request of Sugrīva, Vibhīşaņa and Hanu, agrees to accept Sītā provided she convinces the public of her chastity, Sita is then brought to Sāketa. She rebukes Rāma for his cruel behaviour. Ráma expresses his helplessness and arranges for a fireordeal in which Sītā emerges successful. Rāma implores her to forgive him and to live with him. Sītā consoles Rama but does not like to get re-entangled into the worldly miseries. She renounces the world and becomes a nun. Kștantavadana also renounces the world. In course of time Sītā is born as a Prati-Indra of the Acyuta, a celestial region.
106-108. Gautama narrates the svayamvara-ceremony of Mandakint and Candramukhi. They select Lavana and Aïkusa as their spouses respectively. At this eight sons of Lakşmaņa feel depressed and consequently renounce the world. Then follows the demise of Bhāmandala, the initiation of Hanu and his wives and the emancipation of Hanu.
109-118. Gautama continues to narrate that once two curious celestial beings descend at Saketa for testing the deep mutual affection of Rāma and Lakşmapa. They conjure up a situation as if the ladies of the harem are bewailing the death of Rama. At this Lakşmana receives great shock and dies instantly. This incident inspires Lavaņa and Ankuśa to renounce the world. Rāma being overpowered with

Page #61

82
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
grief becomes mad and wanders about carrying the dead body of Laksmana. Seeking this opportunity the sons of Rakṣasa Sunda invade Saketa but they are chased away by other two celestial beings namely, Kṛtāntavadana and Jaṭayu. The same celestials restore Rama to sanity. Thereupon Rama realises the truth about the worldly things. He performs the last rites of the dead body of Lakṣmaṇa, enthrones the son of Lavana and renounces the world along with Satrughna, Vibhīṣaṇa, Sugrīva, Nala, Nila, Viradhita and many others. In course of time he attains clairvoyance (Avadhijñāna). He repairs to the forest and observes various penances. He breaks his fast there with the food offered by Pratinandi, the king of the city of Syandanasthali (Sandanathali). During the course of his spiritual elevation, Sītā, the Prati-Indra tries to distract him from meditation to mar his progress and thus to cause his rebirth into her own abode, but in vain. Consequently Rama attains omniscience. He gets emancipated after leading ascetic life for a period of twenty-five years.

Page #62

CHAPTER III COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
A comparative study of the Rāma-story of Paumacariyam has been made particularly with that of the Vālmīki and Tulasī Rāmāyaṇa while other important Jaina and non-Jaina works dealing with the story of Rāma have been referred to in general wherever necessary to illustrate the points of agreement and variation.
SECTION I KING DASARATHA, HIS WIVES AND SONS A. Queens of Dasaratha :
According to the Paumacariyam? of Vimalas ūrī, Dasaratha, the king of Sāketapuri (Ayodhyā) marries (22.100-108) Aparājita (Avarāiya), the daughter of king Sukošala and his queen Amstaprabhā of the city of Aruhasthala (Aruhatthala), Sumitrā (Somitti), the daughter of king Subandhutilaka (-tilaa) and his queen Mitrā (Mitta) of Kamalasankulapura (22.106-8) and Kaikeyi (Kegar), the daughter of king Subhamati (Suhamai) and his queen Pșthvīśrī (Puhaisiri) of the city of Kautukamaigala (Kouyamaigala). Kaikeyi's brother's name is Dronamegha (Donameha 24.2-3).
According to the Valmīki-Rāmāyana, the name of the first queen of Dasaratha who reigns over Ayodhyā, is Kausalyā (1.14.33). The names of the other two queens are identical with those mentioned in the PCV. It does not refer to the birth-places and the parents of the first two queens. Kaikeyi's father is said to be king (1.73.1-2) Aśvapati (2.9.22) of Kekaya country with his capital at Rajagļha (2.68.6), also called as Girivraja (Ibid. 21). Kaikeyi's brother is named as Yudhājit (1.73.1).
2.
1. Dr. Bulcke mentions four queens of Dasaratha. This number is found in
the Padmacaritam of Ravişena, not in the Paumacariyan. Bulcke has quoted in his Rāmakathā all the references from Padamacaritam on the basis that the Paumacariyam and the former are identical. But there are certain differences also. Besides there three queens, Dasaratha is said to have 500 wives (ruyagunasāliņiņam pañcasaya jassa pavarajuvainam 28.7 ). The Padamacaritam of Ravişeņa agrees with this number (28.161). The Vālmīki-Rāmāyaṇa also refers to 350 (trayaḥ satasatārdha-2,39.36 ardh asaptasata 2.34.13) wives of Dasaratha. The Ananda Rāmāyana mentions 700 wives of Dasaratha (1.1.72).

Page #63

34
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
The Ramacaritamanasa or Tulasi-Rāmāyana agrees with the Vālmīki-Rāmāyaṇa as regards the names of the queens of Dasaratha. Kaikeyi is merely mentioned as Kekayanandani (2.91). Their seniority is not clear. However at the time of distribution of the sacrificial offering (havi) Kausalya is given the first preference, Kaikeyi follows her and Sumitră is mentioned last of all (1.190). The same order is found when they bear sons (I. 195, 195).
According to the Vasudevahindi, Dasaratha has three queens, Kaikeyi being the second one (pt. I, p. 241). The name of the first queen is Kausalyā. According to the Padmacaritam of Ravişeņa, Suprabhā is the fourth queen of Dasaratha (22,176). She is also called Supraja (25.39; 123.80). The birth-place of Aparājită is said to be Darbhasthalat (22.171). Kaikeyi's mother's name is Pythuśrī (24.3). The Paumacariu of Svayambhu follows Ravişeņa (21.4.9), but does not mention their birth-place and parentage except that of Kaikeyi. Aparăjită is called Kosaladuhiya (=duhiţr 22.12.4). Hemacandra's Trişaştiśalākā-puruşacaritra agrees with Ravişeņa, but the name of the mother of Kaikeyi is Pộthviếri (IV. pp. 190-1). The Rama-Purānaof Bhattāraka Somasena follows Ravişeņa, but Sumitrā, hails from the city of Padmapatra. Kaikeyi is called Kaikāmatí. Her mother's name is Pșthvimati. Kaikeyi has two brothers: Kaikaya and Drona. Suprabha is daughter of the king of Ratnapura.
1. Aruhatthala of the PCV, Darbhasth ala of the PCR and Kusávati of the VR
(7. 108.4) seem to be identical. Kuśāvati of the VR is called Kusasthali in the Vayu Purana (Hindi Translation, H. S. S. Prayaga-p, 366). The very name of Kuśasthali denotes that it was a place where the Kusa grass grew abundantly. Such a place is not suitable for the cultivation of crops. There fore Aruh asth ala (i. e. a land unsuitable for growth) and Darbhasthala mean the same thing. Further the VR (7. 108.4) mentions that Kusavati was situated in the Vindhyas. It was made the capital for Kusa. Kusa is also called as the king of the Kosala country and Lava of the Uttarakośala (Kosaleşu Kusam viramuttareșu tathā Lavam 7. 107. 7). It means that Kušavati or Kusasthali was the capital of South Kosala. Further the VR states that on the occasion of Dasaratha's horse-sacrifice king Bhānumat of Košala had visited Ayodhyā (tatha Kosalarājānam Bhanumantam susatkstam 1. 13. 26). It indicates that Bhānumat was the king of Dakşiņa Kosala and perhaps the father of Kausalyā (Rāmāyaṇa Kalina Samāja-p. 135) who was addressed after the name of the country to which she belonged just as the name Vaidehi (Sita, the princess of Videh a country) and Kaikeyi (the princess of Kekaya country) denote. Therefore, Aruhasthala of the PCV should be the capital of South Kośala and Aparājitā can be called as
Kaulsayā i. c. the princess of Kosaladesa. 2, Rāma-carita (Hindi Translation of Rama-Purā na) by L. B. Shastri-p. 84-85.

Page #64

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
According to the Uttarapuraṇa of Gunabhadra (67. 148-165), Daśaratha rules at Vārāņasī. He shifts his capital to Ayodhya when Sagara, the king of Ayodhya dies. The names of the first two queens of Dasaratha are Subālā and Kaikeyī. The third one is anonymous. The Mahapurana (Tisatthimahāpurisaguṇālañkāra-mahākavva) of Puspadanta follows Gunabhadra, but mentions one more queen (69. 14. 10).
35
In the Ramopakhyāna (MB, 3. 174. 8) the queens are mentioned in the same order as in the TR. In the Raghuvamsa their order agrees with that of the VR. They are said to be the daughters of the kings of Magadha, Kośala1 and Kekaya countries (9. 17). It indicates that Sumitra belonged to the Magadha country. This account agrees with that of the Padmapurāna (Uttarakhanda, ch. 269) and Anandarāmāyaṇa (1. 1. 32, 70-71). In the latter work king Kośala is the father of Kausalya.
According to the Dasaratha Jataka Dasaratha is the king of Vārāṇasī and he has 16000 wives. The Dasaratha Kathanam1 mentions four queens only.
According to the Seri Rāma" and the Hikayata Mahārāja Rāvana, Dasaratha has two wives, Mandu and Baliyādarī. The Serata Kanda' names them as Baliadaru and Bandodari.
In a western accounts Dasaratha is said to have four wives.
B. Marriage of Kaikeyi and the granting of a Boon:
In the PCV the wedding of Aparajita and Sumitra to Dasaratha is merely referred to while the episode of the marriage of Kaikeyī with Dasaratha is described in two chapters (23-24). At Lanka, Narada comes to know of the plot hatched by Vibhīṣaṇa for assassinating Daśaratha to save Rāvana, because Sagaravidhi, a naimittika had predicted that the would-be son of Dasaratha would kill Rāvaņa for the sake of the would-be daughter of Janaka. Narada informs of the same to Dasaratha, the latter soon absconds from his country and wanders incognito. A
1. In the Mahanataka (3. 11) Kausalya is called kośalakanyaka and in the Balaramayana (6. 38f) as dakṣinakośaladhipatiputri.
2.
Its Patalakhanda (ch. 112) mentions four queens, viz. Kausalya, Sumitra, Surupa and Suveśa.
3. Jataka No. 461.
4. Rāmāyaṇa in China by Dr. Raghuvira.
F Stories as found in Hindesia (Indo-China). Vide Bulcke, p. 278.
6. Ibid.
7. As found in Java. Vide Bulcke, p. 278.
8.
Hindu Manners, Customs ond Ceremonies by J. A. Dubois pp. 619-24. (19th Cent.); Vide Bulcke, p. 279.

Page #65

36
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
plaster statue (effigy) of Daśaratha is installed in his palace to deceive Vibhişaņa. Vibhișaņa goes there and cuts off the head of that effigy in the night taking it to be the real person of Daśaratha. In due course Dasaratha meets Janaka who was also fleeing from his capital at the advice of Narada. Both of them join the svayamvara ceremony of Kaikeyi. Kaikeyi chooses Dasaratha for her spouse. The disgruntled candidates wage a battle with Dasaratha so courageously and skilfully that the latter becomes successful in routing his opponents. Dasaratha duly marries Kaikeyi and returns to Vinītāpuri (24. 34 i. e. Ayodhyā). There he offers her a boon in recognition of her valorous performance in the battle.
According to VR when Daśaratha while assisting the Devas (gods) in their battle with Samba Asura, gets wounded, Kaikeyi guards him and saves his life. For that Dasaratha promises two boons to her (2.9.17). Further the interpolated chapters 2-4 after 7.37 of the VR state that Muni Agastya once narrated to Rāma an account which was related to him by Nárada. He told Rāma that Rāvana came to know from Sanatkumāra that one who is killed by Prabhu-Hari-Nārāyaṇa attains the abode of Hari, that Hari would be born as the first son of Dasaratha and would go to the Dandaka forest in exile. Răvaņa planned to kidnap Sītā so that he would attain emancipation at the hands of Rāma, the Hari.
In the Tulasi Rāmayana, there is only a reference to the boons (2.22.3).
Ravişena's PCR agrees with the PCV. Here the name of the naimittika is Sāgarabuddhi (23.25). It states that Vibhīşaņa goes to kill Janaka (23.55) also. Svayambhu's PCS agrees with Ravişeņa, but it mentions that the boon was offered at Kautukamarigalapura (PGS, 21.4.3). Hemacandra's TSP follows Svayambhu but does not mention the name of the naimittka (TSP, IV. pp. 190-192). Bh. Somasena's RPS agrees with the PCR but does not refer to the name of the naimittka.
The Vasudevahindi (p.241) accounts differently. Two boons were granted to Kaikeyi, viz, one for her benefactory services to her own people (sayanovayāraviyakkhaņāe) and the second one for her courage and manly performance (purisavarasarisam) in getting Dasaratha released from the captivity of a neighbouring hostile king.
The Uttarapur āņa as well as the Mahāpurāņa do not contain this episode.
Kaikeyi's Svayamvara (marriage) is referred to in the Bangali Kyttivāsa Rāmāyāna (1.25) and Assamese Rāmāyaṇa of Madhavakandali (8-10). [Bulcke, 2. p. 294.]

Page #66

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
37
The Ananda Ramayana mentions the episode of the marriage of Dasaratha with Kausalya, which partially agrees with that of the PCV. Ravana comes to know from Brahma that the son of Dasaratha born of Kausalya would kill him. He foils their marriage by demolishing their boat in the Sarayu river, kidnaps Kausalya, puts her into a trunk and leaves it into the custody of Timingala Matsya. When the Matsya is away to face his enemy, Dasaratha goes there and performs Gāndharva marriage with Kausalya. Ravana comes to know of it and he tries to kill them, but Brahma intervenes and saves them. Thereafter Dasaratha marries Sumitra and Kaikeyi (1.1.37-74). This account1 is found in the interpolated portion of some of the recensions of the Svayambhuva and Tulasi Rāmāyaṇa.
According to the Satyopakhyāna, Narada praises the beauty of Kaikeyi before Dasaratha and predicts that a great son would be born of her. Dasaratha manages to win the heart of Kaikeyi through a Devayogini. Kaikeyīs father marries Kaikeyī to Dasaratha on the condition that her son would inherit the crown of Ayodhya (Bulcke, p. 278).
There are certain non-Jaina works which associate war-chariot with the promising of boons to Kaikeyī. Kaikeyī was granted two boons by Dasaratha for she prevented, in time, the dislocation of a wheel from the war-chariot by putting her hand in place of the axle which had fallen down broken when Dasaratha was fighting in the Devasura battle. This feat of Kaikeyī was commended and rewarded by Dasaratha. This account is found in the Brahmapurana (Anandaśrama, ch. 123. p. 300), Padmapurana (Bengali version, vide-Bulcke, the Ananda Rāmāyaṇa p. 322), Adhyatma Rāmāyaṇa (2.2. 66-72) and (101. 75-84).
The Rama Kiyena2 (ch. 14) also has the above account. According to the Seri Rama" and the Hikayata Maharaja Ravana, Darī a concubine of Dasaratha holds up the wrecking litter of Dasaratha when he marries Mandu-devi (chief queen). Dasaratha makes Darī her queen and promises the kingship to her son (Bharata).
There are some non-Jaina works which refer to one boon only. The VR4 also indicates that upon the strength of one boon Kaikey!
1. Vide Bulcke, p. 277.
2. Vide Bulcke, p. 322.
3.
Ibid. pp. 278, 3 3.
4. Purvam dattavara devi varamenamayacata/
Vivasanam ca Ramasya Bharatasyabhiṣecanam// 1.1.22.

Page #67

38
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
demanded two things. The Rāmopākhyāna' agrees with it. Dasaratha Jataka and the Dasaratha Kathānam mention one boon. Seri-Rāma and the Hikāyata-Mahārāja-Ravaņa agree with it
The The
Like the VH, the Assamese Rāmāyana of Madhavakandali (ch. 16 and Seri-Rāma (some other version)? mention that two boons are granted to Kaikeys on two different occasions. Telugu Bhaskara Rāmāyaṇa (13th-14th cent. A. D.) and Varadarāju Rāmāyana (1650 A. D.) also mention two boons.3
C. Birth of Rāma and his brothers :
In the Paumacarijań, there is no association of any divinity with the birth of the sons of Dasaratha. They are born in the natural way and Daśaratha does not perform any religious rites for their birth. Rāma is the eighth Baladeva (20.2;21.1). He is one of the three members of the eighth trinity of the 'sixty-three great persons' of the Jaina faith (20). The other two i, e. Vasudeva and Prativasudeva of the eighth trinity are Laksmana and Rāvana (Dahamuha) respectively.
According to the VR, when Dasaratha does not have any son, he performs 'aśvamedha' (horse-sacrifice) and the 'putreștiyajña' (1.1415). On that occasion at the request of various gods to Brahman, Vişnu promises to take birth in form of the sons of Dasaratha for bringing an end of the atrocities of Rāvana, the Rākṣasa king. Thus Rāma and his brothers are born as the incarnations of Vişņu (1.18. 11-14).
The TR mentions only the 'putrakāma subha yajna' (1.189) and not the 'aśvamedha'.
The Mahābhārata (3.276.5) refers to the incarnation of Vişnu, but does not mention the performing of any sacrifice by Dasaratha. Similarly the Vişnu (4.87), Bhāgavata (9.102), Vāyu (4.4.87), Kūrma (1.21.18) and the Garuda Purānas (143.4) do not have reference to any sacrifice.
1. Satyapratijña yanme tvaṁ kāmamekan niśțstavanj Upakurusva tadrājamsta
smānmueyasya sankațāt;/ Varam dadani te hantā tad gshana yadicchasi (MB, 3.277.21-22). Abhişecanikaṁ yatte Rāmärthamupakalpitam/ Bharatastadavā.
pnotu vanam gacchatu Rāghavaḥ. MB, 3.277.26. 2. Bulcke, 2, p. 402. 3. Rāmāyana Samiksā, Venkateswara University, Tirupati, (1967), pp. 32, 34, 42.

Page #68

39
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
In the Dasaratha Jataka, Dasaratha Kathanam, Serata Kanda1, Tibetan Ramayana2 and the Khotani Rāmāyaṇas there is no reference to any sacrifice.
D. Christening of Names:
According to the PCV, Aparajita's son is named Padma (Pauma) for his face glittered like a lotus and his eyes resembled the petals of a Sumitra's son is lotus flower (viyasiyavarapaumasaris amuhaṁ 25.7). named Lakṣmaṇa for he was endowed with several qualities (lakkanesu uvaveo teņam guņāņuruvam chudham ciya Lakkhaņo nāmaṁ 25.11). Kaikeyī bore twin1 sons namely, Bharata (Bharaha) and Satrughna (Sattuggha 25.14). Padma who is also called Rama had white complexion while Lakṣmaṇa's was dark-blue just like a blue water-lily (niluppaladalasamo 25.11).
According to the VR, Rama, the son of Kausalya is born on the ninth day of the bright half of Caitra. Bharata is the son of Kaikeyi. Lakṣmaṇa and Śatrughna are the youngest twin sons of Sumitra (I. 18.8-13, 21-22). This account differs from that of the PCV as regards the seniority of Lakṣmaṇa and Bharata and the mother of Satrughna. Valmiki does not assign any particular reason for naming some epithets them as such. However Lakṣmaṇa is addressed with such as 'lakṣmivardhanaḥ' and 'lakṣmisaṁ pannaḥ' (1.18.28.30) and Rama as lotus--eyed (rājīvalocanam 1.19.17), (padmapatraviśālakṣau 1.48.3; 1.76.12; 1.50.20). Rama's face is described as resembling a As regards blue-lotus (Ramasya vadanam puskarekṣaṇam 2.61.8).& the colour of their bodies Valmiki differs from Vimalasūrī. In the VR Rama is said to be of dark-blue complexion (śyama 6.28.18; meghaśyama, indivaraśyama) while Lakṣmaṇa of white complexion (śuddhajambunadaprabhaḥ 6.28 22).
In the TR (1.197) each brother is named after his individual qualities. Rama is named as such because he is a treasure of happiness and solace to the whole world ('so sukha-dhāma Rama' and 'akhila
1. Bulcke, p. 267.
2. Ibid.
3.
Ibid.
4. Though it is not stated explicitly, yet their birth-ceremony is mentioned to be twin brothers (jammusavo celebrated together. It indicates that they were mahanto tānam pi kao naravaiņam 25.14).
5. See 1.18.15 and the Tilaka Commentary.
6. Rama is called Padmanabha i.e. Hari or Visņu (7.87 interpolated chapter No. 5.45.).

Page #69

40
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
lokada yaka viśrama'),1 Lakṣmaṇa on account of his being a repository of multifold qualities (lacchana dhama2), Bharata as he is the maintainer of the world (bisva bharana poșana kana joī) and Satrughna as such for the recitation of his name is enough for annihilating the enemies (jāke sumarinate ripu nāsā). As regards the complexion of Rama and Lakṣmaṇa, the date of birth of the former and their seniority, the TR agrees with the VR. Rāma is described as 'syama' (1.198.3), 'Nilakañja bārida gambhira (1.199) and Lakṣmaṇa as 'gaura' (1.198.3), 'dāminī barana Lakhana' (2.115.4). Śatrughna is called younger than Lakṣmaṇa (2.164), Lakṣmaṇa younger than Bharata (2.200) and Bharata younger than Rāma (2.194).
The Raghuvamsa agrees with the VR and states that Rama was named so on account of his charming body (abhirameņa vapușă 10.67). In the Padmapurana, Rama is named as such for his 'tribhuvanābhirămataya', Lakṣmaṇa because of his 'rupaśauryadilakṣmiyogyatayā',
Bharata on account of his 'bhuvam bhārāttāryatīti' and Satrughna because of his 'Satrūnhantiti'. The Adh. Răm. agrees with the Padmaburana, but Lakṣmaņa is said to be named so for his 'lakṣaṇānvitam' just as mentioned in the TR and PCV.
As regards the seniority of Bharata and Lakṣmaṇa there is no agreement in the Brahmanical works. At one place even in the Southern recension of VR, Lakṣmaṇa seems to be elder than Bharata for the latter salutes the former with reverence (6.127.41). The Gauḍīya version of VR mentions Bharata as a younger brother of Laksmana. In the Pratima Nataka Bharata addresses Lakṣmaṇa with reverence and salutes him. Sumantra clearly calls Bharata as an 'anuja' of Lakṣmaṇa. In the Purāņas the order in which they are mentioned shows that Lakṣmaṇa is elder than Bharata.
In the Dasaratha Jataka Bharata is younger that Laksmana. It does not mention any fourth son of Dasaratha.
According to the Dasaratha Kathānam, Bharata and Śatrughna are born of the third and the fourth queen of Dasaratha. In the Serī Rāma Bharata and Satrughna are uterine brothers (Bulcke, p.280).
1. In the VR lokarama is the adjective of Rima 1.18.29.
2. Compare with the 'lakhanesu uvaveo, of the PCV (25.11).
3. Patalakhaṇḍa. Ch. 112,
4. But the Tilaka commentary explains that Bharata is elder.
5. Bulcke. p,280.
6. IV. 9f.
7. Visnu. Pu, 4.4.87, Bhagavata Pu, 9.1.9; Padma Pu, Pätāla. ch. 112.

Page #70

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
In the Marathi Bhāvārtha Rāmāyaṇa1 Bharata and Satrughna uterine brothers as in the PCV.
The PCR mentions Satrughna as the son of Suprabha, the fourth queen of Dasaratha. The name Lakṣmaṇa is christened on account of his bearing good marks (sulakṣmya 25.26).3 The Vasudevahindi (I.p.241) agrees with the PCV as regards the seniority and the respective mothers of all the four brothers. The PCS follows the PCR and calls Rama as Ramacandra also (Ramacandu 21.4.9) Hemacandra's TSP (IV.p.192-195) follows the PCR but it mentions that Padma and Lakṣmaṇa are born at Rajagṛha when Dasaratha after marrying Kaikeyi goes there and stays there with his wives. Somasena's RPS follows the PCR and also mentions the date of birth of Padma as the thirteenth day of the dark half of Phalguna (p.86).
E.
According to the UP of Gunabhadra, Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa are born of Subālā and Kaikeyī respectively. They are born at Vārāņasī and their dates of birth are the thirteenth day of the dark half of Phalguna and the first day of the bright half of Magha respectively. Rama is nowhere mentioned as Padma. Bharata and Satrughna are born of the third queen and they are born at Saketapura (67.149.165). The MP (69.12-14) of Puspadanta follows the UP but Bharata and Satrughna are born of the third and the fourth queen of Dasaratha respectively. In it Rāma is called Padma also (78.13.8;78.29.3) as well as Rāmacandra (78.26.2). The first son of Dasaratha is named Rāma on account of his charming body (tapuramu) and the second is named Lakṣmaṇa (Lakkhanu) because of his having qualities (lakkhapalakkhamkiyau 69.12).
Rama's Teacher:
According to the PCR, Rama and his brothers receive education in various sciences and training in archery at Ayodhya under Airakucchi (25.26) of Kampilya nagara. His parents are named to be Bhargava
are
1.
Bulcke, p.279.
The Brahmanical Padma Purana, which mentions four queens of Dasaratha tells us that Bharata and Satrughna are the ons of Surūpā and Suveṣā respectively (Vol. 2- 8. 733) But at another place Suvesa is said to be the daughter of the king of Kekayadeśa. She demands kingdom for Bharata and the exile of Rama (p.739).
3. The B. G. K. edition reads 'Sulakṣmā'.
41
2.
4. Svayambhu is the first author among the Jainas to call Padma as Ramacanda. See also Mahaviracaritam 2. v. 20.1.3 'ha deva candamuha Ramacanda' and 1. v. 26, 1 2. jaya jaya 'jagatpate Ramacandra'.
See the reason assigned in the PCV.
5.

Page #71

42
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
and Airānī. He himself was educated at Rājagļha under Vaivasvata (Vaivassaa).
In the VR Vasistha is the family preceptor. Upadhyāya Sudhanvan is referred to as the teacher of archery (2.100.14). Viśvāmitra is said to have taught 'Balā' and 'Atibala' lores to Rāma on the southern bank of the river Sarayū (1 22.11-12). He also trained him in the discharging of various missiles (1.27-28).
In the TR all the four brothers are referred to have first got educated at the house of an unnamed preceptor (1.204-205). Later on Viśvāmitra trained Rāma (1.209).
The PCR (25.42-43) names the preceptor as Ehiruūdhi or Ero (25.49) and his mother is called Işu, The RPS mentions them as Ehirudha and Isakā (p. 86).
SECTION II. BIRTH OF SITA AND HER MARRIAGE
A. The Family of Janaka :
According to the PCV Janaka, the king of Mithilā, is the son of Väsavaketu (21.32) or Indraketu (28.15) born of Ila (21.33). Janaka's wife is Videhā (26.70;28.16) or Vaidehi (Vaidehi 26.75). His daughter and son who are born as twins are Sītā and Bhamandala (26.75,87). Bhamandala is lost by Janaka and is then adopted by Candragati as his son.
Janaka's brother is Kanaka (Kanaa). The latter's wife and daughter are Suprabha and Subhadrā (28.132) respectively.
According to the VR, Janaka is the son of Hộşvaroman. Janaka's brother is Kušadhvaja (1.71.12-13). There is no mention of the wives of Hysvaroman, Janaka and Kušadhvaja. Janaka has two daughters, Sitā and Urmila (71.20-22;1.73.26,30). No son of Janaka is referred to in the VR. Kušadhvaja has two daughters-(1.72,5), Māndavi and Śrutakirti (1.73.32-33). Thus the account of the PCV differs from that of the VR.
1.
Bhāmandala on the very day of his brith, is kidnapped away by a celestial being who had enmity with him in his previous life. The stolen child is found by Candragati, a Vidyadhara, king of Rathanūpura. Candragati takes him to his wife and adopts him as his own son (26.70,87). He is named Bhāmandala on account of the shining caused on his body by the reflection of his ear-rings beset with jewels.

Page #72

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
43
In the TR Sunayanā is called the chief queen of Janaka (Janaka patamahiși 1.124). The brother of Janaka is Kuśaketu. In other respects it agrees with the VR (1.325).
In the Purānas?, Sita's father is named Sīradhvaja whose brother's name is the same as found in the VR and Bhanumat is mentioned as the son of Siradhvaja. But the Bhagavata Purāņa (9.13.21) mentions Kusadhvaja as the son, not the brother of Sīradhvaja and Bhānumat is said to be the fourth descendant in the line of Kušadhvaja. The Kalika Purana (38.11,12,32) refers to two sons and one daughter of Janaka. Thus the tradition of the PCV is generally supported by the Purānas that Janaka had a son.
According to the Anandarāmāyaṇa, Sumedhā is the chief queen of Janaka (1. 3. 98; 5.2.25).
The PCR and the RPS agree with the PCV, but the name of the mother of Janaka is stated to be Vipula (PCR, 21. 53, RPS, p. 81). The PCR (28.259) and the BPS (p. 93) mention Lokasundarī instead of Subhadrā. The PCS (21.10,3) names the father of Janaka as Candraketu and does not refer to any brother of Janaka (21. 13-14). The TSP (IV. p. 204) follows the PCV, In the Vasudevahindi (1. p. 241) the name of the wife of Janaka is Dhāriņīdevī, but there is no mention of the brother and the son of Janaka.
According to the UP (67. 167) the name of the wife of Janaka is Vasudhădevī. No son or brother of Janaka is referred to. The MP (69. 14-15; 70. 8-9) follows the UP.
B. Birth of Sitā:
According to PCV, Sītā is born of Videhā, the wife of Janaka (26.75). But in the VR, Janaka while ploughing the land finds a female child emanated from the land. She is named as Sītā (1.66. 13-14) and adopted as his own daughter by Janaka though she is not born of his wife (sthapiteyamayonijā 1. 66. 15). In the TR also she is called the daughter of the land (avanikumārī 2.64 ; dharani sutā
There are some works which do not give any hint to the supernatural birth of Sitā. In the Rāmopākhyāna (MB, 3.274.9) she is merely called the daughter of Janaka (Videharājo Janakaḥ Sītā tasyātmajā
1. Vn. Pu. 4.5.39; Vy. Pu. 2.28.18. 2. Aha să suhaṁ pasūya, duhiyä puttani ca tattha Vaidehi. 3. Atha me krtataḥ kşetram larigaladutthita tataḥ; Ksetra sodh ayatā labdha
namna Siteli visruta bhūtaladutthită să tu vyavardhata mamātmaja.

Page #73

44
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
vibho). Some other references in the MB also corroborate the same view (sutām Janakarājasya Sītām 3. 148. 7; Vaidehi 3. 148. 8; 7.59.5) The Harivamsa Purana (41. 130) differs from other Puranas and agrees with the MB for it also does not refer to her supernatural birth.
In the Jaina Rama-story there are two different traditions about the birth of Sītā. The first tradition as found in the PCV that Sīta is. born of the wife of Janaka, is followed by the PCR (26, 121), the PCS (21.5.4) and the TSP (IV. p. 197). The other tradition is found in the PCV that Sītā is born of the wife of Janaka, is followed by the PCR (26. 121), the PCS (21. 5. 4) and the TSP (IV. p. 197). The other tradition is found in the Vasudevahindi (I. p. 241). It mentions that Mandodari, the chief queen of Ravana puts her new-born daughter into a casket and orders the minister to throw it away, because she was prophesied to become the cause of the destruction of her family. The minister takes it to the garden of Janaka and with the help of 'tirakkharaņīvijjā' fixes it on the plough-share. Thus she comes to be known as extracted by the plough. She is then handed over by the ploughman to Dhāriņī, the wife of Janaka, who adopts the child as her own daughter, naming her as Sītā.1 The UP of Gunabhadra (68.17-27) agrees with the above account. Here Marica at the order of Ravana buries near the garden of Mithila the casket in which she is closed along with a letter of identification, by Mandodari. Then it follows the Vasudevahindi. It calls her also as 'bhubhūtā' (68. 336) and 'mahīsută'. It is noteworthy that the name of the wife of Janaka is Vasudha. Thus we find that the Vasudevahindi removes away the uncertainty of the parentage of Sita while the UP improves upon the former by naming the wife of Janaka as Vasudha3. Thus Gunabhadra puts forth a logical explanation of the birth and the naming of Sītā. Puspadanta (MP, 70.8-9) agrees with the UP and calls Sītā as 'dharasuya' (72.3.9). 'mahīruha' (76.30.1), and 'Janayavasundharīdhīya also (78.27.9).
1. The tradition that Sita was the daughter of Ravana seems to have influenced many other Rama-stories in India and abroad. Among the Indian Ramastories the Kasmiri Rāmāyaṇa is an example. Among the stories of the foreign countries, the Tibetan and Khotānī Rāmāyaṇa, Seratakāṇḍa, Seri Rāma, Reämakera, Rama Kiyena are noteworthy (See Bulcke, pp. 896-80).
2. Bulcke (p. 300) remarks that Gunabhadra is the first author to mention Sita as the daughter of Ravana. This statement needs modification, because the Vasudevahindi is of earlier date than the Uttara Purana of Gunabhadra.
3. The VR also states her birth from 'vasudha' in the sens e of the earth. See 6.116.15 (Apadeso me Janak annotpattirvasudhätalät).

Page #74

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
45
Bh. Somasena (RPS, Ch. 14) has mixed up both the Jaina traditions. He states that when Bhamandala, the twin brother of Sitā is stolen by a revengeful celestial being, a farmer brings a casket and gives it to Janaka. The female child concealed in it is adopted by Janaka. That child (i. e. Sīta) becomes an object of solace for the wife of Janaka who is aggrieved at her separation from her son. She receives the female child as a replacement for the lost son.
The Svāyambhuva Rāmāyana (17th cent. A. D.) mentions Sītā as Mandodari's daughter. Rāmajā taka of Syāma records the same thing. According to the Palaka Pālāma of Syāma” and Laňkānoy of Laos' Sīta is Rāvana's daughter.
On the strength of the evidences available in the PCV and the Brahmanical literature it can be surmised that Vimalasūri is the first author who definitely mentions that Sītā was begotten by Janaka on his wife Videha."
C. Sitā's Betrothal with Rāma :
According to the PCV Janaka engages Sītā to Rāma in recognition of the latter's chivalry 'purisayāranihasaṁ' (27,41). Rāma helped Janaka by chasing away the Mlecchą hordes who under the leadership of Ātaranga, the chief of Mayūramala, had attacked the land of Janaka.
There is no account of the betrothal of Sítā to Rama in the VR and the TR. According to the VR many kings go individually and try in vain their skill and strength at the bow. Janaka refuses to offer Sitā to any one of them. Then the disgruntled kings besiege Mithilā for one year. Helpless Janaka propitiates gods. The latter send their fourfold army and chase away the enemy-kings (1.66.17-24). About the brother of Janaka a separate episode is narrated in the VR. Sudhanvan the king of Sănkāśyapura once seizes the city of Mithila to obtain the Saiva-bow and Sita for himself. Janaka does not surrender but kills Südhanvan in the battle. He installs his own brother (Kušadhvaja) on the throne of Sārkāśyapura (1.71-16-19). The TR does not contain any such account. It refers to the visit of Rāvana and Bāņāsura and their vain efforts at the bow (1.250) prior to the celebration of the 'svayamvara'.
1. Bulcke, 2, p. 188. 2. Ibid. p. 376. 3. Ibid. p. 280. 4. Dr. Bulcke is of the opinion that Sita was the legal daughter of Janaka in
the Adi Rāmāyaṇa (p: 292).

Page #75

46
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN Ravişeņa (PCR, XXVII), Svayambhu (PGS, XXI-6-7), Hemacandra (TSP, IV. 199-200) and Somasena (RPS, p. 69) agree with the PCV.
The Uttarapurāna of Guņabhadra and the Mahapurāna of Puşpadanta do not refer to either the betrothal of Sītā or the bow-ceremony.
In the Buddhacarita it is said that when the land was attacked by some Anāryas, Rāma defended it coming back from the Tapovana (tathā mahim viprakratāmanāryaistapovanadetya rarakṣa Ramah 9.69). But there is no reference to the association of Janaka with this episode.
D. Intervention of the Bow :
According to the PCV the marriage of Sītā would have, in the ordinary course of way, followed her betrothal. But a strange episode takes place and Janaka is compelled to arrange for the 'svayamvara' of Sita (28. 1-76).
When Nārada comes to know of the betrothal and the charming beauty of Sita, he enters the palace of Sītā, out of curiosity to have a look at her beauty. There he is manhandled by her guards as soon as Sītā makes an alarm at the horrible sight of the stranger. Being thus insulted Narada plans to put Sītā in trouble. He prepares a portrait of Sita and shows it to Bhamandala at Rathanūpura. Bhāmaņdala being ignorant of his uterine relation with Sītā, develops intense love for her and insists upon her marriage with him. His father Candragati commissions Capalagati. He disguising himself as a horse, kidnaps Janaka and brings him there. Candragati demands Sītā for his son. Janaka expresses his inability. Candragati then gives over the Vajrăvartabow (Vajjāvatta) to Janaka and tells him that Rāma can marry Sītā provided he strings the bow, otherwise he can not (28. 74). Janaka is helpless, he returns to Mithila with the bow.
In the VR no such impediment is put by any outside person. Janaka had voluntarily declared Sītā Vīryaśulkā' and the condition put forth was that one who strung the Saiva-bow, would get her in marriage (1.66. 15-18). In the VR the origin of the 'Saiva-bow' has been referred to at four different places: (i).Janaka got that Sunabha' bow from the gods as a reward for performing a sacrifice (1. 31. 12); (ii) Rudra, after destroying the sacrifice of Daksa gave it to the gods who entrusted it to Devarāta, an ancestor of Janaka (1. 66. 7-12); (iii) There were two bows : one was given to Vişņu and the other to Siva (Tryambaka) by the gods. Once there emerged a fight between Vişņu and Siva to examine the comparative strength of the bows. The bow of

Page #76

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY 47 Siva loosened, so Siva (Rudra) gave it to Devarāta, while the bow of Visnu was inherited by Paraşurāma from his ancestor, Rcīka (1. 75. 11-28); and (iv) Sītā tells Anasāyā that the bow was given by Varuņa (2. 118, 39). These accounts describe the divine origin of the bow.
In the TR it is called "Śiva-dhanu' (1. 250). Its origin is not mentioned.
Like the PCV some Brahmanical works mention that the bow is obtained by Janaka only for the purpose of the marriage of Sītā.
According to the Padmapurana? the betrothal of Sila is settled with Rama. Dasaratha goes to Videhapura to celebrate Rāma's marriage, but Närada intervenes and requests them to postpone the date of marriage because it was an inauspicious day. He further advises to arrange for a 'svayamvara' and to invite various princes to perform the kşā travivāha'. Janaka does not like that any other person should marry Sita. He offers meditation before Rudra. The latter appears and gives him a bow which could be strung only by Rāma. According to the Satyopakhyāna, Siva gives 'darśana' to Janaka in a dream and gives him a bow. He asks him that one who strings the bow, should be married to Sītā (Uttara, 2). The Kaśınīrī Rāmāyaṇa also contains the same episode (Vide Bulcke, p. 285).
The PCR mentions that two bows 'Vajrāvarta' and 'Sagarāvarta' were given to Janaka by Vidyādhara Candragati (28.169). The PCS and the RPS follow the PCR. The TSP mentions Arņavăvarta' in place of Sāgarāvarta' (IV.p. 203). The Vasudevahindi mentions that Sită chooses Rama in a 'svayamvara'. It does not refer to any bow (1.p.241).
This episode is completely absent from the UP and the MP. E. Svayamvara of Sitā:
According to the PCV Janaka then arranges for the 'svayamvara' and invites various princes. Rāma along with his parents and brothers go there. Nobody is able to string the bow except Rāma. Sítā is then declared as his wife (28.93-124). Lakşmaņa also strings the same bow. Then some Vidyadharas offer him their daughters in marriage.
In the VR, there is no 'svayamvara' ceremony and no simultaneous arrival of various princes. They come casually at intervals, try their
1. Note that the PCV (28. 74) also calls it 'suresu kayarakkham' i. e. protected by
the Suras. 2. Patālakhanda, ch. 112.

Page #77

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
strength at the bow and go away disappointed. It is after a long period of time that Visvamitra takes Rama and Lakṣmaṇa along with him to attend the Yajña of Janaka (1.31.6-7) and to show them the strange bow. At the request of Janaka and with the permission of Visvamitra as soon as Rama strings the 'Saiva' bow, it breaks into two (1.67.16-17). Janaka sends for Dasaratha. He arrives there with his other sons to attend the marriage ceremony (1.68-69) of Rama and Sītā, Tulasīdāsa has introduced a new element in it. He tells us that Rama and Sītā see each other in a garden at Mithila. Sītā develops love for Rama (1.230-232) and prays the deity 'Girija' (1.236) to fulfil her desire. Again when all the princes are unsuccessful, Sita prays Maheśabhavānī to lighten the bow in weight so that Rama may wield it easily (harahu cãpagaruãi 1.257). Thus in the TR many princes assemble to decide their fate (1.250.2), but only Rama emerges successful. Sitä puts 'jayamala' round the neck of Rama (1.264). Disgruntled princes are mentioned to have made a row, but the immediate appearance of Parasurama subdues their anger (1.266,268). It mentions that previously Ravana had come there to string the bow, but he felt defeated at the very sight of the heaviness of the bow and went away. (1.250.1).
48
There are many non-Jaina works which mention the presence of various princes on the occasion of the 'svayamvara' of Sītă, their failure in stringing the bow, Rama's success and his claim for the hand of Sită.
The Nrsimhapurana (47.105-118), the Balaramayana (Anka 3), the Mahānaṭaka (1.35), the Padmapurāna (Pātāla 112), the Prasannarāghava (3.40-41), and the Ananda Ramayana (1.3.61-140) refer to the unsuccessful efforts of other princes. The Bhagavata Purana (9.10.6) and the Adhyatmaramayana (1.6.24) speak of to the presence of various princes. Brahmacakra of Laos refers to the same event (Bulcke, 2.p.280).
The Tamil Ramayana of Kambana (1.12), the Telugu Dvipada Ramayana and the Reyama kera mention the unsuccessful efforts of other princes (Vide Bulcke, p.286).
There are some non-Jaina works which mention that after the svayamvara-ceremony is over, the disgruntled candidates attack1 Rāma. Rama defeats them and marries Sītā. The Nrsimhapurana (47.119-124), Padmapurana (ch.112, Pt. II, p. 739) and the Serī Rāma (vide Bulcke
1. In Rama's case the PCV does not refer to this kind of incident. It is on the occason of the 'svayamvara' of Kaikey that the disappointed candidates attack Dasaratha,

Page #78

49
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY p. 287) refer to this battle. The Maithili Kalvānam (5.38-45), a Taina work states that the disgruntled candidates make a row but then submit to Rāma. The Ananda Ramāyāna (1.4.20-45) states that the unsuccessful candidates (1.3.165-168) attacked Rāma and his father when they were returning from Mithila, on the occasion of Dipāvali.
According to the PCR, Laksmana strings the other bow 'Sagarāvarta' (28.247). The PCS and the RPS follow the PCR. The TSP (IV. 204) follows the PCR and further mentions that Sitā puts the ‘svayamvara' garland round Rāma's neck. Dasaratha is said to have come there on the occasion of Rāma's marriage.
In the UP there is no reference to the 'svayamvara' ceremony and the bow. Janaka had invited Rāma and Lakşmaņa with a promise to marry Sītā to Rāma, if they protected his yajña from being disturbed by Ravana and the Rākşasas (67.169). In the presence of many kings the yajña was accomplished and Sitā was married to Rāma. The MP follows the UP and further mentions that Rama strung his bow to warn the enemies (70.13). F. Marriage of Rāma and his Brothers :
According to the PCV at the prospects of Rāma and Laksmana, Bharata gets dejected. Kaikeyi apprehends it. She with the help of Dasaratha gets another 'svayamvara' arranged specially for Subhadrā, the daughter of Kanaka. She selects Bharata. Rāma and Bharata marry Sita and Subhadra respectively, and return to Ayodhya (28.125-140) along with their wives.
According to the VR Sītā is married to Rāma and Ūrmila to Laksmana (1.71.21). Māndavi and Śrutakīrti, the daughters of Kusadhvaja are married to Bharata and Satrughna respectively (1.73).
The TR follows the VR.
The PCR agrees with the PCV (28.261). The Vasudeva hindi merely alludes to the marriage of other brothers. According to the PCS Śaśivardhana marries his eight daughters to Laksmana and other ten daughters to Bharata and Satrughna. Here Višalya, the daughter of Droņa is married to Lakşmaņa (PCS, 21.14). The TSP (IV.204) agrees with the PCV.
The UP and the MP do not refer to the marriages of other brothers at Mithila. It is stated that Dasaratha marries seven girls to
1. According to the PCV Visalyā marries (64,45) Laksmana after curing
(64.45) him in the battle field.

Page #79

50
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN Rāma and sixteen to Lakṣmaṇa (UP, 68.47,48; MP, 70.13) after their returning from Mithila.
According to the Dasaratha Jātaka, Rāma marries his own sister, Sita.
SECTION III
EXILE OF RĀMA A. Dasaratha's decision to crown Rāma :
According to the PCV Dasaratha realises his old age and asks his ministers to enthrone Rāma so that he himself may become an ascetic (31.56). This realisation comes to him at the sight of the pitiable condition of his chamberlain Kañcuki (29.20-29) emaciated by old age. His desire to renounce the world is intensified after listening to the religious discourse and the account of his previous life from a monk (30.36 to 31.49). On this occasion all the four sons of Dasaratha are there.
In the VR also it is the old age which inspires Dasaratha to announce Rāma as his heir-apparent (2. 1. 36; 2.4.12), though the cause of its realisation is not given. Sumantra tells at one place that he and Dasaratha would have entered the life of anchorites after installing Rama on the throne (2.35.35). Here Daśaratha wants to enthrone Rama as soon as possible in the absence of Bharata who is away from home (2.4. 18-27). Dasaratha apprehends some intrigue' from Bharata, He is said to have seen some inauspicious dreams. Rama also while persuading Lakşmaņa to stay behind at home, expresses his suspicion in Bharata's faithfulness to his mother (2.31.14).
In the TR the realisation of old age comes through the observation of a grey hair growing near his ear (2. 2). There is no reference to any suspicion of Dasaratha in Bharata. On the contrary it is mentioned
1. This suspicion seems to be quite appropriate when one comes across Rāma
telling Bharata on the Citrakūta hill that their father while marrying Kaikeyi, had promised her father that the kingdom would be entrusted to her son (Purābhrātaḥ pitā naḥ sa mātaram te samudvahami/mātāmahe samasrausidrājyasul kamanuttamam 2. 107. 3). The Pratimā Nātaka also corroborates it: Bharata tells the Devakulika that Kaikeyi might have demanded kingdom for him remembering the sulkadoşam' (3.11), At another place (3.19) Kaikeyi admits it before Bharata (Jada sukkaluddha naņu pucchidayvaa). According to the Satyopākhyāna, Kaikaya married his daughter to Dasaratha on a promisc from the latter that the crown of the kingdom would pass to the son of Kaikeyi (Bulcke, p. 278).

Page #80

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
51
that Rama along with Sita (2. 7) and the people of Ayodhya (2. 11) was eagerly awaiting the return of Bharata to grace the occasion of his coronation.
In the Ramopākhyāna (MB, 3.277.15) there is no indication to any such suspicion of Dasaratha in Bharata.
According to the Mahānāṭaka Bharata was not away from home at the time of Dasaratha's decision to crown Rāma (3. 5).
The PCR (29. 79. to 31.90), the PCS (32. 3, 9), the TSP (IV. p. 209) and the RPS (p. 97) are in agreement with the PCV.
The Uttarapuraṛa (78. 9) and the Mahapurana (70.18) state that Dasaratha announces Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa as the king and the heirapparent respectively and send them to Vārāņasī, their ancestral capital, to rule over there.
B. Rama's voluntary exile : વિજયશીલચંદ્રસૂરિ ગ્રંથ સંગ્રહ
According to the PCV (31.59), Bharata also was ounce the world along with his father. Kaikeyi gets aggrieved to learn that both her husband and her son would remain no more with her and thus she would die of their separation. Therefore, she thinks out a plan to prevent Bharata from renouncing the world. She demands of Dasaratha to fulfil her boon by making Bharata the king of Saketa. Dasaratha immediately grants her demand (31.71) and informs of the same to Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa. But Bharata is not ready to engross himself in the worldly life by accepting the crown. When Dasaratha and Rama persuade him, he frankly says that he would never transgress over the legitimate claim of Rama (Bharaheņa ya padibhanio naya tujjha vaikkamaṁ kāhaṁ-31.91). Being forced by circunmstances Rāma voluntarily exiles himself to remove the scruples of Bharata.
4.
No definite period and place of exile are mentioned. However Rāma tells Bharata that he may depart to any forest, or to the bank of any river or to any mountain, in a solitary place. He further informs his mother that he may go to the Vindhyas or to the Malaya mountain1 or in the vicinity of the sea (31.100). Rāma takes permission of his parents and starts on his journey. Sītā joins him without any opposition. Lakṣmaṇa accompanies them without making any rash and disparaging utterings against Dasaratha (31.100).
According to the VR, Kaikeyī is not at all disturbed by the news of Rama's coronation, because Rama is as dear to her as her own son, Bharata (2.8.13-19). But her maid-servant Manthara warns her of
1.
See also. 33.141.

Page #81

52
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
being degraded in future and instigates her to get the two boons fulfilled by Daśaratha, viz. coronation of Bharata and banishment of Rāma for fourteen years (2.9.20). Then Kaikeyi's heart gets aflame with jealousy. She falls into the trap and exploits Dasaratha's pullisanimity for her demands. Dasaratha gets distressed with these cruel demands. He implores Kaikeyi to give up her wilfulness and to allow him to coronate Rama (2.13.22). But Kaikeys does not swerve from her decision. Dasaratha feels ashamed of asking Rāma to go in exile. It is Kaikeyi who in the name of Dasaratha asks Rāma to go to Dandakāranya for fourteen years (2.18.35-37). Rāma readily accepts the command and starts for the journey. Lakşmaņa gets ferocious and passes scandalous remarks against Daśaratha (2.21.12). He tries to excite Rama to occupy the throne by force, but the latter pacifies Lakşmaņa by telling him that he will remain loyal to the orders of his father (2.22.15). Lakşmaņa also accompanies him to the forest. Sīta also wants to go along with her husband. First her request is not granted by Rāma. At this Sītā gets enraged and abuses Rāma (striyam puruşavigraham 2.30) Ultimately Rāma takes her along with him.
After their departure Daśaratha dies in extreme grief (2.64.78) of separation from his sons. On this occasion Bharata and Satrughna are not there.
In the TR a divine element has been introduced. Sarasvati, at the request of the gods, pollutes the mind of Manthara (2.12) and induces her to instigate Kaikeyi. At one place Bharadvāja tells Bharata that it was not the wickedness of Kaikeyī, but Sarasvati had led her astray (2.206).
In the TR Dasaratha is ready to anoint Bharata (2.31) but does not want Rama's exile. Kaikeyi does not yield.
In the PCV and the VR, Kausalya is unwilling to send her son to the forest, but in the TR she does not prevent Rāma. On the contrary she considers it to be an honour for a son to obey the orders of his parents (2.55-57).
In the TR Sīta is not referred to as abusing Ráma for not taking her along with him. Rāma permits her when he finds her determined to accompany him. Lakşmaņa does not oppose his father's decision. He tells Nişāda at one place that it is all due to misfortune (2.92).
The PCR agrees with the PCV. The PCS agrees with the PCV, but Kaikeyi is depicted to be jealous at the coronation of Rāma (22.6.7). Bharata labels Dasaratha as 'mahāmayandhu' (22.10.6) i. e. impudent. Lakşmaņa is ready to imprison Bharata for crowning Rama but Rāma himself pacifies Lakşmana. The period of exile is

Page #82

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĂMA-STORY
53 said to be of sixteen years (24.10.4). The TSP (IV.p.209) and the RPS (p.97) agree with the PCV. The Vasudevahindi follows the VR but the period of exile is mentioned to be of twelve years.
In the Rāmopakhyana the period of Rāma's exile is not referred to in Kaikeyi's demand (277.26), but at the time of Rāma's returning from Larikā fourteen years are mentioned (271.39).
The UP and the MP do not contain any reference to the exile of Rāma.
According to the PCV it is quite clear that Rāma takes a voluntary exile. Kaikeyi cannot be alleged as cruel and wicked. There are many non-Jaina works which have tried to exonerate Kaikeyi from being charged with rascality and impiety by putting forth various reasons.
The Gaudiya and the North-West versions of VR record that Kaikeyi was cursed by a Brahmin, therefore (sāpadoșamohitā) her mind became perverted and she trusted the words of Mantharā (Bulcke,p.324).
In the Pratimă Națaka it is said that Kaikeyi demanded coronation for Bharata for she wanted to keep up the promise of Dasaratha (mahārassa saccavaanam rakkhantie III. 18f) Further it is said that she exiled Rāma to make true the curse of a Maharși (Andhakamuni) and while asking for fourteen days' exile, unconsciously fourteen years' period was demanded by her. She says to Bharata that whatever she has done, is with the prior consent of Vaśiştha and Vamadeva (VI.151 ). In the Mahāvīracarita, Śūrpanakhā in the disguise of Manthara, goes to Mithilā on the occasion of the 'svayamvara' of Sītā and hands over Dasaratha a letter from Kaikeyi, really a forged letter, demanding (IV.14) crown for Bharata and exile for Rāma. The Anargharāghava tells the same story (IV.14-15; IV.66). According to the Balarāmāyana 6.5-11), Daśaratha and Kaikeyi had gone to meet Indra. Finding the opportunity, Māyāmaya, Surpanakhā and a maid-servant in the disguises of Dasaratha, Kaikeyi and Mantharā respectively go to Ayodhyā and banish Rāma. The Mahā Nātāka? tells us that the arrival of the new bride i. e. Sītā was found to be inauspicious (3.5f), hence Kaikeyi demanded exile of Rāma along with Sītă and Lakşmaņa and demanded throne for Bharata.
In the Adhyātmarāmāyaṇa (2.2.44-46) it is said that the gods and goddesses sent Sarasvati to Ayodhyā for perverting the minds of Manthară and Kaikeyi. The Ananda Rāmāyaṇa (8.2.56) and the
1. The recension of Madhusūdana Miśra.

Page #83

54
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Kāśmiri Rāmāyura (Bulcke-p.325) blame Sarasvati. In the Adhyä tma Ramāyana (2.1.33-28) it is also mentioned that a day before the coronation of Rāma, Narada goes to Ayodhyā and reminds Rāma of his promise to lighten the burden of the earth by killing Rāvana. Rāma then accepts his advice and promises to enter the forest rather than accept the kingdom. Further at the time of Kaikeyi's demand for his exile, he consoles his father saying that his exile is meant for the accomplishment of the wishes of the gods (devakāryaṁ cāpi bhavisyati 2.3.75). Thus Kaikeyi is saved from being blamed. The Ananda Rāmāyana (1.6), the Kašmiri Rāmāyaṇa and the interpolated portions of some versions of the Rāmacaritamanasa also contain this account (Bulcke, p.319). In the Rāmalingāmsta, Kaikeyi tells Rāma, after his return from Lankā, that she sent him in exile for killing Rāvaņa as she was induced by the Devendra (Sarga 12) to do so (Bulcke-p.207).
There are some works which make Pitamaha (Brahma) responsible for the exile of Rāma. According to the Ramopākhyāna (MB,3.269.9-10), Gandharví Dundubhi was commissioned by the Pitāmaha to be born as Mantharā for bringing about the destruction of Dasgarīva by exiling Rāma. The Gaudiya version of Padmapurāna (Pätālakhanda ch. 15) and the Ananda Rāmāyaṇa (1.2.3) mention the same thing.
Then there are certain works which tell us that the enmity of Mantharā with Rāma was responsible for that unhappy episode. The Agnipurā ņa (6.8) mentions that Rima had insulted Mantharā, hence the latter put him in trouble. According to the Telugu Rämāyana of Raiganātha (2.3) Rāma had fractured a leg of Manthară. The Seri Rāma and the Rāma Kiyena mentiou that Rāma had pierced an arrow into the hump of Manthară. According to the Satyopakhyāna the enmity between Mantharā and Rāma in their previous life became the cause of the exile of Rāma (Bulcke,p. 326).
According to the PCV, Rāma voluntarily prefers exile to crown. Kaikeyi does not demand his exile. There are some non-Jaina works .which agree with this point of the PCV.
The Dasaratha Jātaka and the Dasaratha Kathānam mention that Kaikeyi demanded only the coronation of Bharata. But Dašaratha being suspicious of the intrigues of the mother of Bharata sent Rāma and Lakşmaņa away from his territory for twelve years. According to the Anāmakam Jataka the king voluntarily retired to the forest to avoid battle with his maternal uncle.
According to the Tibetan Rāmāyana, Dasaratha was unable to decide whether Rāma or his younger brother should be made the

Page #84

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĂMA-STORY
55
crown-prince. Then Rāma voluntarily went away to some hermitage to perform penance in favour of his younger brother. According to the Seri Rāma when Rāma heard the news of Bharata's coronation, he voluntarily left for the forest along with Lakşmaņa and Sita. According to some other version of Seri Rāma when Kaikeyi tells Rāma about her demand for the coronation of Bharata, Rāma leaves for the forest to lead the life of a Rși (Bulcke, p. 321).
The Simhalese Rāmakathā states that Rama alone goes to the forest and lives there for seven years to escape the inauspicious effect (condition) of the Saturn of his life. According to the Western Account No. 1 Rama retires to the forest for 12 years to expiate the sin of killing Tădakā. According to the Account No. 12 Rāma departed to the forest for performing penance at the age of 15 along with Lakşmaņa and Sita. According to No. 14 Rāma was cursed by a Brahmin, hence he accepted the request of Kaikeyi and voluntarily left for the forest (Bulcke, p.321).
C. Kaikeyi's attempt to call back Rāma :
According to the PCV, Rāma along with Sitã and Lakşmaņa proceeds towards (avaradisarn vaccantā) the west from Ayodhyā, enters the Pāriyātra (Pariyatta) forest, crosses the river Gam bhīrā and sojourns there. Some warriors who had accompanied him of their own accord go back to Ayodhyā and report the news to Bharata. Thereupon Dasaratha crowns Bharata and he himself becomes a monk (32.7.27). Now Aparajitā and Sumitrā get distressed due to the separation from their husband and sons. Kaikeyi is unable to bear the sight of the grief of her co-wives. She sends Bharata and herself follows him to call back Rāma. After meeting Rāma, she admits her fault, weakness and lack of sagacity and begs his pardon. She further requests Rāma to occupy the throne, because Bharata is merely a novice (Rajjam kerehi niyaya, Bharaho viya sikkhanio te; Mahilā sahāvacavala, adihapehi sahāvamailla; Tam me khamahi puttaya, jam padikūlar kaya tujjha 32.50.51). But Rāma does not swerve from his promise like a true Kșatriya. He anoints Bharata there in the forest and resumes his journey towards the south. Bharata returns home and reigns over the land. He waits for the day when Rāma would return and he (Bharata) would be able to shake off the burden of the kingdom and become a monk (32.96). On the other side Rāma traversing the forest comes across some hermitages of the recluses (33 3). From there he proceeds to the Citrakūta hill and sojourns there for four months (33.11).

Page #85

56
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARİYAN
According to the VR Sumantra escorts Rāma, Sīta and Laks. maņa in a chariot (2.40.12). They reach the river Tamasā (2.46), leave behind the citizens who voluntarily accompanied them, cross the rivers Tamasā (2.46.28), Vedaśruti (2.49-50), Gomats and Syandika, reach Srangaberapura and cross the river Ganges in a boat with the help of Guha, a Nişāda chief leaving behind Sumantra (2.52). Rāma asks Lakşmaņa to go back to Ayodhyā but the latter does not. Then they reach Prayāga situated on the confluence of the Ganges and the Jamuna (2.54.5) and pay homage to Muni Bharadvāja. They further proceed to the Citrakūta hill (2.56.12). There they pay homage to Valmiki and sojourn in a hut (2.56.23).
Now Sumantra reaches Ayodhyā and reports himself to Dasaratha. Daśaratha desperately dies in sorrow of separation (2.64.77). Then Bharata is brought to Ayodhyā from his maternal uncle's home (2.70). He rebukes his mother Kaikeyi and performs the last rites of his dead father (2. 77). He rejects the offer of kingship and goes to the Citrakūta hill along with his mothers and the royal paraphernalia to bring back Rāma (2. 83. 6). He informs Rāma of the death of their father, blames Kaikeys and requests Rāma to return and accept the throne. Kaikeyi is quite silent. She does not tell anything. Rāma remains true to the words of his father (2. 105. 39). Jābāli and Vasistha try to persuade Rāma but in vain. On a request from Bharata, Rämna gives away his sandals to the former (2. 112. 12). Bharata then returns to Ayodhyā. He shifts his capital to Nandigrāma and awaits the safe return of Rāma (2. 115, 17).
The TR follows the VR with some alterations and innovations. At Ssangaberapura, Sumantra requests Rāma to return to Ayodhyā, because Dasaratha wanted (2. 95) him to do so. Finding him unwilling, Sumantra again requests him to send back Sita (2. 96). Rāma advises Sītā to return, but she does not. Then follows the arrival of a Tāpasa and his homage to Rāma (2. 110). Tulasīdāsa further refers to the appearance of gods in the disguise of the Kolas and Kirātas and the construction of two cottages by them for the sojourn of Rāma (2. 133). Bharata on advice from Vašiştha places before Rāma three alternatives viz. Rama and Lakşmaņa along with Sita should return to Ayodhyā and Bharata and Satrughna should go to the forest or Lakşmaņa and Satrughna should return to Ayodhyā and Bharata will go along with Rāma or Rāma along with Sītā should go to Ayodhyā and the remaining three brothers should go to the forest (2. 268-269). Janaka also comes there on that occasion (2.273). A divine element of bearing fruits by the trees is also referred to (2.278). Rāma is ready

Page #86

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
to do as Bharata and the elders want him to. At this stage the gods are perturbed for they suspect that Rama might return to Ayodhya and thus the mission might fail. Rāma perceives it. He asks Bharata to accept the crown. Bharata obediently accepts his brother's command (2. 306-7). Rāma then gives away his sandals to Bharata (2. 315-316). Kaikeyi1 is said to be repenting in her heart for her deeds when she sees Rāma on the Citrakuta hill. When the messenger of Janaka arrives there, Kaikeyi' again laments over her mistakes.
57
The PCR (31-33. 40) agrees with the PCV. Vasudevahindi refers to the efforts of Bharata and Kaikey to call back Rama. Further it follows the VR, but it does not mention Guha, Bharadvāja, Vālmīki and the Citrakuta hill. Here Bharata and his mother go to call back Rāma. Rāma consoles Bharata's mother but does not accept her request. He further advises Bharata not to censure his mother. The PCS follows the PCR. It also mentions that Bharata's desire for renouncing the world is again disapproved by Dasaratha. Bharata goes of his own accord to bring back Rama (24. 7. 9). Kaikeyī follows him but she does not speak anything to Rama. On the other hand the poet depicts her as a jealous character who goes there to assert that the former decision of Rama's exile should hold (nam bhanai Bharahu tuhum au vaṇavāsahim Rahau jāu jāu 24.9.8). The TSP follows the PCV. It states also that Dasaratha (IV. p. 213) sends his officers to bring back Rāma but Rāma does not return Then Kaikeyi takes permission of Dasaratha and goes along with the ministers and Bharata to call back Rāma (IV. p. 215). Dasaratha renounces the world after the returning' of Bharata. The RPS follows the PCR, but mentions the name of the river as Bāhu in place of Gambhīrā (p. 99).
According to the UP of Guṇabhadra, Rāma, once during the spring season, sojourns for some days at the Citrakuta garden along with his wife Sītā (68. 126). Puspadanta follows Gunabhadra (MP, 71, 11, 16). There is no exile of Rama.
In the Adhyatma Rāmāyaṇa, Kaikeyī is remorseful of her malicious (2. 9. 56) designs which were aroused in her heart by her own folly and illusion. She requests Rāma sojourning at the Citrakuta hill to pardon her (Krtam maya duṣṭadhiyā māyāmohitacetasa; Kṣmasva mama dauratmyam kṣamāsārā hi sadhavaḥ). Rāma consoles her by informing
1. Lakhi Siya sahita sarala dou bhai kutila rani pachitani agahāi. Avani Jamahi jacati Kaikei, mahi na bicu bidhi micu na deí-2. 252.
2. Garai galāni kutila Kaikeyī, kāhi kahai kehi dūṣan u dei-2. 273.

Page #87

58
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
that she was impelled by himself to do so for the accomplishment of the work of the gods and so she was not to be held guilty (2. 9. 63-64). The Ananda Rāmāyana follows it (1. 6. 112-115). The Torāve Rāmāyana (2.6) and the Rāmalingāmặta (12) follow the same.
According to the Dharmakhanda ch. 38 of Skandapurăņa and Tativasangraharāmāyaṇa (2. 11), Kaikeyi gets perturbed to see that the people of Ayodhyā are in grief on account of the parting away of Rama. Her heart melts and she goes to Rama and requests him to come back (Bulcke, p. 404, 2nd edition).
SECTION IV RAMA'S JOURNEY FROM CITRAKŪTA TO DANDAKĀRANYA
A. Main work during the Journey:
According to the PCV, Rama and Lakşmaņa along with Sīta, throughout their journey from the Citrakūța hill upto their entering into the foret of Dandaka, primarily assist the helpless rulers and rescue them from the atrocities of the oppressive kings and tribal chiefs. They bring them under the suzerainty of their brother Bharata and promise to marry several girls offered to them by those kings. It is only on the Vamsagiri that they pay homage to some monks and save them from a calamity.
In the VR and the TR, Rama along with Sitā and Lakşmaņa comes across various Rșis who greet Rama and inform him of the atrocities of the Raksasas. Rāma promises to annihilate the Rākşasas. There is no reference to the subjugation of any ruler by Rāma and Lakşmaņa. B. Route of their Journey :
According to the PCV they leave behind the Citrakūta hill and enter the Avantideśa. Further they cross the river Narmada and after traversing the Vindhya forest they reach the land where flows the river Tāpi. Proceeding further they arrive at the Vamsasthalagiri. From there they depart to the Dandakāraṇya where flows the rivers Krauñca. ravă and Karnaravā. They sojourn there.
According to the VR, they immediately enter the Dandakaranya leaving behind Citrakūta and the Aśrama of Atri. They proceed by
1. It has been already stated in the preceding section that they came across some
hermitages before reaching the Citrakūta hill. They stayed there for night only (33. 4). Further in the Dandaka forest they pay homage to two more monks (Sec.5).

Page #88

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
59
the side of the river Mandakini and reach Pañcapsara. From there they go to the bank of Godāvarī (Pañcavați) and sojourn there.
C. Account of Rāma's Journey :
A brief comparative account of the important incidents during their journey is given below.
According to the PCV, Ráma along with Lakşmana and Sītā enters the territory of Avanti (33.11), leaving behind the Citrakūta hill and reach Daśapura. Lakşmaņa subdues Siṁhodara, the king of Ujjeni (capital of Avanti) and rescues Vajrakarņa, the lord of Daśapura from the captivity of Simhodara, the overlord of Vajrakarna. Lakşmana accepts the girls offered to him in marriage by both the kings. From there they go to the town of Kūvavadda (33.148) and promise prince Kalyānamālal to get his father (Valikhilya) released from the clutches of Rudrabhūti, the Mleccha chief of the Kāgonanda tribe. Proceeding further they cross the river Narmadā and enter the Vindhya forest (34.34). Lakşmaņa subdues Rudrabhūti and rescues Vālikhilya (34.51). Further traversing the forest and the land of Tāpī they reach Aruņagrāma and go to the house of Kapila, an orthodox Brahmin, to quench the thirst of Sitā. Unfortunately being insulted by that orthodox Brahmin (35.9) they repair to the forest. A Yakşa, Potana by name, greets them and conjures up a divine colony called Ramapuri (35.26) for their sojourn. Unknowingly Kapila approaches them with the hope of gaining some wealth. He is welcomed and offered great wealth by Rāma. Kapila then becomes a layman of the Jaina faith. Yaksa Potana presents Rāma, Lakşmaņa and Sītă with a necklace, a pair of earring (cūņāmaņi), a braid-jewel and a lute when they depart from Rāmapuri (36.4-6). In due course they reach Vijayapura. Lakşmaņa gives his consent to marry Vanamāla, the daughter of Mahīdhara, king of that town (36.35). Further on getting the news of the attack of Ativīrya, the ruler of Nandyāvartapura, on their brother Bharata, they go to the battle-field and subdue Ativīrya by means of a stratagem. Ativīrya accepts the suzerainty of Bharata (37.64-65). Vijayaratha, the son of Ativīrya engages his sister Ratimālā to Lakşmaņa and marries Vijayasundarī to Bharata (38.1,8). Resuning his journey Rama along with Sītā and Lakşmaņa reaches Kșemañjali. pura. Lakşmana wins the hand of Jitapadmā, the princess of that place by withstanding a severe test proposed by her father, king Satrudamana (38.44). Proceeding further they ward off the calamity (uvasagga) caused by some celestial being to disturb the two monks,
1. Really a princess in the disguise of a prince (34.23).

Page #89

60
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Deśabhūsaņa and Kulabhūşaņa meditating at the Varnsagiri. Another celestial being Garudādhipati appears there and makes a promise to assist Rāma and Lakşmaņa in difficulty (39.131). Suraprabha, the king of Vamsasthalapura extends a hearty ovation to them and provides them with all the facilities. He gets many Jina shrines constructed on that hill on the advice of Rāma. The hill comes to be known as Rāmagiri (40.16). Rāma continues his journey and enters the Daņpakāraṇya forest (41.1) which is said to be situated on the other side of the river Karṇaravā (Kannaravā 40.13).
According to the VR, many Tāpasas inform Rāma sojourning on the Citrakuta hill, of the dreadful atrocities being perpetrated on them by the Rākşasas under the leadership of Khara (2.116.11) in the Janasthāna. They advise Rāma to go to some safe place and themselves migrate to the Aśrama of muni Aśva (2.116.20). The place being deserted by the Tapasas was not worth living; then the haunting memory of Bharata's sweet visit associated with that place tormented him time and again, and the place had become very untidy too, so Rāma leaves (2.117.2.4) that place and goes to the Aśrama of Atri and Anasūyā. Atri greets Rāma as a worthy prince while Anasuyā greets Sita and presents' her with clothes ornaments, unguents, anointments and garlands (2.118.18). From there they enter the forest of Dandaka (3. 1. 1). Staying there for a day in the Aśrama of some Rșis they proceed further. On the way they encounter Virādha, a fierce Raksasa (3.2) who snatches away Sitā. They overpower him and bury him alive (2.4) according to his wishes, Then they arrive at the aśrama of muni Sarabharga as directed by Virādha (3. 4. 20). In course of their further journey they meet many sages (munisarighāḥ) and listen to their complaints. They promise to annihilate the Raksasas and rescue the sages from oppression. Among these various types of Tāpasas there are the Vālakhilyas2 who have profuse hair grown on their bodies. Proceeding further by the side of the river Mandākini and after traversing many rivers and by-passing many hills they reach the aśrama of Sutīkşņa and pay respects to him (3. 7. 1) They resume their journey to visit various other aśramas. On the way Sītā mildly protests against the decision of Rāma to put an end to the Raksasas, because she tells him that penance and bow cannot go
1. Inari divyan varan malyam vastramabharaṇāni ca Arigarăgam ca Vaidehi
mahārhamanulepanam'. 2. The Tilaka commentary calls them 'prajāpaternakhalomajih' or 'ye vātāste
Valikhilyāh (3. 6. 2), In the PCV there is the account of rescuing Valikhilya, the father of Kalyānamālā of Küvavadda by Räma.

Page #90

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
61
together (3. 9. 27). Rāma insists on performing his righteous duty by destroying the wicked. Proceeding further they reach Pañcāpsara Tațāka (3. 11. 11), stay there for a very long period of time and visit again muni Sutiksna. From there they go to the aśrama of the brother of Agastya and then to that of muni Agastya. They pay obeisance to the great sage while the sage expresses his regards for them and presents them with a divine Vaisnava bow, an arrow, a quiver and a sword (3. 12. 32-36). Being directed by the sage, they proceed towards Pañcavați (3. 13. 13), situated beside the river Godāvari (3. 13 18), for their final resort.
The TR follows the VR, but in it Rama is deified (8. 4). He departs from the Citrakūta hill with the fear that he will be disturbed and often frequented by the people as they had known the reality that Rāma was an incarnation of Visņu (3. 3)'. During his journey all the munis pay obeisance to Rāma, taking him as God personified. Sita is also deified. She is mentioned as 'Sri'? (Lakşmi 3. 7). There is no reference to the snatching away of Sita by Virādha. Rāma manifests his 'caturbhuja-rūpa' and Sutīkşņa eulogises Rāma as God-incarnate. There is no reference to the Pañcāpsarataţāka. Muni Agastya addresses Rāma as Hari and worships him (3. 12). From there Rama goes to Pañcavati.
The PCR agrees with the PCV. But it mentions Kūvavadda as Kūvara, Potana as Patana (Yakşādhipati) and names the place where the colony was conjured up by the Yaksa as Vanasthalı (35. 54). Sitä is said to have been left behind with an Āryă (nun) when Rāma proceeded to subjugate Ativīrya (37. 95). The PCS deviates from the account of the PCV and the PCR. It mentions that Rudrabhūti on being enamoured of Sītā commissions his warriors to snatch her away (27. 3. 9),' but he soon falls at the feet of Rāma and Lakşmana as soon as he learns that they are Baladeva and Vāsudeva respectively (27. 8. 9). Vijayapura is mentioned as Jivantapura (29. 10) while the name of the king is Anantavīrya (30. 1. 2), It does not refer to Ratimālā and Vijayasundarī. The river Godavari (Golāņai) is referred
1. In the interpolated chapter 5.45 after 7.37 of the VR, Rāma is called Padmana
bha i. e. Vişnu. 2. She is also called the mother of world, jagadambīby Arigada when he goes to
Lankā to persuade Kāvana (TR, 6. 29. 3). In the VR, in an interpolated
chapter Sita is addressed as Lakşmi (3. 2. and 5. 53 after 7. 37). 3. In the VR Virādha snatches away Sītā, but he surrenders to Rāma as soon as
he remembers the prophecy made by Vaisravana that he will attain Syarga on being killed by Rāma (3. 4. 18).

Page #91

62
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYA
to have fallen on their way (31. 3. 2). It refers to a heap of bones of those candidates who tried to win the hand of Jitapadma, but on being unsuccessful, they were killed by Aridamana=Satrudamana (tahem kāraņemjo jo marai johu, so ghippai tar haddairi ehu 31. 5. 8). The RPS follows the PCR, but it does not speak of the offering of girls by king Siṁhodara and Vajrakarņa to Laksmana (p. 104). Kūvavadda is mentioned as Nalakacchapura. Vālikhilya is said to have afterwards appointed Rudrabhuti as his minister (p. 106) on the advice of Rāma. The land of Tapi is called Khānadeśa. According to the PCV, the sons of Mahidhara accompany Rāma to assist him in subjugating Ativīrya (37. 32), but the RPS tells us that Mahīdhara (Pșthvidhara) also goes along with Rāma (p. 109). The TSP follows the PCV, but it mentions Kuvavadda as Kübararpura (iv, p. 222). Here Kalyāṇamala is said to have been offered in marriage to Laksmana (IV. p. 223). Rudrabhūti is called Rudradeva, a Kāka and the lord of the Kirātas (p. 224). He tries to snatch a way Sita but he is unable to withstand the fight given by Lakşmaņa. It clearly mentions that the river Tapi is crossed by Rama (IV. 224). The Yakṣa lord is called Gokarņa (IV. p. 225).
The Vasudevahindi does not refer to these various incidents. It says that after leaving Bharata behind, Rāma goes towards the south, visits various Tāpasas on the way and reaches Vijanasthāna.
The Uttarapurāna and the Mahāpurāna do not contain any such. accounts.
The Dasaratha Jataka, the Dasaratha Kathānam and the Anamakam Jataka also do not refer to these incidents.
The following accounts of the Buddhacarita, Raghuvaṁsa and the Āścaryacūdāmaņi have something common with the attack of Anantavirya on Bharata and Rama's counter attack as found in the PCV. In the Buddhacarita it is mentioned that Rama came from 'tapovana' to defend his country when it was devastated by the Anāryas (Tathā mahim viprakstāmanāryaistapovanādetya rarakṣa Rāmaḥ 9.69). In the Tibetan Rāmāyana it is said that Rama took voluntary exile in favour of his younger brother's coronation and joined some hermitage. The reference in the Buddhacarita to the 'tapovana' perhaps speaks of this type of exile of Rāma. The Raghuvamśa' mentions that Bharata was immediately called
1.
The TR refers to the heap of bones of the munis killed by the Rūkgasas (asthi samūha dekhi Raghurāyā 3. 9). See Adh. Rām, 3. 2. 19 (patitānyanekāni siransi asthi bhūtāni. The VR (2.67) merely describes the drawbacks of a kingless state and compares it with a wild forest which is full of danger.

Page #92

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
63
back from his maternal uncle after the exile of Rāma, for the kingdom without a king was likely to slip into the hands of enemies (12. 11). In the Ascarya Cūdāmaninataka of Saktibhadra when Rama and Lakşmana are away for hunting the 'Kanaka mțga' Rāvana and his charioteer in the disguise of Rāma and Lakşmaņa approach Sītā and ask her to ride the chariot as they want to go to assist Bharata whose territory is in danger.
SECTION V ABDUCTION OF SITĀ.
A. Meeting a Vulture (Jațāyu):
According to the PCV, while sojourning in the Dandakāranya on the bank of the river Karnaravā, Rama, Sīta and Lakşmaņa reverentially receive two monks, Trigupti and Sugupta (Tiguttināmo muni 41.18; Suguttamuni 41.66). On that occasion a diseased vulture (giddha 41.14, Jadagi 41.56, Jadáu 41.75) falls down there. It is then entrusted by the monks to Sítă for its nourishment and care (41.70). From there Rama proceeds further into the interior of the forest and stays near the river Kroñc aravā! (Kuñcaravā 42.15) along with Sita, Lakşmaņa and the vulture (42.35).
According to the VR, Rāma while proceeding to the Pañcavați meets Jațāyu on the way (3.14.1). Jatayu introduces himself as the son of Aruņa and Syeni (3.14.32-33) and the brother of Sampati as well as a friend of Dasaratha (3.14.2). He offers his help to protect Sītā. Rama takes Jatayu along with him to the Pañcavați (3.14.36).
The TR (3.13) follows the VR and introduces a sermon which is delivered by Rāma to Lakşmana on iśvara and Jīva (8.14-16). In the PCV also there is a sermon delivered by the munis to the vulture on the ethics and adoration of the religion (41.66-70). B. Death of Sambuka and Candranakhā's displeasure:
Once Lakşmaņa proceeds to the place wherefrom comes fragrant smell. There he sees a divine sword called "Suryahāsa.' He lifts it up and sportively cuts of the bamboo-thicket growing on the bank of the river Kroñcaravā, to examine the power of that sword. No sooner does he strike at the thicket than a severed human head falls out of
1. The VR (3.69.5) men tions Kroñcāranya where Rāma and Lakşmana reach
in search of Sita. It is said that they reached there after moving first to the West of Pancavati and then to the south (See Sec. 5E).

Page #93

64
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
it (43.27). Lakşmaņa immediately returns and reports the matter to Rāma. When Candranakhá comes there, she finds her son, Sambūka killed who was performing penance in that thicket to obtain that divine sword (3.29). Bereaved Candranakha sets out in search of the culprit and as soon as she catches sight of those handsome princes, she forgets her wrath on account of being enamoured of them. She transforms herself into a young girl and starts weeping. Sītā consoles her. Candranakhā introduces herself as a destitute girl and requests Rama to marry her. At this both the brothers are stunned. Finding no reply from them, Candranakha gets disappointed and retraces to her home (43 47).
In the VR Sambūka has no relation to Candranakha (Śūrpaņakhā). The episode of the death of Sambūka is narrated in the Uttarakānda (73-76). Here Sambuka is a Śūdra who performs penances to attain heaven (7.76.2). His penance against the religious code is considered to be the cause of the untimely death of the son of a Brahmin (7.74.28). Hence Rāma searches out Sambuka who was performing penances hanging from a tree with his head downwards near a pond situated in the northern side of the Saivāla hill (south of the Vindhyas) and severs his head with a sword (7.75.9; 7.76.4). The Brahmin boy is automatically restored to life.
According to the VR Sūrpanakhā happens to be at Pañcavați casually (yadrcchayā 3.17.5). She in her charming disguise requests Rama and then Lakşmaņa to marry her. When neither of them agrees to her proposal she threatens to devour Sitā. At Rāma's beacon Lakşmaņa cuts off her ears and nose (3.18.21). Disfigured Sørpanakhā crying bitterly goes away from there in wrath.
The TR does not give any account of Sambūka. Sürpanakhā discloses her real ferocious form when Lakşmaņa insults her. At this Sītā gets frightened Rāma makes a sign to Lakşmaņa to cut her nose and ears (3. 17). The interpolated Lavakusakānda of the TR follows the VR as regards the slaying of Sambūka by Rāma.
As regards the episodes of meeting Jațāyu, murder of Sarbūka and displeasure of Candranakhā, the PCR agrees with the PCV. The
TSP agrees with the PCV but with some alterations. It does not mention the river Karṇaravā. Šambaka is referred to be hanging with his head down and his legs tied to a banyan tree. Candranakhā introduces herself to Rāma as a princess from Avanti and the widow of a Khecara (IV. p. 241). The Vasudevahindi does not refer to the
1. The Tilaka sika (7.75.13).

Page #94

65
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY meeting of Jațāyu at this place and the murder of Sambūka is altogether absent. Rāma reaches Vijanasthāna. There Sītā abuses Sürpapakhā for her misconduct. At this sūrpanakha assumes a dreadful form in wrath and frightens Sitā. Ramal himself disfigures her.2 Mahābhārata of Săralādāsa and Vicitrarāmāyana of Madhavadasa (Oriya) mention the killing of the son of Surpanakha at the hands of Lakşmana (Bulcke p. 619).
The Uttarapurāna and the Mahā pur āna do not contain these episodes.
The episode of the killing of the son of Śūrpanakha by Lakşmaņa finds place in many non-Jaina works with certain alterations.
In the Ananda Rāmāyana the name of the son of Surpanakhā is Śămba. He performs penances in a jungle. Brahmā puts there a divine sword for him. It is not noticed by him. Lakşmaņa takes it away and cuts off the trees and creepers. Samba is also killed (vřksagulme hataḥ Sambaḥ 1. 7. 41-43). His mother sees Rāma and Lakşmana and proceeds to kill them. Then it follows the VR. Bhāvārtharāmāyaṇa (3. 8.) contains a similar story. (Bulcke. p. 619).
In the Kanarese Torāve Rāmāyana, Sambūka, the son Śūrpanakhā performs penance for attaining Indra-pada. During the course of his penance, he gets covered with an anthill. Indra and Nárada disguise themselves as hunters and invite Lakşmaņa for hunting. Indra conjures up a boar running towards the hill. Laksmana shots at the boar but Sambūka gets killed (Aran. 3. Vide-Bulcke p. 411) in the Telugu Dvipada Rāmāyana his name is Jambumāli. He prepares to obtain a divine sword for killing Rāvana who had killed the former's father, Lakşmana happens to see that sword and kills Jambukumāra who was performing penance in a bamboo thicket (Aran. 4-5 ; Bulckep. 411).
In a south Indian story the son of Śūrpanakhā goes to an Aśrama of some Tapasvin to eat fruits. The Tapasvin curses him to become a tree. Further being requested by Sūrpanakha, the Tapasvin moderates his curse saying that her son will attain emancipation when Rāma (Vişņu) cut one of the branches of that tree (Bulcke p.412).
In the Serī Rāma, Dersāsimha, the son of Surapandakı performs penances to obtain a divine sword for taking revenge upon Ravana who had killed the former's father. Lakşmana kills him with that sword. The Seratakānda also refers to the death of the son of Surapa ndaki being
1. According to the Padma purāna (Uttar. 269) Rāma cuts off the nose and the
cars of Sūrpanakhā. 2. She is called Suppanahi.

Page #95

66
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
pierced by an arrow. In the Rāmakiyena, Kumbhakaśa is the son of Sūrpanakhā (Sammanakkha). A battle between Kumbhakaśa and Lakşmaņa takes place for the latter had taken away the former's sword. That sword was placed by Brahmă by the side of Kumbhakaśa who was performing penaces on the bank of Godavari to obtain the same (Bulcke p.412).
According to the Brahmacakra Lakşmaņa kills two daughters of Sūrpanakha who were guarding the borders of Larkā (Bulcke 2.p.422). C. Battle with Kharadașaņa:
According to the PCV, disappointed Śūrpanakhā, the sister of Rāvana, runs away to Pātālaukārapura in wrath. She reports to her husband Kharadūşaņa the murder of their son and makes a false allegation that the murderer attempted to molest her. Kharadūșaņa sends an envoy to Rāvana and he himself with a contingent of 14000 soldiers attacks Rāma and Lakşmaņa (44.1-14). Lakşmaņa asks Rāma to guard Sītā and to come to his help if he makes a lion's roar (sīhanāyaṁ). He proceeds to face the enemy (44.23). In the meanwhile Rāvaņa arrives there and gets en amoured of the beauty of Sīta (44.30). He deceives Rāma by making a lion's roar resembling the voice of Lakşmaņa. Rāma immediately runs to the help of Lakşmaņa but the latter gets surprised to find his brother there. He sends Rama back to protect Sita (44.50). Laksmana by chance gains there an ally in Vidyadhara Virādhita (45.1), the son of Candrodara whose capital Fatālankārapura was usurped by Kharadūşaņa (3.10-23). Lakşmaņa kills Kharadūṣaṇa while Virādhita slays all the soldiers of Kharadūşaņa.
According to the VR, Śūrpanakhā goes to Janasthāna (3.18.25) and reports to her brother Khara (Dūşana and Rāvaņa are also 3.17.22 her brothers and the name of her husband is Vidyujjihva 7.12.2) the disfiguring of her form by Rama and Lakşmaņa for the sake of Vaidehi (Sīta). She further expresses her desire to devour the blood of all the three persons (3.19.20). Khara Sends fourteen Rakşasas to kill the culprits but they are slain by Rama (3.20, 21). Śūrpanakha again approaches Khara and abuses him. Khara accompanied by an army of 14000 Rākşasas under the leadership of Duşaņa, attacks Rāma (3,22). On that occasion Lakşmaņa being instructed by Rāma, takes away Sītā along with him in a near-by cave (3.24.15). Rāma fights with them and alonel kills all the Raksasas as well as
1. There is no reference in the VR to any help of Viradhita as found in the
PCV. In the VR Viradha is a Rākşasa who snatches away Sita and finally

Page #96

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
67
Dūşaņa, Triệiras and Khara (3.26-30.27). Lakşmaņa and Sită come back to Rāma.
Räksasa Akampana? reports to Rāvana the death of Khara and others. He further praising the beauty of Sītā asks Rāvaņa to kidnap her so that Rāma might die in separation from her (3.31.31). Ravana seeks help from Mārica but the latter advises him not to fight with Rama and not to kidnap Sita. Sūrpanakhā abuses and excites Rāvana and makes him a false report that she went there to bring Sītā, the peerless beauty, for him but Lakşmaņa disfigured her (3.34.21). She further instigates him to kidnap Sīta. Rāvana reapproaches Mārīca and asks him to help in removing away Sítā by becoming a golden deer. First Mārīca prevents Rāvana but being threatened by the latter he accedes to his plan. On seeing the golden deer Sītā asks Rāma to bring it for her. Rāma leaves behind Lakşmaņa and chases the deer (3.35-43). When the deer is pierced with the arrow of Rama, it makes a noise of alarm 'Hā Sīte hā Lakşmaņa.' Hearing it Sita sends away Lakşmaņa to help her husband (3.44-45).
The TR follows the VR but it does not refer to any desire of Surpanakhā to devour the blood of the culprits and the first battle of 14 Rākşasas. Here Khara is mentioned to have first demanded Sītā to avoid the slaying of Rāma in the battle. When Rāma declines to give away Sítā, a battle takes place (3.19). Rāma transforms the Raksasas into Rāmas with the power of his ‘māya'.? The Rakşasas bring their own end (3. 20). It does not refer to the message of Akampana. When Sürpapakha3 reports the beauty of Sītā and the assassination of Khara and Dūşaņa, Rāvana thinks that Rāma is not an ordinary person, but he is an incarnation of God. So he plans to be killed at the hands of the god by kidnapping Sītā4 (T6 maiṁ jai
1.
.
he is buried alive (See Sec. 4 C). In the Adhyātma Rāmāyana Viradha is mentioned to be a Vidyadhara (3.2.38) while in the VR he is Gandharva (3.4.16). Akampana's message to Rāvana is not found in the Gaudiya and the NW versions of Rāmāyaṇa (Bulcke p. 329). The Ramopākhyāna (MB. 3.277) and the Bhattikāvya (Ch.5) also do not mention it. The Raghuvansa mentions that each Rākşasa was seeing a number of
Rāmas (12.45). 3. The Raghuvansa does not mention Akampana (12.51). Here also sūrpanakha
reports to Rāvana. 4. According to the VR as stated above Sürpanakhā instigates Rāvana to
kidnap Sitā. But the interpolated chapters No. 2, 3 and 4 after 7, 37 (Uttarakānda) state that Rāvana wanted to attain the abode of Hari or Bhagavān or Vişnu by being killed at the hands of Rāma, the incarnate God, hence he kidnapped Sita.

Page #97

68
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
bairu hathi karaom/prabhu sara prāna tajern bhava taraum S. 23.). Ravana requests Mārīca once only and Mārīca also thinks it auspicious to be killed by Rāma=Hari (3. 26). Further at the advice of Rāma, Sítā enters into the fire and manifests a shadow Sīta when Laksmana is away from there to collect some bulbs and fruits for their food (Prabhu pada dhari hiyam anala samānī, nija pratibimba rākhi taham Sítā 3. 23). Marica at the time of his death is said to have been granted a good state of existence by Rāma (muni durlabha gati dinni, nija Pada dinha 3. 27).
The PCR agrees with the PCV but additionally mentions that Ravana uttered 'Rama, Rama' in his lion's roar (44. 78). The PCS refers to Khara and Düşaņa (37. 2. 10) as two persons and husbands of Candranakhā. She is mentioned to have assumed her hideous form (37. 1) and Lakşmana is said to have raised the Sürahasa sword against her (37.2). Khara marched to punish the culprits while Düşana sent a message to Rāvana (37. 1. 2). It (37. 14-15) also mentions Trisiras of the VR. Rāvana was in advance tempted by the beauty of Sitā which was communicated to him through the message of Dūşaņa (38. 1). The RPS agrees with the PCV. According to the TSP, Candranakhā informs Rāvana (IV. p. 243) and requests him to help Kharadasaņa, She also excites him referring to the beauty of Sītā. The latter is said to have compelled Rāma to go to the help of Lakşmaņa. Triširas is also mentioned (IV. p. 246).
The Vasudevahindi agrees with the VR. But in it Khara and Dūşana are sons of Surpanakhā (Suppana). It does net mention the sending of the 14 Rākşasas or the army of 14000 soldiers or the message of Akampana. Mārīca is requested by Ravana? once only.
The Uttara purāna and the Mahāpurāna do not contain these episodes. They relate the abduction of Sītā as follows. Nārada instigates Rāvana to kidnap the beautiful Sítā. Rāvaņa decides to do so and plans to kill Rama and Lakşmaņa whose rising glory was becoming unbearable to him (UP. 68. 91-114; MP. 71. 1-3). It is also said that Rāvana kidnapped Sītā for he was not invited by Janaka on the occasion of her marriage with Rāma. The MP states that Rāvana could not tolerate the wedding of Sītā to Rāma because Janaka and Dasaratha were his (Rāvana's) vassals (kirkarau) and Sita was previously promised to him (Rāvana) by Janaka (74. 12).
In the UP the plan adopted by Rāvana for kidnapping Sitā differs from that of the PCV but it agrees with the VR with some additions,
1. Rāvana is called Rāmana.

Page #98

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
69 Mārīca though first unwilling to help, later on advises Ravana to send Śūrpanakhā and ascertain whether Sītā has any affection for him. Śūrpanakhā goes to the Citrakūța garden where Rama and Sita are sojourning. She in the disguise of an old lady-gardener enquires from Sitā and comes back with a report that Sita is very faithful to her husband and cannot be seduced at all (68. 115-182). Considering the report a lie, Rāvana himself driving in his Puşpaka-vimāna goes there along with Mārīca. The latter transforms himself into a golden deer and dupes Rāma. Lakşmana is not there at that time (68. 199). The MP also agrees with this account. In it Śūrpanakhā is called Candanahi. She goes there in the disguise of a Kañcuki and pretends herself to be mother of (71. 19) the gardener.
D. Forcible removal of Sitā by Rāvaņa to Laikā:
According to the PCV when Sītā is left alone with Jațayu, Ravana removes her by force. He overpowers the vulture and flees away taking her in his Puşpaka-vimāna (44. 39-42). Khecara Ratnajațin obstructs the passage of Rāvana and tries to rescue Sīta, but Rāvana nullifies the power of the Vidyās of that Khecara as a result of which the latter falls down on the Kambudvipa (45. 32). On the way Rāvana implores Sītā to become his wife but she rebukes him (46. 1-10). He reaches Lankā, puts Sità in the Devaramana Park and himself goes to his palace (46. 15). He deputes Mandodars to persuade Sītā. Mandodarī requests Ravaņa to use force but the latter tells her of his vow of not using force on any unwilling woman. Mandodarī fails to persuade Sitā. Then Rāvana himself tries to seduce Sítā first by putting allurements before her and then by conjuring dreadful and monstrous beasts and hobgoblins. But Sitā is firm. Vibhīşana is unable to see her plight. He admonishes Rāvanā. But the latter is adamant, and arranges for Sītā's abode under the Asoka grove of Padma-udyāna. He sends his maid-servants to seduce Sita but all in vain.
According to the VR, when Sīta is left alone, Rāvaņa approaches her in the disguise of a Parivrājaka (3.46,2) and talks a while with her. He asks her to become his wife. She condemns her for his malicious intentions. He resumes his real form and forcibly takes her away in his chariot (3.49.16). He cuts off the limbs of the intervening Jayāyu (3.51.42). During his flight Sītā drops her upper garment and some ornaments when she observes five monkeys sitting on a hill (3.54.2).
1. He took his vow when he paid homage to Muni Anantavirya (14. 153).

Page #99

70
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Ravana passes over Pampa and arrives at Lanka1. He first puts her in his harem (3.54.13), not in any park. Here Rāvana is said to have commissioned eight Rakṣasas to work as spies in the Janasthana and to kill Rama and Lakṣmana (3.54.18-29). He implores Sītā to become his wife. He shows her the wealth and the splendour of Lanka (3.35). Sītā rebukes him. Rāvana threatens to kill her in a year if she does not yield to him. He appoints the Rākṣasīs having hateful figures to take her to Aśokavātikā and to guard her there (3.56). There is no reference to Mandodari's advice to use force on Sītā. At one place before the expulsion of Vibhīṣaṇa from Lanka, Mahāpārsva requests Ravana to use force2 on Sītā but Rāvaņa declines to do so on account of the fear of a curse of Brahma that he (Ravana) will die if he uses force on any unwilling woman (6.13). Ravana was cursed to that effect when he had once molested Puñjikasthala. There is no mention. of Ravana's request to Mandodari to persuade Sītā to yield to him. In the Sundarakanda Hanumat is said to have secretly observed that Rāvana along with the ladies of his harem went to Sītā and tried to seduce her by putting various allurements before her. Sita bitterly condemns him (5.18,20); that various Rākṣasīs tried to frighten Sītā with their ugly and hideous forms (5.24) but Sītā did not yield even at the risk of her life (5.25.3). It does not refer directly to the intervention of Vibhīṣaṇa, but Sītā is said to have told Hanumat that once Kala, the daughter of Vibhiṣaṇa informed her that Vibhiṣaņa requested Rāvani to release her (Sita) but Ravana did not pay any heed to it (5.37. 9-11).
According to the TR Ravana approaches Sitä in the disguise of a yati (Jati ken veṣa 3.28). While taking her away by force, Ravana in his heart happily bows to her feet (mana mahu carana vandi sukha mānā). The account of the Jatayu agrees with VR. On the way Sitä drops her clothes on a hill where some monkeys were sitting. Sītā was taken to the Aśoka-vana of Lanka (3.29). It does not mention the
1.
There is no reference to the intervention of Ratnajațin of Kambudvipa to rescue Sită from Rāvaṇa. But Sūpārsva, the son of Sampati (and nephew of Jatayu) is said to have let Ravana pass freely when the former was in search of food on the sea-shore-side of the Mahendragiri. Supărśva first thought of killing them for his food but he gave way to them when Ravana implored for the same (4.59.13-18). The Kambudvipa of the PCV and Kabandha of the VR has some similarity in name. (See Sec. 5E).
2. Also see 5.20.6 (evam caivamakāmaṁ tvam na ca sprakṣyämi Maithili). 3. The PCV does not refer to any such secret observation by Hanumat.
4. In the interpolated section of the VR (5.54. after 7.37) it is stated that Ravana guarded Sita as his mother.

Page #100

71
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
commissioning of any Rākṣasa by Ravana to kill Rama and Lakṣmaṇa or Mahāpārsva's intervention to help Sītā. In other respects it (5.9-11) agrees with the VR.
The PCR and the PCS agree with the accounts of the PCV. The RPS mentions that the motherly love gushed forth from the heart of Mandodari when she was trying to persuade Sītā to yield to Ravana. Sītā also felt in her heart as if she was the daughter of Mandodari. The latter then promised to safeguard the chastity of the former (Here she is the abandoned daughter of Ravana and Mandodari). In other details the RPS agrees with the PCV. The TSP agreeing with the PCV additionally mentions Trijatā1 (IV. p. 245) attending upon Sitā.
According to the Vasudevahindi which follows the VR, Rāvana approaches Sītā in the disguise of a Tapasa. Jat yu is referred to as a Vidyadhara. It tells us in short that Ravana crossed the Kişkindhi hill and went to Lanka.
According to the UP when Rama goes away to hunt the golden deer, Rāvana in the disguise of Rāma asks Sītā to go to her palace in a palanquin (really the Puspaka-vimāna) telling her that the deer had already been sent to the palace. Thus by deception he removes her to Laikā. (There is no mention of Jatayu in the UP). When he reveals his real form, Sītā gets frightened. He does not dare touch her with the fear of being deprived of his 'gaganagāminī vidyā' (68.213). He puts her under the guard of some Rākṣasīs. They try to allure her but in vain. When many inauspicious omens are observed, ministers persuade Rāvana to release Sită but he does not (68.235). The Mahā purăṇa agrees with the UP. In both these works Vibhīṣaṇa's efforts to get Sītā released have not been referred to.
Further the UP mentions Ravana persuading Sītā to accept him as her husband. He goes to her along with the ladies of his harem and appoints Mañjarikā (Mandodari in the PCV) for the same (68. 321). Rāvana himself tries with various temptations. At his failure he gets furious but Mandodari" prevents him from using force (68.340). There is a new element which differs both from the PCV and the VR. The UP mentions that Mandodari and Sita both feel,
1. In the VR Trijatā interprets her own dream to Sita, consoles her and saves her from committing suicide (5.27-28). The PGS also mentions at another place that Trijață guarded Sita and she had seen a dream (50.8).
2. In the VR Dhanyamālini (5.22.30) does the same thing but at another. place Hanumat tells Rama that Mandodari (5.58.77) prevented Rāvana from using force.

Page #101

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
as if they are mother and daughter. Mandodarī goes away having utmost sympathy for Sītā and advising her not to yield to Ravana in any case (68.348-363). The MP follows the UP. It mentions additionally that Mandodars recognises Sitā as her abandoned daughter by the marks on her feet (olakhiya payajuyalañch anena 73.22.12).
Like the PCV there are some works which do not refer to the device of the golden deer."
In the Karmapurana (Utta. 37.113, 114), Sita is said to have been kidnapped by Rāvana when she was strolling alone in the forest (gļhitvā māyayā veşar carantīm vijane vane).
In the Anamakam Jataka when the king goes away to collect fruits, a cruel Nāga assuming the form of a Rși abducts the former's queen.
According to the Siṁhalese Rāmakathā, Sītā is abducted from the capital in the absence of Rāma. The Rāmacarita of Anāma mentions that Daśanana attacks the capital of Daśaratha and after gaining victory over it, he takes away Sítā along with him (Bulcke p. 340).
The Western Accounts No. 6, 9, 11 & 15 do not mention the golden deer. According to the Account No. 15 a servant of Rāvana assuming the form of a beggar kidnaps Sītā for his master when Rāma is out to subdue the revolting vassals (Bulcke p. 341).
E. Rama's Sojourn at Pätālankārapura :
According to the PCV Rāma on being cautioned by Lakşmaņa immediately goes back but does not find Sīta there (44.51). He while making a useless search for Sită sees the vulture crying and breathing his last. He loses all hopes. (44.66). In the meanwhile Lakşmaņa returns and learns about the sad incident. He introduces Virādhita to Rāma. Virādhita commissions his soldiers to search for Sītā but all in vain (45.17-27). Virādhita then takes Rāma and Lakşmaņa to Pātā. laňkārapura for their safety. They defeat there Sunda who then along with his mother Candranakhã flees away to Lanka (45.44).
According to the VR Rāma meets his brother Lakşmaņa in the way after having killed the deer (Mārīca). At this unexpected meeting
1. C.v. Vaidya is of the opinion that the episode of the golden deer is a later
development in the VR. Sita was abducted when Rama and Lakşmaņa had gone out for usual hunting because Sitä says to Rīvana “Agamișyati me bhartā vanyamādāya puşkalam. Rurūngodhānvarahansca hatvādāyamişam bahu (3.47.23)".
In the case of a golden deer she would have referred to it. (The Riddle of the Ramayana, C. V. Vaidya, p.144).

Page #102

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
73
he suspects the safety of Sitā and both the brothers speed up towards the Aśrama and find that Sītā is not there (3.60). Further in search of Sītā they meet Jațāyu who is in a precarious condition. He informs Rama that Rāvana has kidnapped Sītā and has gone towards the south. Saying so he dies then and there. Rāma and Lakşmaņa proceed further to the west and then to the south. They enter the dense Kroñcāranya (3.69.5) and reach the aśrama of Mātanga (3.69.8). There they encounter Ayomukhī Rākṣasi. Lakşmaņa disfigures her. Then proceeding further they meet a dreadful Rākşasa or Dānava Kabandha” (3.69.27,43). Both the brothers fight with him and cut off his limbs. He tells them that he was cursed to this state by Sthūlasirarsi (3.71.4). He further advises them to go to Sugrīva who will help them in recovering Sītā (3.72), Rāma arrives at Padmāsarovara. (3.74.3), meets Śabari and proceeds towards the Rşyamūka hill (3.75).
Thus we find that Ayomukhī, Mātaiga, Pampā and Śabari of the VR do not find mention in the PCV. The Rāmopākhyāna also does not refer to Ayomukhi, the Mātaiga-āśrama and Sabari (MB 3.279,280). The other recensions of VR except the southern one do not mention Ayomukhi (Bulcke p.330).
The TR agrees with the VR. About Jaçãyu it tells us that he assumed the form of Hari at the time of his death and was granted Haridhāma by Ráma (3.32-33). It does not mention Matarga-āśrama and Ayomukhi. Further Sabarī, not Kabandha, requests Rāma to go to Pampā and make friends with Sugrīva (3.36).
The PCR agrees with the PCV. The PCS additionally mentions that Viradhita was installed as the king of his paternal kingdom of Alaukārapura (40.18.6) by Rāma. The TSP and the RPS follow the PCS in this respect. The PCS further mentions that when Rāma becomes hopeless and dejected about the recovery of Sītā, two Caraña munis console him by the way of delivering a religious discourse (39.3-10)
According to the Vasudevahindi the Jațāyu tells Rāma that Rāvana has kidnapped Sītā. Then Rāma and Lakşmaņa proceed toward the Kişkindhigiri.
1. In the PCV there is a reference to the river Kroñcaravā (Kuñcaravā) flowing
into the heart of the dense forest of Dandakāranya (42.5.14.5) (See Sec. 5A). 2. It reminds us of Ratnajațin (PCV 45.32) of Kambudyipa whom Sugriva meets
in search of Sita. Sugriva takes him to Rama. He informs Rāma of the kidnapping of Sita by Rāvaņa (See Sec.6D).

Page #103

74
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
According to the UP the deer is not killed but Rama loses his way in the forest. His attendants make a search for him but he is not discovered. Next morning Rama returns. When a search is made for Sītā, her upper garment (uttarīya) is found (68.245). Subsequently a messenger informs Rama of a dream seen by Dasaratha. Dasaratha dreams that Rāhu kidnapped Rohiņi. It meant that Sita was kidnapped by Ravana and was carried away to Laikā. To this effect a letter closed in a casket was sent by Dasaratha to Rama through that messenger. Following that, Rama's brothers and Janaka console Rāma and think over a plan for the recovery of Sită (68.268). The MP follows the UP, but it mentions that Lakṣmaṇa was there when Rāma returned after the sunset and not the next morning (73.1-3) as referred to in the UP.
SECTION VI
FRIENDSHIP WITH SUGRĪVA
A. Sugriva's approach to Rama for help:
According to the PCV, Vānararāja Sugrīva wandering about in distress caused by the appearance of a sham Sugrīva, learns about the slaying of Kharaduṣaṇa. He considers the slayer of Kharaduṣaṇa to be a fit person to help him. Accompanied by his minister Jambūnada he approaches Rāma sojourning at Pātālankarapura. Jambūnada makes Rāma conversant with the plight of Sugrīva and requests him to assist Sugrīva. Rāma promises to do so and asks Sugrīva to search out Sītā. Sugrīva reciprocates with a promise to help him (47.1-31).
According to the VR, Rāma and Lakṣmana themselves are in search of Sugrīva (3.75,7-10: 4.3.37). When they reach near the Ṛṣyamuka hill (4.1.128), Sugrīva observes them from a distance and gets frightened suspecting them to be disguised agents of Vali (4.1.6,21) Sugrīva sends his minister, Hanumat to spy against them. Hanumat disguising himself as a 'bhiksu' (4.3,2) approaches them and finds out their identity. He requests them to make friends with Sugrīva (4.3.32) who was in distress on account of being deprived of his wife and political right by Vali (4.5.22-23). Lakṣmana tells Hanumat of the kidnapping of Sita by some Rākṣasa and requests for the help of Sugrīva (44.18). Hanumat fetches them to Sugrīva. Rāma and Sugrīva take an oath of mutual help. Sugrīva produces before Rama the upper garment and the ornaments of Sită (4.6.15) and promises to kill Rāvana (4.7.4).
The TR agrees with the VR, but it mentions that Hanumat goes to Rama in the disguise of a brahmin ('bipra' or 'batu' 4.1). Hanumat

Page #104

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
75 and Sugrīva receive Rāma as Bhagavān (4.3). Sugrīva is ignorant of the identity of the kidnapper of Sītā (4.5).
B. Cause of Sugriva's distress :
According to the PCV, Vidyā dhara Sāhasagati, the son of Khecara Cakrāůka being enamoured of the beauty of Tárā, demands her in marriage from her father Jvalanasimha of Jyotipura. Jvalanasimha rejects his proposal on the ground of his short span of life as foretold by a sage and marries Tārā (Sutārā) to Sugrīva. Bearing this enmity Sāhasagati masters the 'rūpaparivattanakarī' Vidyā in the Himalayas (10.1-13). He transforming himself as real Sugrīva, goes to Kişkindhipura to establish sexual relations with Tārā. A duel follows between the real and the impostor Sugrīva. As it becomes quite impossible to identify the true one, both of them are expelled from the city. Han umat is called for to settle the issue, but he is also in a fix and he returns in vain (47.23,38). The impostor is also called 'duttho māyāvi Danavo' (47.13).
According to the VR, the cause of depriving Sugrīva of his wife and expelling him from the territory is that he occupies the throne of Vāli considering that the latter has died.
The VR narrates that Vāli, the elder brother of Sugrīva bore enmity with Māyāvī (Asura), the son of Dundubhil (4.9.4) for a certain woman. Once Māyāví challenged Vāli for a fight. The latter chasing the former entered a hollow land (bila) leaving behind Sugrīva to wait at the opening of the 'bila'. Sugrīva stayed there for a year and saw some blood flowing out of the hollow. Considering it to be a sign of the death of Vali, Sugrīva closed the opening with a slab of stone to escape any further atrocity from Māyāvī and returned to Kişkindhā. The ministers then enthroned him. But in course of time Vali returned safe after having killed Māyāvi (also called Dănava 4.9. 22). Vāli got enraged at the faithlessness of Sugrīva. He did not excuse him, but kidnapped his wife? and expelled him from the city. . Helpless Sugrīva took shelter in the Rşyamūka hill where Vali could not go because of the fear of the curse of a sage (4.11.64).
In the PCV there is no enmity between Vali and Sugriva. The name of the wife of Vāli is not mentioned. Vāli voluntarily renounces the kingdom for Sugrīva on the occasion of a battle with Rāvana for the
1. At 7.12.13 Māvāyi and Dundubhi are called brothers and the sons of Maya
Dänava. 2. Her name is Rumi (4.18.19; 4.20.28; 4.35.5). Tūrā is the wife of Vali (4.20,2;
4.11.37;; 4.15.6).

Page #105

76
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN marriage of his sister and himself becomes a monk (9.6,9,94-26) instead of recognising the suzerainty of Rāvana.
According to the TR Māyāvī entered a cave (4.6) and Sugrīva waited for Vāli one month only. C. Slaying of sham Sugriva :
According to the PCV, Sugrīva takes Rāma and Laksmana to Kişkin dhipura from Patālaikärapura. A battle ensues between both the Sugrīvas. Initially the real Sugrīva is overpowered by the hit of a mace of the sham Sugrīva. He is consoled by Ráma pleading that he could not distinguish between the two. In the second fight the impostor is brought forth to Rāma's sight. As soon as Rāma is seen by the impostor, the Vetālí (Veyāli Mahāvijjā 47.43) leaves the impostor and he appears in his real form as Sāhasagati. Rāma slays him with his arrows. Thus Sugrīva recovers his wife Tārā. Rāma and Lakşmaņa stay there in a garden. Thirteen daughters of Sugrīva offer themselves to serve Rāma (47.52).
According to the VR, Sugrīva for his own confidence takes two tests of Rama to ascertain the latter's fitness in killing the mighty Vali. Rāma is successful in both the tests viz. kicking off the heavy carcass of Dundubhi and piercing of seven trees of Tāla by an arrow at a single stretch (4. 11. 84, 12. 3). No test is mentioned in the PCV1 in this connection.
Then the account of the VR2 is similar to that of the PCV. The VR mentions a duel and not a battle. At the time of the second duel Sugrīva puts round his neck a flower garland (gajapușpīmālā 4. 12. 30) for being distinguished from Vāli. Before the ensuing of the second duel, Vāli is intervened by his wife, Tārā. She requests him to make friends with Sugrīva because Rāma and Lakşmana are assisting Sugrīva. Vali declines the same because he considers it quite contemptible and degrading that Rāma and Lakşmaņa should ever perform such a sinful act (dharmajñaśca kştajñaśca katham pāpari karişyati 4. 15. 5). Rama shots Vali with his arrow, concealing himself behind some trees (4. 16. 35). Vāli derides Rāma for his cowardice. The latter explains that his act is righteous. Vāli hands over his divine garland to Sugrīva and dies. Then follows the mourning by Tārā, the coronation of Sugrīva, the conferring of the status of Yuvarājatva to Argada, the son
1. See Section 7B. 2. Here they are not distinguished on account of their similarity in stature,
body, dress and movements-'alarikāreņa vesena pramāṇena gatena' and ‘rupasādráya' (4. 12. 30, 32).

Page #106

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
77 of Vali (in the PCV the name of the son of Vali is Candrarasmi while Argada and Jayānanda are the sons of Sugrīva 47. 23; 10.10). Sugrīva recovers his wife Rumā (4. 26.42), makes Tāră also as his wife (4. 29. 4; 4. 35. 4) and succeed the throne of Kişkindhipura. The VR does not refer to any daughter of Sugrīva. Rāma and Lakşmaņa stay in a cave of the Praśravanagiri (4. 27. 1.4), a range of the Mālyavat mountain (4. 28. 1).
The TR is in agreement with the VR. It additionally mentions that Sugrīva develops the feeling of Vairāgya' (birāga) and so he does not like to fight with Vali. Rāma advises him to do so saying that his words always become true (4. 7). Here Tārā prevents Vali at the time of the first duel and Vāli considers it auspicious to be killed by Rāma (jaun kadāci mohi mārahim tau puņi houm sanātha 4. 7). Vali eulogises Rāma as Bhagavān. Tārā is not mentioned to have become the wife of Sugrīva and no wife of Sugrīva is referred to.
According to the Rāmopakhyāna (MB. 3. 28) Hanumat does not assume any artificial form; there is only one duel between Sugrīva and Váli. Rumā is not mentioned, and Tără is called the wife of Vāli. Further once Vali suspects Tārā of having soft heart for Sugrīva when she prevents Vali from holding a duel with Sugrīva. And though Sugrīva is said to have told Rāma that his wife was snatched away from him by Vali, yet after the death of Vāli it is nowhere mentioned that Sugrīva got back any woman other than Tāra. The above reference and the suspicion of Vali on Tarā indicate that Tārā was formerly the wife of Sugriva or Sugrīva wanted Tārā for himself.
In the Nșsimha Purāna (ch. 50) there is one duel only. Tára's warning to Vali and her efforts for pacifying Lakşmaņa are not mentioned. There she seems to be the wife of Sugrīva to whom she is restored from Vali. Rāma and Lakşmaņa are unaware of the identity of the kidnapper of Sītā.
The Rāma-Kiyena does not refer to the tests as mentioned in the VR and thus it agrees with the PCV (Bulcke p. 358).
According to the Anāmakam Jataka the king (Bodhisattva) in search of his queen meets a monkey whose territory was usurped by his uncle. When both the monkeys fight, the king fixes an arrow on the bow and at the sight of it the uncle monkey flees away. There is no mention of hiding of the king behind the trees and thus it is in agreement with the PCV.
The PCR (47), the PCS (43), and the RPS (21) agree with the PCV. The TSP (IV. p. 253) mentions only one fight between the impostor and the real Sugrīva,

Page #107

78
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
According to the Vasudevahiņdi Vāli and Sugrīva are Vidyadharas who develop mutual enmity for a certaian woman. Váli overpowers Sugriva and the latter takes shelter in a Jaina temple along with Vidyadhara Hanumat and Jāmbavat. Further it follows the VR. But the approach of Hanumat to Rāma, in disguised form, the tests taken by Sugrīva and the hiding of Rāma etc. are not mentioned.
According to the Uttarapurāņa there arrive two Vidyadharas, Sugrīva and Anumát (Hanumat of the PCV) of their own accord to help Rama (68.269). They were already informed of the plight of Rama by Närada. Nārada advised them to help Rāma in recovering Síta from Rāvaņa so that Sugrīva would regain his hereditary position (68.287-289) of Yuvarājatva. Here Sugrīva is said to have been exiled by Bāli on account of the latter's greediness (68.275). There is no mention of the abduction of Sugrīva's wife by Bāli. Here Rāma sends Anumat twice to bring about conciliation with Ravana but the missions are met with failure. Then Rāma marches with his army towards Laukā and sojourns at Citrakūțavana. At that time Bali through his envoy offers to help Rāma provided Sugrīva is not given any shelter (68.442). Rāma does not agree to the proposal. He demands Mahāmegha elephant from Bali and also asks him to accompany him to Laikā. At this proposal Bali gets annoyed and challenges Rāma for a battle. Lakşmaņa and Sugrīva fight the battle and kill Bali (69.464). Rāma restores tho lost kingdom to Sugrīva and sojourns in a garden of Krişkindhanagara (68.467). The MP follows the UP (73.7-75).
SECTION VII
THE MISSION OF HANUMAT
A. Reproach to Sugriva and Patnakeśins help:
According to the PCV (48.1.10), Sugrīva after the restoration of Tārā, gets so much immersed in pleasures with her that he forgets to make any search for Sītā. Rāma speaks of the negligence of Sugrīva to Lakşmapa. The latter reproaches Sugrīva for his procrastination. Sugriva begs pardon of Laksmana and despatches his warriors in various quarters to search out Sitā (48,34). Rāma sends a message through one of the Vanaras to Bhāmaņdala (48.37). Sugrīva himself, on his way to discover Sītā, meets Ratnajațin at the Kambudvipa (48.30). Sugriva fetches him to Rama. Ratnajațin (Ke si informs Rāma about the abduction of Sitā by the Raksasa Lord of Lankā (42-44). Thus

Page #108

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
for the first time Rāma and Sugrīva come to know of the name and the place of the kidnapper.
79
According to the VR, before the reproachment of Sugrīva by Lakṣmaṇa, Hanumat reminds Sugrīva of his promise (IV. 20) and then Sugrīva orders Nīla to call for the help of the Vanaras from different places. But still the work gets delayed. Then at the fury of Lakṣmaṇa, Hanumat alerts Sugrīva (4.32). Lakṣmaṇa warns Sugrīva that he will be killed by Rama (4. 34. 17). Here Tara1 intervenes and pacifies Laksmana (4. 24). Sugrīva himself does not go but sends his generals with suitable forces to various places2 (4. 41-44). In place of Ratnajațin of the PCV, Sampāti, the elder brother of Jatayu informs Hanumat, Angada and Jambavat of the place and the name of the kidnapper of Sītā (i. e. Rāvaņa). Sampāti was informed of the same by his son Suparṣva (4. 59)
The TR agrees with the VR (TR 4.18-28). But no details of pleading of Tara for Sugrīva and no reference to Suparśva are found in it.
B. Lifting up of Koțiśila and selection of Hanumat for Mediation: According to the PCV (48.47-195), after hearing the very name of the lord of Lanka, all the Vanaras get stupefied and so much frightened that Jambavat1 has to request Rāma to drop the idea of rescuing Sīta because of the invincibility of Ravaṇa. Lakṣmaṇa then tries to convince them of the unfailing valour of Rama but in vain. Lakṣmana goes to Sindhudeśa and lifts up the 'Koțiśila. At this Jambu
1.
Sending of Tara by Sugrīva to pacify Laksmana is not found in the N. W. and the Gaudiya versions of the VR (Bulcke p. 35).
The long description of various routes as found in the VR is polation (H. Jacobi-Das Rāmayana p. 37) vide Bulcke p. 356. not have such descriptions (48.35).
3. There are contradictory references in the VR about the identity of the kidnapper and his place.
(A) Jatayu informs Rama of the person who kidnapped Sita and the direction in which he went (3, 67. 1 and 68. 10). But Lakṣmaṇa informs Hanumat at the time of his first meet that he is ignorant of the identity of the kidnapper of Sita (4. 4. 14).
(B) Sugrīva himself promises to kill Ravana when the former meets Rama for the first time (4.7.4)
2.
a later interThe PCV does
(C) Tără informs Lakṣmaṇa that she heard of Ravana from Vali (4.35.16). But Rama requests Sugrīva to discover the place of Ravana (4.40.11). (D) Angada tells Hanumat about the kidnapping of Sita by Ravana when
he and others get frightened at the sight of Sampati (456.12-13). 4. Jambūnada (Jambuvat) is the minister of Sugrīva (19.18-41).

Page #109

80
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
nada gets assured of the destined death of Ravana as prophesied by sage Anantavirya (48.99). The Vanaras do not favour a straight fight with Ravana. They advise Rama to conciliate with Rāvana through Vibhiṣana. Hanumat who is considered to be quite a fit person for mediation, is called there from Śrīpura (49.19). Hanumat1 is the son-in-law of Sugrīva. He is an ally of Ravana and the husband of the daughter of Candranakha.
According to the VR, there is no stupefaction of the Vanaras but Tara while pacifying Lakṣmaṇa, says that Ravana cannot be killed called for by Sugrīva alone (4.35.16), therefore, other allies are assistance. Lakṣmaṇa does not try to convince the Vanaras about the valour of Rama but Sugrīva himself admits before Lakṣmaṇa that Rama is quite fit to kill Rāvana on account of his success in previous test.2 Hanumat does not bear any marital relation with Ravana. He is selected on account of his strength, ability, wisdom and faithfulness. He is commissioned to find out Sītā. No command of making an effort to reconciliate with Ravana through Vibhiṣana (4.44.7) is mentioned in the VR.
The TR does not describe these topics of the VR in detail.
There are some non-Jaina works in which Lakṣmaṇa is also associated with the test of Rama in piercing the seven trees, though in the PCV it is only Lakṣmaṇa who lifts up the Koțiśila. According to the Ananda Rāmāyaṇa (1.8.36), Seri Rama and the Reama Kera as well as the Western. Acc. No. 1, these trees stood on the back of a snake coiling itself in a circular form. Lakṣmaṇa presses that snake to straighten its body and Rama pierces the trees. Some works mention that there prevailed a prophecy that one who pierced these seven trees at a stretch would be the killer of Vali. This account is found in the Nrsimhapurana (50.22), Ananda Rāmāyaṇa (1.8.39) and the West Acct. No. 13. According to the PCV also there prevailed a prophecy that one who lifted up the Koțiśila, would be the slayer of Rāvana.
C. Hanumat's journey to Lanka:
According to the PCV Rama gives his finger-ring to Hanumat to convince Sīta that the bearer is his (Rama's) confidant and he further asks him to bring the braid-jewel of Sită (cūdāmaņi 49.35). Hanumat along with a band of soldiers, on his way to Lanka, overpowers
1. 19.18-41.
2. This test was taken for adjudging the fitness of Rama in killing Väli and not for the annihilation of Ravana as found in the PCV (See Sec. 6C).

Page #110

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
81
Mahendrarāja of Mahendranagara to take revenge upon the latter who had deserted his own daughter, Añjanāsundarī, the mother of Hanumat. Further Hanumat conciliates with Mahendrarāja and sends him to Rāma sojourning at (50) Kişkindhapuri. Proceeding further Hanumat meets king Gandharva of the Dadhimukha island and informs him of the death of Sahasagati. Gandharva goes to Kiskindhapurī to marry his three daughters to Rāma (51) as foretold by a Naimittika (ch.51). Hanumat on his way enters into the belly of Asālikāvidyā through her mouth and tears open her belly. She was requistioned there to defend the rampart of Laikā. He further kills Vajravadana, the chief guard of the rampart and fights with Larkasundari, the daughter of Vajravadana but her amorous advances win his heart. He stays there for the night, enjoying with her and the next day he enters the city of Lankāpuri (ch.52)
According to the VR, the ring is given to Hanumat but he is not asked by Rama to bring the braid-jewel of Sita (4. 44. 12). Hanumat is said to have gone towards the south along with Tarā, Jāmbavat and Nila under the leadership of Angada. Sugrīva sends other generals to the east, west and north but they return unsuccessful (4. 47). Herefrom the details of the account differ from that of the PCV. On their way Hanumat etc. make a search for Sitä on the Vindhyas (4. 48. 2). Angada kills Asura Suranirbhaya considering him to be Ravaņa (4. 48. 20). Further they move to the south of the Vindhyas (4. 49), enter into the Rkşabila (cave) and meet Tapasī Svayamprabha (4. 50-52). From there they reach the seashore and meet Sampati, the elder brother of Jațăyu, who informs them of the name and the place of the kidnapper of Sita (4. 53-59). The episode of humiliating the king of Mahendranagara is not found in the VR. Here Hanumat alone (leaving all others behind) climbs the Mahendragiri (4. 67. 39), magnifies his body (5. 1. 10) and takes a flight across the sea, In course of his flight he converses with the Maināka mountain (5. 1. 89), enters into the mouth of Surasă Raksasī, mother of the Nagas (5. 1. 156) and deceives her by coming out again after assuming a small form. He further slays Simhika Raksasī (5. 1. 188) and jumps on the Lambagiri, on the other side of the sea (5. 1. 200). There is no reference to Dadhimukha island but the VR mentions that Hanumat, on his way back from Lankā, ruins Madhuvana in a frenzy of excessive joy and fights with Dadhimukha who is the maternal uncle of Sugrīva and the gardener of Madhuvana (5. 61). Dadhimukha comes to know the
1. It can be compared with the unsuccessful return of the warriors of Virādhita as
mentioned in the PCV (Sec 5 E).

Page #111

82
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
reality when he goes to Sugrīva to make a complaint of the miscreant. He comes back and requests pardon of Hanumat (5. 64). Hanumat further on his way to Lanka, after having crossed the sea, assumes a small form like that of a cat (5. 2. 47) to enter into Lankapuri unnoticed. Before entering into the city he overpowers Rākṣasi Lanka who is stationed there by Ravana to guard the city (5. 3. 28). She is referred to as the city itself appearing in the form of a Rākṣasī.
The TR agrees with the VR but it cuts short all the descriptions. (4. 23-28). Jambavat (Jāmavat) while encouraging Hanumat to jump across the sea, calls him an incarnation coming to the world with the sole purpose of fulfilling the mission of Rama (Rāma kāja lagi tava avatārā 4. 30). The description of the journey of Hanumat across the sea is in agreement with that of the VR. Hanumat assumes the form of a mosquito (masaka samāna rupa 5. 4). Lankini is called a niśicarī (Rakṣasi).
The Ramacarita of Abhinanda does not refer to the love proposal of Lankasundari but mentions that in the cave of Svayamprabha, Vănaravarasundarī proposes twice to gain the love of Hanumat but the latter rejects her proposal (Bulcke, p. 184).
D. Meeting with Sita and Mandodari's Interference:
According to the PCV, Hanumat straightway goes to the house of Vibhiṣaṇa and requests him to persuade Ravana to send back Sitā. Vibhīṣaṇa is very sorry because his previous efforts met with derision and reproach (52. 8). He advises Hanumat to make his personal efforts in admonishing Ravana. Hanumat goes to the Padma-udyāna and drops the finger-ring in Sita's lap. Sita regains her spirits, becomes cheerful and hands over her upper-garment to Hanumat as a mark of refuge (53. 12). Learning about the gladness of Sītā, Mandod arī arrives there and gets surprised to see Hanumat there. Hanumat then introduces himself to Sītā and narrates the events which happened to Rama (53. 40). Mandodari flatters Hanumat, but the latter reproaches the former. Mandodari then condemns Rama. Sītā rebukes Mandodari. At this Mandodari along with other women makes an attempt to beat Sīta. Hanumat intervenes at this stage. Mandodari gets discomfited and reports the matter to her husband (53. 55).
In the VR there is no reference to the meeting of Hanumat with Vibhīṣaṇa. On the other hand Hanumat makes a very long and thorough search for Sita (5. 4-13) and observes her surrounded by many Rākṣasīs, seated under a 'caitya prāsāda' in the Aśokavātikā

Page #112

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
83
(5.15). Hiding himself in the Simsapa tree' Hanumat takes notice of the harassment of Sītā1. Here Sīta is said to have tried to commit suicide which was ultimately given up by her on observing auspicious omens (5.28-29). Then Hanumat meets Sītā, hands over the fingerring and both of them have a free talk about the conditions and the events which took place on either side (5.30:37). The episode of Mandodari's attempt to beat Sītā is not referred to in the VR. At 5.58.75-80 Hanumat informs Rama that he saw Ravana beating Sītā with his fist and the intervention of Mandodari to save Sītā. While at 5.22.39 it is said that Rāvana in his fury roaringly approached Sita to frighten her but Dhanyamālinī immediately took him away from there (5.22,39).
The TR mentions that Hanumat while searching for Sītā hears Vibhiṣaṇa chanting the name of Rama (5.66). He assumes the form of a Vipra, goes to Vibhiṣaṇa and acquaints him, with the situation. Vibhīṣaṇa points out the place of Sita's confinement (5.8). Then it (5.9-12) agrees with the VR. When Sitǎ thinks of commiting suicide by burning herself into the fire (5.12) Hanumat drops the finger-ring before her. Then follows their meeting.
Though the Ananda Ramayana (1.8.29), the Gujarati Rāmāyaṇasāra, Bhavartha Rāmāyaṇa (5,1) and the West. Acct. No. 13 do not mention any meeting between Hanumat and Vibhīṣaṇa as found in the PCV, but they tell us that Hanumat saw Vibhiṣaņa devotedly eulogising Rama (Bulcke, p. 371).
mention the The Ramopakhyāna (MB, 3. 280, 281) does not manifestation of his huge form by Hanumat when he crosses the sea or the changing of his form while entering the city of Lanka. Further it is to be noted that the tortures afflicted on Sitä by Ravana and the Rākṣasīs, as described in the VR, are not mentioned to have been observed by Hanumat. It agrees with the PCV as regards the order of these incidents which are referred to have taken place before the arrival of Hanumat. Hanumat's journey to Lanka is not narrated directly. It is Hanumat who reports to Rama the account of his journey to Laikā after having returned to Kişkindhipura (3.282).
E. Discussion with Sitä :
Further according to the PCV, at the request of Hanumat, Sītā takes food which she had given up (46.14) when she was being taken
1.
See Sec. 5 D.

Page #113

84
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYA
to Larkāpuri by Ravana. Hanumat requests Sitā to accompany him to Kişkindhipura on his shoulders (āruhasu majjha khandhe 53.60) but Sita declines to touch any other person's body (53.61a). She confides the following episodes of her life to Hanumat so that the latter should refer to these in his conversation with Rāma and make him believe that he actually met Sita: (i) homage paid by them to the Căranamunis, (ii) subduing the wild elephant by Rāma in the Padmasara?, (iii) embracing Candanalata by Rāma, (iv) sportively beating of Sita by Rama with the stalk of a lotus, (v) explaining of the Nandidrumas to her by Rāma, (vi) hospitality extended by them to the sages on the bank of the Karṇaravă and on the same occasion obtaining of the Cudāmaņi” at the time of the supernatural occurrings. After narrating these episodes she gives her braid-jewel to Hanumat and advises him to depart before Rāvana puts any impediment (53.63-72) before him.
In the VR there is a reference to the weakness of Sita on account of her observing fast 'Upavāsa' (VR, 5.15.19) but there is no reference to the request by Hanumat to take food. Here Hanumat requests Sitā to take her on his backfupāroha mama prstham 5.37.31) but Sītā refuses on the same ground (5.37.62). She is further said to have told that she would not be able to withstand the speed of Hanumat and she might fall in the sea or she might be put to further difficulties on being chased by the Rakşasas. Further for her genuineness Sītā confides some episodes to Hanumat to be conveyed to Rāma and also hands over her 'Cūdāmaņi' (5.38.66). Here the private incidents referred to differ from those of the PCV. They are, viz. the kāka vịttānta (5.38, 5.40,4), and the application of the manaḥśīlā-tilaka on her cheeks by Rama (5.40.5).
According to the TR, Hanumat expresses his inability to take her to Rama without Rāma's commission to that effect (5. 16). Hanumat again meets Sītā after burning the city of Laikā and receives her braid-jewel. She for the confidence of Rāma narrates the "Sakrasutakatha' (5. 277) i. e. the kāka-vșttanta to Hanumat.
1. Sahinnanesu puno, imesu vayanesu visāttho 53.64. 2. Bhavabhūti's Uttararūmacarita (Anka.3) refers to Sita's alarm when an elephant
who was nurtured by her, is attacked by an agitated elephant in the river. She requests Rāma to save the elephant in trouble. This episode has some
basic similarity with that of the PCV. 3. The text does not refer to the Cūdāmaņi on that occasion. It was given by
Yakşa Potana when they started from Rāmapuri (See Sec. 4C). 4. In the Adhyatma Ramayana the request is made to climb his shoulders (me
skandha-māroha 5.5.6) as in the PCV. In the Ananda Rāmāyaṇa also (1.9.277).

Page #114

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
85
F. Capturing of Hanumat by Indrajit and the former's wordy duel with Ravana:
According to the PCV, as soon as Hanumat starts from there he finds himself surrounded by the servants of Ravana. They had been commissioned by Ravana to beat and chase off Hanumat, on receiving the information of his arrival from the ladies who had gone to the garden. During his fight with them Hanumat ruins the whole garden (53. 75-80). Following that a band of soldiers arrive there. Hanumat inflicts a crushing defeat by killing them. Further he destroys various buildings of Laňka and approaches the palace of Ravana (53. 90). Ravana gets ready to capture Hanumat but Indrajit intervenes. The latter himself along with Meghavahana and his soldiers, gruesome fight, binds Hanumat with serpent nooses (baddho ciya nagapāsehim) and produces him before Ravana (53. 120). Ravana deprecates his alliance with Rāma. Hanumat retorts Rāvana rebuking him for his malicious conduct. Ravana gets annoyed and orders his men to insult Hanumat by beating him in the centre of the city (53. 141). Hanumat losing no moment tears asunder the fetters and flees away towards Kişkindhipura after ruining the city of Lankā. Mandodarī informs Sītā of (53. 147) Hanumat's escape.
after a
He
According to the VR, Hanumat intentionally deserts the garden to ascertain the mind and the strength of the army of Ravaņa (5. 41. 7. 11). Rākṣasīs report it to Ravana on the next day (5. 42). Ravana then sends a contingent of 8000 servants to subdue Hanumat but they all are killed. Hanumat destroys the 'caityaprāsāda11 and kills the guards who try to oppose him (5. 43). Then follows the slaying of Jambumalin (5. 44. 20), seven sons of the ministers (5. 45. 17), five generals (5. 46) and Akşayakumara (5. 47. 38) who were all commissioned by Ravana to capture Hanumat. At last Indrajit is sent. overpowers Hanumat and seizes him by his Brahmastra (paitāmaham astram 5. 48. 36). Hanumat voluntarily gets captured with a view to have some discussion with Rāvaņa (5. 48. 47). He is then produced before Ravana who being annoyed with the abuses and scorns from Hanumat orders his men to assassinate Hanumat (5. 51. 45). Here Vibhīşana intervenes and saves Hanumat (5. 52. 25). Rāvana then orders to ignite the tail of Hanumat. It is done accordingly. Hanumat gets himself released from the fetters and burns the whole city of Lanka (5. 53-54) except the house of Vibhīşaņa. He again goes to Sītǎ and
1. There is no mention of destroying of any 'caitya' in the N. W. and Gaudiya versions (Bulcke, p. 366).

Page #115

86
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
finds her quite safe (5. 55-56). Then he jumps over the sea and alights on the Mahendra hill (5. 57. 30). There he narrates all the events to Argada, Jambavat etc. They proceed further, ruin Madhuvana and then having been sent for by Sugrīva, they all go to him (5. 58-64).
In the TR Hanumat takes permission of Sīta and starts plucking the fruits of the garden to quench his hunger (5. 17). As a monkey he is, he uproots the trees of the garden, being impelled by his inborn nature. Then he encounters the guards of the garden, other warriors, Akşayakumara and Indrajit (5. 19). Hanumat requests Ravana to become a devotee of Rāma (5. 23). Thereafter it follows the VR. After burning the city of Laukā, Hanumat again meets Sitā and then goes away (5. 29).
The PCR agrees with the PCV. But it does not point out the location of Koțisila. It states that eleven days had passed since the abduction of Sītā when Hanumat met Vibhișaņa at Lalika (53.12). Vibhîşana is said to have promised Hanumat to assist him by reapproaching Rāvaņa for rescuing Sītā (53.12). Here Hanumat changes his form when he drops the finger-ring before Sítā (53.25). Hanumat appears before Sītā when the latter makes a request for it and that also after the arrival of Mandodari (53.37-49). Sítā refuses to go with Hanumat because Rāma had not ordered him to that effect (53.146). According to the PCS Hanumat drops the finger-ring hiding himself in the sky (49.9.9). Trijatā's dream is referred to in it (50.9). Hanumat destroys the park to tease Rāvaņa (51.1.1). The killing of Akşayakumāra by Hanumat is mentioned in it (52). When Rāvana is being advised by Vibhīşaņa to give up Sīta, Indrajit intervenes, scorns Vibhīşaņa and then seizes Hanumat (53). According to the RPS, Rāma is so furious that he attempts to kill Sugrīva for the latter's negligence in searching out Sita, but Lakşmana intervenes and saves Sugrīva (p.131). The place of Kotisila is mentioned to be Nābhagiri (p.134). Here Hanumat ties Mahendrarāja by the help of his langūla vidya' (p. 136). He manifests himself in the form of 'Kamadeva' to win the love of Lalikāsundari (p.138). He changes his form, climbs a tree and then drops the ring in the lap of Sītā (p.138). He assumes the form of a monkey when he is attacked by the servants of Rāvaņa (p.140). He. burns Lankā but the ignition of his tail is not referred to (p.141). The TSP follows the PCR and PCV. Akşa is said to have been killed by Hanu after destroying the garden at Laikā (IV. p.270).
The Vasudevahindi merely refers to Hanumat's going to and coming back from Lankā without any details. Here a messenger is sent to Bharata. The latter sends his army to help Rāma.

Page #116

87
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
In the Anamakam Jātaka the nephew monkey sends many monkeys in search of the queen. They meet a wounded bird on a hill. informs them of the whereabouts of the Naga who had kidnapped the queen. Thereafter no messenger is sent but a direct attack is mentioned.
According to the Uttarapurana1, Aņumat goes to Laikā twice before the slaying of Vali. During the first mission Aņumat takes the finger-ring with him (68.293). There is no mention of his fight with Mahendrarāja or the meeting with king Gandharva and Lankasundari. Aņumat assumes the form of a wasp and then searches for Sītā in Lanka Sītā is said to be seated in the Nandanavana of Lanka (68.307). Aņumat secretly observes the arrival of Ravana and his attempt to coax Sītā. Mandodari intervenes and saves Sītā from being tortured by Ravana (68.340) as in the VR. Here Mandodari's natural love of a mother rises in her heart. She sympathises with Sītā, advises her to be firm and goes away (68.363). Aņumat then assumes the form of a monkey and hands over to Sītā the casket which he brings from Rama (68.365). Sītā takes out the ring, reads the letter and feels cheerful. She takes food on being requested by Anumat (68.374-5). Then Aņumat returns to Rāma and acquaints him with Sita's plight (68.376). On the advice of Angada, Rama sends again Aņumat to Lanka, this time as an envoy to find out the solution peacefully through the good offices of Vibhiṣana (68.392). Vibhiṣaṇa takes Aņumat to Ravana but their conference fails for Ravana gets annoyed and scorns Aņumat. Vibhīṣaṇa intervenes and sends back Aņumat to Rāma (68.434). It does not refer to sending of any confidential news by Sitā to Rama of her genuineness. Aņumat apprises Rama of the arrogance and the unwillingness of Ravana to give up Sītā. Then Rāma along with his army starts towards Lanka and halts in the Citrakutavana for the time being (68.439).
The Mahapurana agrees with the UP. It additionally mentions that at first Sītā does not believe that Aņumat is a genuine envoy of Rama. Aņumat then convinces Sītā of his genuineness by telling her a private incident of her life with Rāma. He tells her about the love quarrel she had with Rama and Rama's subsequent efforts in pleasing her. He refers to the applying of 'Tilaka' on her forehead by Rama (72.26-27). On being convinced she accepts the casket and the letter from Aņumat.
1. The UP and the MP refer to the lifting up of Kotisila by Laksmana but it is done after rescuing Sitä from Ravana and after the consecration of Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa (See Sec. 9B).

Page #117

88
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
SECTION VIII
THE KILLING OF RĀVANA
A. March to Lankā :
According to the PCV, after receiving the news of Sita through Hanumat, Rama along with the Vanara army marches towards Lanka on the fifth day of the dark Märgaśīrşa (54.28). On the way Nala subdues Samudra, the lord of Velandharapura or Suvelapura situated in the valley of Velandhara hill. The defeated lord offers his four daughters to Lakşmana in marriage. Further they defeat Hamsaratha, the lord of the Harsadvīpa situated in the vicinity of Lankapuri. A fresh message is sent again to Bhămandala (54. 46) by Rāma.
According to the VR, Rāma's army consisting of the Vanaras traversing the Sahya and the Malaya mountains (6.4.94) reach Mahendragiri (6.4.92) and encamp on the seashore (6.4.100). The VR does not refer to Velandharapura and Hamsadvīpa. It is only after crossing the sea that Rāma climbs up a mountain named Suvelaśaila (6,38) to take a view of Larkā. There is no king like Samudra, but it is the sea itself which comes in their way. When the sea does not allow a passage, Rāma worships it for three days (6.21.10). Even then the sea is not appeased. Rama then at first pierces arrows in the cea (6.21.26) and then as soon as he is ready to hurl the 'Brahmăstra', the presiding deity of the sea (Sagara) appears before Rāma, begs his pardon and advises him to appoint Nala, the son of Viśvakarman (6.22) to construct a bridge over the sea. Sagara names his country as Drumakulya. Rama hurls his arrow towards it. That place comes to be known as Marukāntāra (6.22) (36-37). Only the bridge is built by Nala and the sea is crossed. Here before the appearing of the deity of the sea and after the exile of Vibhîşaņa from Larika, Sardūla and Suka? (6.20) are sent by Ravana to spy against Rāma (6.25). These references are not found in the PCV.
The TR does not refer to the hills mentioned above (5.35). Suka is said to have been expelled by Ravana when he requested Rāvana to give up Sītā. Suka then paid homage to Rāma and left for his
1. The Tilaka commentary mentions the eighth or the seventh day of dark
Margasirga (6.4.5,6,7) as the date of their march. 2. This spying work by sārdūla and sūka is not mentioned in the North West
and the Gaudiya versions-Bulcke, p. 377.

Page #118

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
89
Asrama (5.57). The deity of the sea here appears in the form of a Vipra (5.58). Nala and Nila both are appointed to construct the bridge (5.59). It additionally states that Rāma installed Śiva-linga at Rameśvaram1 (6.2)
According to the
Ramopakhyāna, the sea deity appears before Rama in his dream and advises him to ask Nala to construct a bridge (MB, 3.283.32-45). It does not mention the specific names of the hills traversed. The Raghuvamsa of Kalid sa (12.66-72) does refer to the hills and the work of the spies.
not
Like the PCV the following works do not mention the construction of a bridge but unlike the PCV some other device is adopted. According to the Abhişeka Naṭaka, the sea gives way when Rama is ready to discharge an arrow (4.16.2). According to the Padmapuraṇa, Rama at the request of Narada worships Sankara who gives the former a bow which is laid across for crossing the sea. (Patalakhanda, ch. 112 p. 743). According to its ch. 269 (Uttarakhanda), the water of the sea disappears when Rama discharges arrows at it. According to the Adbhuta Rāmāyaṇa when Lakṣmaṇa jumps into the sea, its water gets evaporated (ch. 16). In the Birhora Rāma story Hanumat stretches his tail and Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa cross the sea (Bulcke, p. 384).
B. Vibhiṣana's shelter under Rama :
According to the the PCV, Vibhiṣaṇa advises Ravana to desist from war and to release Sită (55.6). A hot discussion follows between both the brothers. Indrajit intervenes and abuses Vibhīṣaṇa. Rāvana in wrath draws his sword while Vibhīṣaṇa pulls out a pillar and they are ready for a fierce duel which is stopped by the intervention of Indrajit and Bhanukarpa (55. 20). Then Vibhīṣaṇa with his meagre force takes shelter under Rāma First Rama is apprehensive, but after conviction he allows Vibhişana to join him. At this time Bhamandala arrives there to assist Rama (54.47).
According to the VR Vibhiṣana2 takes shelter under Rama before the latter crosses the sea (6. 9. 16 to 6. 16). He goes to Rama with his four warriors. No protest or duel with Ravana is mentioned in this connection Vibhīṣana is coronated there by Lakṣmana in advance (6. 19. 26) In other respects the VR agrees with PCV, but there is no reference to Bhamandala.
1. It i mentioned in the southern recension of VR. (Bulcke, p. 377).
2. According to the Gaudiya version he is said to have gone to Kailasa and on being advised by Vaisravana and Siva he joined Rama (Bulcke, p. 379).

Page #119

90
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
* In the TR, Vibhísaņa asks Rāvaņa to bow his head to Bhagavān Rāma. Rāvaņa kicks? Vibhişaņa and the latter goes away with his ministers without any protest (5.41).
In the Bhattikävya (12. 80) Vibhīşaņa is said to have been kicked by Rāvaņa. According to the Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa, Vibhīşaņa tells Kumbhakarņa in the battlefield that Rávaņa had raised his sword to kill him (Vibhīşaņa) and had kicked him (6. 8. 10-12).
According to the Serī Rāma, Vibh işaņa was thrown into the sea by Rāvana, but he was saved by a crocodile and Hanumat took him to Rāma. According to the Rāmāyaṇa Kakāvin, Vibhīşaņa goes to Rārna with his army (Bulcke, 383).
According to the Vasudevahindi a message is sent to Bharata by Rāma. Bharata sends his army to assist Rāma. Then they cross the sea by constructing a bridge. Vibhişaņa along with his four ministers takes refuge under Rāma (Pt. I. page 244).
c. First casualties in Battle :
According to the PCV the Rākṣasa leaders, Hasta and Prahasta become the first casualties in the battle. They are killed by the Vānara chiefs, Nala and Níla (57.34) respectively. Following that incident, Indrajit and Ghanavāhana (sons of Rāvana) capture (59.47) Sugrīva and Bhamandala respectively and bind them with the serpent nooses (nāgapăsehim 59.65). Thereafter Bhānukarna, the brother of Rāvana captures Hanumat (59.71), but Angadakumăra's intervention helps Hanumat to get released soon from the grip of the arms of Bhānukarna (59.74). Consequently when Vibhīşaņa is ready to fight, Indrajit and Bhānukarņa leave the battlefield, because they do not consider it proper to kill their relative (59.79). Having learnt of the discomfiture of Sugrīva and Bhāmandala and on being advised by Rāma, Lakşmaņa remembers Garudādhipati. The Garudādhipati (Mahālocana Sura) soon appears there and favours Rāma with the 'Simhavāhini vidyā' and Laksmana with the 'Garudavidya'. He also supplies them with other divine weapons (59.84f ).
According to the VR, before the commencement of the battle, the following episodes take place which are not found in the PCV. The espionage work of Suka, Sāraṇa and Sārdūla (6.25-30) against Rāma by creation of an illusory severed head and bow of Rāma by Vidyujjihva and with the help of them Rāvana's attempt to frighten Sita (6.31-32);
1. The Gaudiya and the N. W. Versions of VR refer to the kicking of Vibhișaņa
by Rāvana.

Page #120

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
91
Sarama's sympathy for Sita (6.33-84); the efforts of Malyavat to set right Ravana (6.35-36); Rama's climbing on the Suvela to take a view of Lanka (6.37-39); the duel between Ravana and Sugrīva1 and the sending of Angada for sounding a final warning to Ravana (6.41). Thereafter a battle ensues between the Vanaras and the Rakṣasas. Herefrom the sequence of events as narrated in the VR does not agree with that of the PCV, but all of them have their counterparts in the PCV. First of all Indrajit having become invisible overpowers Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa with his 'nagamaya saras' and captures them with the power of his māyā (6.44.33-38). Sugrīva and Bhāmandala are not seized here as in the PCV. Here Rāvana takes a flight in the Puspakavimāna and shows to Sītā wounded Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa. Trijatā consoles Sītā. These episodes are not found in the PCV. Suddenly Garuda or Suparna appears there (6.50.36-41) and the serpent nooses of Rama and Lakṣmana loosen and they get cured by Garuda. Following that the Rākṣasa general Prahasta is killed by Nila (6.38.3f, 52-54), the chief of the Vanara army. Here Hasta is not mentioned, but preceding Prahasta's assassination Dhumrākṣa and Akampana as well as Vajradamṣṭra are said to have been killed by Hanumat and Angada respectively (6.51-56). So far Kumbhakarna (Bhanukarna) does not enter the battlefield. Then follows Ravana's duel with Sugriva, Hanumat, Aigada and Lakṣmaṇa, one after another. Here Lakṣmana is subdued by Ravaņa. Ultimately Rama routes Ravana out of the field (6.59). Then comes Kumbhakarna, first unwilling and abusing Ravana for his sinful act but being threatened by Ravana he has to accede. He captures Sugrīva (not Hanumat as in the PCV) and takes him away pressing him between his arms (6.67.66f). Sugrīva after some time gets released automatically. He tears off the ears and the nose of Kumbhakarna (6.67.84f). Angada and Hanumat are also, before the captivity of Sugrīva, mentioned to have fought with Kumbhakarna. Hanumat is said to have thought of helping Sugrīva to get released but he gave up the idea considering that his action might bring humiliation to his master i e. Sugrīva (6.57.79), who was himself brave enough to subdue Kumbhakarna. Ultimately Kumbhakarna is shot dead by Rama (6.67.171). In the PCV he is not killed.
The TR does not mention any espionage work against Rama after his crossing the sea and during his sojourn near Lanka. Before the beginning of the battle, Mandodari persuades Rāvana,
now for the
1. The Gaudiya and the N.W. versions of VR do not mention his duel (Bulcke, p. 377).

Page #121

92
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
second time (6.67), to liberate Sitā. Then follows the request of Prahasta (here as a son of Răvaņa ) to return Sītā and to fight against Rama if the latter desires so even after the release of Sita (6.6-10). There is no reference to the battle with Hasta. Rāma's climbing on the Suvela is referred to, but the duel between Sugrīva and Rāvana does not find any mention (6. 11.). It additionally states that Rāma discharges an arrow (6. 13) and makes the parasol and the diadem of Rāvana as well as the earrings of Mandodari fall down. Mandodarī again requests Rāvana to give up Sita (6.14) and to bow down his head to the feet of Bhagavān Rāma (6. 15). Then follows the mediatory work of Arigada who first requests Rāvana to become considerate enough to return Sitā to Rama, the incarnate God (6. 20). Once more Mandodarī tries to set Rāvana right but in vain (6 35-37). Then follows the battle. There is no mention of the seizing of Sugrīva and Bhāmandala. First of all Hanumat inflicts a crushing defeat on Meghanāda (Indrajit 6. 63) Angada's fight is also mentioned (6. 44). Thereafter Malyavat makes a vain effort to dissuade Ravana from nursing enmity with Rāma (6. 48). Now Laksmana is wounded by a Sakti (6.54). Then follows Kumbhakarna's turn, who is ultimately killed by Rāma (6. 71) as in the VR. Here Rama only and not Lakşmaņa gets enmeshed of his own accord with the serpent nooses of Meghanāda (6. 74). On that occasion Garuda who is sent by Devarsi (Nārada) releases Rāmu from the serpent-nooses. Thus the TR also does not follow the same sequence as found in the VR. As stated above Lakşmana is wounded before the death of Kumbhakarna. In the PCV also Kumbhakarna is captured after the wounding of Lakşmaņa (See further).
The Rāmopākhyāna agrees with the VR, but it does not mention the severing of imaginary head of Rāma, the efforts of Malyavat to set right Ravana and the duel between Rāvana and Sugrīva (MB, 3. 284-287). Here Vibhişana kills Prahasta while Hasta is not mentioned. Prahasta is the first casualty here as in the PCV. Then Sugrīva is seized by Kumbhakarna (ch. 286).
The Raghuvañía does not mention all the episodes of the VR. After referring to the imaginary head of Rama and Trijatā's efforts to console Sītā, it states that Rama and Lakşmaņa are captured
1. In the VR Angada straightway thunders a warning to Rāvana, but in the
TR first of all he uses sweet words for the well-being of Rāvaņa himself. In the PCV Hanumat went as a mediator when he took the finger-ring of Rāma to Sita.

Page #122

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
by Indrajit and released by Garuda (12.74-76). The duel of Sugriva and Ravana, the sending of Angada and the showing of wounded Rāma and Laksmana to Sītā have not been referred to. In the Bhattikavya on the advice of Vibhiṣaṇa, Rama remembers Garuda (1465) and as soon as Garuda appears the serpent nooses of Lakṣmaṇa loosens.
93
D. Wounding of Lakṣmaṇa by the hit of a Sakti of Ravana :
According to the PCV, after the release of Sugrīva and Bhamandala, Ravana appears in the battlefield for the first time. He has first a hot discussion with Vibhiṣaṇa who asks Ravana to give up Sita, but Ravana ignores him and makes a direct fight with him (61.14-21). In this all round fight, Lakṣmaṇa and Rama imprison Indrajit and Bhanukarņa respectively. Ghanavahana also is captured (61.47-52). Then Lakṣmaṇa turns towards Ravana who is fighting with Vibhīṣaṇa. Here Lakṣmana, being struck with the Amoghavijaya Sakti hurled by Ravana, falls down wounded and unconscious on the ground (61.61). Rama overpowers Rāvana and makes him flee away to Lanka (61.71).
According to the VR, after the assassination of Kumbhakarņa there follows the slaying of the four sons of Ravana, viz. Narantaka, Devantaka, Triśiras as well as Atikaya and the two brothers of Rāvana, viz. Mahodara and Mahāpārśva (there are no such reference in the PCV). Then Indrajit in his invisible form overpowers Rama and Lakṣmaṇa who intentionally fall down on the ground to deceive him (6.69-73). Hanumat brings the Osadhi-parvata and cures Rama and Lakṣmaṇa (6.74). The Vanaras burn the city of Lanka (6.75). Then follows the slaying of Kampana, Kumbha, and Makarākṣa (6.76-79). Thereafter Indrajit kills illusory Sită, conjured up by his dark powers, before the Vanaras (6.81) and goes away to perform a yajña. He is attacked and killed by Lakṣmaṇa, first destroying his unholy yajña (6.86-90). The PCV does not refer to these episodes. In the PCV as already stated above, Indrajit is not killed but captured. In the VR Ravana being distressed with the death of Indrajit, tries to kill Sitā but he is checked by Suparsva (6.92.59). Then follows the killing of Virupakṣa, Mahodara and Mahāpārsva (repetition). Thereafter Ravana himself fights with Vibhiṣana as in the PCV. Lakṣmaṇa intervenes and gets wounded by the hit of a Sakti hurled by Ravana (6.100.36). Rama then makes Ravana flee away from the battlefield as mentioned in the PCV.

Page #123

94
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
According to the TR, it is before the death of Kumbhakarna that Lakşmaņa is wounded by the sakti and that also hurled by Indrajit (Meghanāda), not by Rāvana (6.54). The Sakti is called Viraghatini. Lakşmaņa gets cured by Suşeņa (6.62). Then the TR follows the VR but the killing of Kumbhakarna is mentioned after the death of the sons and the brothers of Rāvana. Thereafter come the overpowering of Rāma and Lakşmaņa and the timely help of Garuda (5.73-74) as already mentioned. Then follows the performance of a Yajña by Meghanāda, its destruction and the killing of Meghanāda by Lakşmaņa (6.76). The TR does not mention the burning of Lankā here again and the killing of any magic Sītā.
The Adhyatma Rāmāyana refers to the power of the sakti as 'amoghaśaktitaḥ' (i.e. of unfailing power 6.6.8). In the PCV it is called Amoghavijayā.
E. Višalya's medical aid :
According to the PCV, Rama on being advised by Khecara Candramandala who happens to come there (63.19), sends Aigada, Hanumat and Bhāmandala to bring the bath-water of Višalyā before the sunrise for curing Laksmana. They all go to Bharata. Bharata sends for Višalya but her father Droņamegha refuses to send her. Kaikeyi then herself goes to Droņamegha (her brother) and sends Višalyā to Rāma (64.23). She cures Lakşmaņa and other wounded soldiers. Lakşmaņa marries Višalyā. Visalyāseems to be an expert military surgeon.
As soon as Višalyā touches the body of Lakşmaņa, the Śakti (Amogavijayā) gushes out of his body and appears in her personal form. This Śakti was presented to Rāvana by Nagarāja on getting pleased with the unflinching devotion of Rāvana to the Jinas, for Rāvana had extracted the sinews from his arm to replace the broken strings of Vīņā while eulogising the Jinas on the occasion of his hostility with monk Vali (9.88.101) on the Kailasa mountain.
According to the VR Susepa commissions Hanumat to bring the mahauşadhi 'Višalyakarani' from the Oşadhi-parvata (6.101.29). These herbs are named as "Višalyakaraņi, Sāvarṇyakarani, Sañjivakarans and Sandhāni (6.101.31). As Hanumat is unable to recognise them, he
1. 62.26; 64.16. 2. There are references to Vispala in the Rg-Veda (1.112.10;1.117.11;1.118.18).
In an obscure way Višalyā of PCV has something to do with Vispalā of Rg-Veda. Sāyaṇa explains Vispalā to be a woman who had lost her thighs in a battle and who was restored to her health by the gods, Asvinis.

Page #124

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
95
brings the whole peak of the mountain. Suşeņa with the help of those herbs cures Lakṣmaṇa. In the VR these medicines are referred to for four times. First of all when Rama and Lakṣmaṇa are wounded by Indrajit, Susena asks for these herbs (Sañjivakaranim divyam Visalyam -6.50.30). The second occasion is the wounding of Rama and Lakṣmaṇa by Indrajit after the death of Kumbhakarna. Here Jambavat points out the place where these herbs grow (6.74.29), On the third time Suşeņa cures the injured warriors and Lakṣmaṇa who had been wounded while destroying the Yajña of Indrajit (6.91.25). And the fourth occasion is the wounding of Lakṣmaṇa by the hit of the Sakti hurled by Rāvana as mentioned above.
The places of their availability are mentioned as the Candra and the Drona mountains situated in the Kṣirodadhi (6.50.31). On the other occasion the location is said to be the Oṣadhi-parvata situated in the middle of the Rṣabha and the Kailasa mountains (6.74,29-31; 6.101.31-32).
According to the VR, the military physician (surgeon) Suşeņa is said to be the father-in-law of Sugrīva (6.50.23). There is no reference that while taking the medicinal herb Hanumat met with Bharata2 and no mention of the inevitability of producing the herb before the sun-rise.
In the TR the relation of Suşeņa is not mentioned. He is brought from Lanka by Hanumat. The former sends Hanumat to bring the osadhi, but the name of the oṣadhi and the name of the place of its availability are not specifically mentioned. Here Ravana tries to foil the plan of Hanumat by employing Rākṣasa Kālanemi, but he is unsuccessful (9.55-58). Here when Hanumat is returning with the Oṣadhi mountain, Bharatas makes the former fall down by shooting an arrow to foil his journey, considering him to be a Raksasa. After knowing the real situation Bharata permits Hanumat to go to Rama (6.60) so as to reach the destination before the sun-rise. In the final fight with Rāvana, Laksmana is said to have been once more wounded by the Sakti (which was given by Brahma) hurled by Ravana. As soon as Lakṣmana is taken to Rama, the Sakti flees away into the sky automatically (6.83-85).
1. At 4.22.13 Susena is referred to as the father of Tara, the wife of Vali. 2. The Gaudiya version contains this episode.
3. The Gaudiya & the N.W. versions of Rāmāyaṇa contain this episode (Bulcke, p. 379).
The Gaudiya version contains this episode but Bharata does not shoot Hanumat (Bulcke, p. 379).

Page #125

96
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
On this occasion no herb is brought by Hanumat. Lakşmaņa rises up and drives away Rāvana from the battlefield.
The Adhyatma Rāmāyaṇa states that the Sakti fled away to Ravana because of Lakşmaņa's Nārāyaṇatva (6.6.17).
In the Ramopakhyāna (MB, 3.289.4-7) Lakşmana and Rama both are injured by Indrajit once only. There is no reference to any Sakti. They are cured with the aid of the Visalyā-oșadhi, but there is no mention of bringing it by any person (3.289.6). Vibhişana is said to have handed over the specific water brought by Guhyaka. This water was sent by Kubera to be used for washing the eyes, so that invisible persons could be seen by the user of the water. Lakşmaņa used it and thereafter killed Meghanāda. There is no mention of performing of any Yajña by Indrajit (3.289 25). Here Avindhya checks Ravana from killing Sita (3.289.32).
According to the Raghuvansa the killing of Kumbhakarņa (12.81) is mentioned after the incident of the wounding of Lakşmaņa by the Śakti (12.77). Not the peak but the medicinal herb is referred to have been brought by Hanumat. In the Bhattikävya (14.50) there is a reference to the washing of the eyes of Sugrīva with the water brought by Vibhişana, Thereafter Sugrīva is able to observe Indrajit. He then chases him off.
The conversation of Hanumat with Bharata at the time of his return-journey while carrying the Oşadhi mountain is mentioned in the Mahānāțaka (13) (Damodara Miśra's version: Bulcke, p. 391), but not in (Madhusudan's version 9). The latter version refers to the bringing of the Oşadhi before the sunrise (9.72-73). The Kyttiväsa Rāmāyana, Sūrasā gara, Gitāvali and Ramarahasya refer to the conversation between Hanumat and Bharata. According to the Kyttiväsa Ramayana, Hanumat puts the sun under his armpit so that the sun may not rise till he reaches his destination (Bulcke, p. 391).
The Rāmakiyena mentions that Hanumat procures the water of the five rivers from Bharata for curing Lakşmaņa (Bulcke, p. 392). According to the Adhyatma Rāmāyana, Hanumat brings Dronagiri (6.5.72; 6.7.33) on which grew many herbs. The Ananda Rāmāyana also mentions the same hill (1.11.23). About the Sakți it is said that it was given to Rāvana by Maya (6.6.5) who had obtained it after great penance. The Gitāvali mentions the bringing of Droņācala by Hanumat (UK, 9).

Page #126

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
97 F. Rāvana's offer for a peace treaty with Rāma : .
According to the PCV after the recovery of Laksmana from wounds, Rāvana is advised by his ministers to liberate Sita and to sign a peace treaty with Rama (65.6). But Rāvaņa disregards their counsel and offers to Rāma through his envoy some parts of his territory provided he (Rāma) releases his (Ravana's) relatives and foregoes Sītā's return. Rāma rejects the offer and warns Ravana of the fatal consequences if Sītā is not released (65.20).
In the VR there is no mention of it. In the TR it is stated that Prahasta (Rāvana's son) had, before the commencement of the battle, requested Rāvana to give up Sītā for restoring peace (6.9-10) at home.
The Mahānāțaka' refers to the sending of a 'dūta' by Rāvana for making truce with Rāma. Ravana had demanded the 'parasu' (Jāmadagnya) for returning Sīta, but Rama disagreed.
In the Khotāni Rāmāyana it is said that Răvaņa after having been wounded in the battle offered to pay royal toll to Rama and for that the latter did not kill the former (Bulcke, p. 395).
G. Acquiring of Bahurupā Vidyā by Rāvana:
According to the PCV, Rāvana, after his proposal being turned down by Rāma, starts meditating in the Jina temple to acquire unvanquishable Bahurupā-vidyā for defeating Rama (66). The Vanaras cause terror in Lanka by torturing the citizens (67). Angada disturbs Rāvana and drags Mandodarī to impede Rāvana's success. But Råvaņa remains devoted and attains the desired goal (68).
. In the VR there is no reference to the performance of any austerity by Rāvana for attaining any supernatural power. The performance of a sacrifice by Indrajit and its destruction by Laksmana has already been referred to. The north-west version of VR mentions, after the slaying of Indrajit, the meditation by Rāvana, the mischief of the Vanaras to perturb him, the dragging of Mandodari by Angada and the incomplete sacrifice of Rāvana (Bulcke, p. 380).
The TR mentions the performing of a Yajña by Indrajit as in the VR. It additionally refers to the sacrifice of Rāvana and its being foiled by Hanumat and Angada who were sent by Rāma after the death of Indrajit to do so (6. 85). Here Ravana's wives are dragged and Rāvana is kicked.
1, Madhusudana's version (Bulcke,p. 195).

Page #127

98
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Obstructing of the sacrifice of Rāvana and his failure to achieve the desired goal is found in the Adhyātma Ramayana (6.10.4-35), Padmapurāņa (Uttara, 269 does not mention the performance of any sacrifice by Indrajit) and the Ananda Rāmāyaṇa (1.11.230-240). The Khotāni Rāmāyaṇa, Telugu Dvipāda Rāmāyana, Kannarese Torāve Rāmāyaṇa (6.42), Gujarātī Rāmāyana-sara, Kašmiri Rāmāyaṇa, Seri Rama, Reama Kera, Rāma Kiyena and the West-Acct. No. 3 also mention (Bulcke, p. 396) Rāvana's unsuccessful sacrifice.
It is important to note that the Rāmopākhyāna and the Raghuvamsa do not mention either of the sacrifices.
In the RāmaKiyena, Kumbhakarna is associated with a sacrifice undertaken for vitalising the power of his lance (mokşasakti). but it is destroyed by Hanumat and Angada (Bulcke, p. 392).
H. Rāvaņa's plan to set free Sitā:
According to the PCV, Rāvana after having achieved the Bahurupā-vidya frightens Sīta saying to her that she would willingly submit to him when her husband is killed by him. Distressed Sītā implores Rāvana to desist from ending the life of Rama and Bhāmandala and soon falls down on the ground in swoon (69.29). At the sight of this plight of Sītā, Rāvana becomes remorseful of his cruel deeds and decides to set her free, but after having defeated Rāma and Lakşmaņa so that he would escape from being charged as coward. Moreover he thinks that then he would become the sovereign of the whole Bhāratavarşa (69.58).
The VR does not refer to any such idea of Rāvana. On the contrary after the death of Indrajit, Rāvaņa plans to kill Sītā, but Supäráva prevents the former from committing such a sinful act (6 92.58f).
The TR also does nor refer to any such idea of Rāvana.
I. Rejection of Mandodari's request by Rāvana:
According to the PCV Mandodarī reminds Rāvana of the emergence of Rāma and Lakşmaņa as the Haladhara and the Vasudeva respectively and his (Prati-väsudeva's) destined death at the hands of Lakşmana. She further requests her husband to release Sītā to escape his ruin. Rāvana does not pay any heed to her words and orders his army to march forth to the battle field (70).
In the VR there is no direct reference to any request of Mandodarī. But at the time of bewailing the death of her husband,

Page #128

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
99
Mandodari utters that she had requested Ravana after the ruining of Larki by Hanumat, to desist from harbouring enmity with Ráma, but Rāvana did not accept her proposal. Here she is said to have considered Rāma as an incarnation of Vişņu (6.111.13) and the abduction of Sită (mentioned as Śrī) as the cause of the death of her husband (ibid 23). In the Gaudiya and the N.W. versions of the VR, Mandodari is said to have appealed to Rāvana after the slaying of Prahasta, to stop the battle and to give up Sītā saying that Rama was superior to all the ordinary human beings (Bulcke, p. 378).
In the TR Mandodarī is found to be requesting Rāvaņa not less than four times for giving up Sītā (5.35; 6.6; 6.14&6.37) saying that Ráma was the God incarnate and at 6.6. she reminds Rāvana of the mission of Rama to relieve the earth from the burden (of the sinners). At 5.35 i.e. after the ruining of Lanka by Hanumat she had requested Ravana for the first time.
In the Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇā just after the destruction of the Yajña of Rāvana (6.10.36f) Mandodarī tells Rāvana that Rama is an in carnation of God and further requests him to give up Sita. Thereupon Rāvana decides to be killed by Rāma to attain emancipation (ibid 58). Tne Ananda Rāmāyana also agrees with it (1.11. 241-145).
J. Slaying of Rāvana :
According to the PCV, in the final battle, Rāvaņa fights driving in the Indra-chariot which was constructed by the Bahurupa-vidya, while Rāma and Lakşmaņa fight riding on the Keśarin and the Garuda chariots (supplied by Garudādhipati). In the gruesome fight many types of missiles are hurled from both the sides. Lakşmaņa severs the head and the arms of Rāvana by shooting arrows, but to his surprise he finds that on account of the effect of the Bahurupavidyā they reappear every time increased in geometrical progression (71.16). Rāvana then hurls his disc (cakra) at Lakşmaņa (72.36), but instead of obeying his command it obeys Lakşmana and Rāvana is killed, his head being severed off, on the 11th day of dark Jyeștha (73.34).
1. Vide-Sec. 8C. 2. "Soi avatareu harana mahibhāra'.

Page #129

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
In the VR Indra sends a chariot, a bow, an armour, arrows and a Sakti to Rāma through Matali (6.102.12-151). Rāma severs the limbs and the head of Ravana but they reappear as many times as he severs them off. Here Rāvana is not said to have ten faces and twenty arms. Rama then on the advice of Matali, shoots Paitāmaha arrow into the (heart) chest of Ravana (6.108.18) and kills him. This arrow is said to have been given to Rāma by Agastya who had got it from Brahmā (6.108). Rāvana is said to have attained heaven (6.109.24).
100
The TR agrees with the VR. It additionally mentions the conjuring up of many counterfeits of himself by Ravana with the power of his māyā (6.95). Here on the advice of Vibhīṣaṇa, Rama shoots an arrow in the navel of Ravana, which was the receptacle of nectar and hurls thirty other arrows to sever his heads and arms. Rāvana then dies (6.103) and attains the 'dhama' of Rama (6 104).
According to the Rāmopakhyāna, Rāvana creates many illusory Rāmas and Lakṣmaṇas (3.290.8), but it does not mention the reappearing of his limbs and the tendering of any advice by Matali or Vibhiṣaṇa. Rāvana is burnt to ashes on being shot by the Brahmastra of Rama (32.90.30).
The Raghuvamsa also does not mention the reappearing of the limbs or heads of Rāvana.
According to the Birhora Rama story Lakṣmaṇa is said to have killed Rāvana (Bulcke, p. 395).
From Rama's march to Lanka up to the death of Ravana (Subsections A to J):
The PCR generally agrees with the PCV. The name of one of the four girls offered to Lakṣmaṇa by Samudra differs from that of the PCV (PCV, 54 43; PCR, 54.68). It additionally mentions the defeating of Khecara Suvela of Suvelanagara before reaching Hamsadvipa (54.70). Here Rama promises the crown of Lanka to Vibhīṣaṇa when the latter takes shelter under the former (55.73). According to the PCS they cross the sea driving in aerial cars (56.9). Nīla and Nala (56.11) defeat two Vidyadharas, Setu and Samudra who are in service of Ravana. Setu and Samudra offer five girls to Laksmana
1. According to the PCV Garuḍādhipati had supplied the Simhavahini-vidya, a plough and a pestle (hala-musala) to Rama and the Garuda-vidya and Vijjuvadana club to Lakṣmaṇa. Two Chariots, some weapons & missiles (Agneya & Varuna) were also supplied to them (59.84).

Page #130

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
101
left with
calls vening of thny girls
in marriage. The number of the girls here exceeds that of the PCR by one (56.13). Then Rāma reaches the Suvela hill whose ruler Suvela on being advised by Setu and Samudra joins Rama (53.13.9). When Vibhīsaņa advises to release Sītā, Rāvana admits that he is a slave of his senses but Indrajit instigates him for hostility. A duel follows between both the brothers (57. 3-7). It additionally mentions that Rāma challenges Rāvana through Argada and asks for conciliation, but Ravana ridicules the proposal of Rāma (58).
Rāma himself remembers of the Mahālocana (celestial god) when Bhamandala and Sugrīva are captured by the enemies (65.12). The Khecara who puts forth the proposal of the bathwater of Višalyā is named Praticandra (68.1). Kaikeyi herself goes to Dronamegha and sends Visalyā asking her to marry Lakşmaņa (69.14-15). Here the ministers support Mandodarī when she requests Rāvaņa to make compromise with Rāma (70.3). Rāvana sends his envoy to communicate to Rāma that he is ready to abdicate his throne for him provided Sītā is left with him (70.7). In other respects it agrees with the PCR.
The RPS calls Velandhara as an island, not a mountain It mentions also the defeating of the lord of Suvelapura (p.142). There is no mention of offering of any girls by Samudra. The king of Harisadvīpa is called Suhamsa. Rama is said to have promised the kingdom of Laikā to Vibhīşana. The Vidyādhara who advises Rāma to bring the bathwater of Visalyā is named Saśiprabha (p.149). Since Višalya is already destined to be the wife of Lakşmana, hence she is sent to Rama without objection (p. 151). No mention of Angada's interference with Rāvana's meditation is made and no dragging of Mandodarī is referred to (p. 154). Rāvana promises to Sitä that he shall not kill Rāma and Lakşmaņa when she makes a request for the same. Rāvana then promises to regard her as his daughter and tells her that he will kill others, capture Rāma and Laksmana and release her (p. 155). Then follows the request of Mandodarī. Here she discloses to Ravana that Sita is their abandoned child. But when she talks of Nārāyaṇa and Partinārāyaṇa, Rāvana gets enraged and declares war (p. 156). Here Lakşmaņa is said to have been favoured with Siddhartha-vidyā by the daughters of Candravardhana of the Vijayārdha mountain (p. 158). In other respects it agrees with the PCR.
The TSP mentions the crossing of the sea through air. Samudra and Setu, the kings of Velandhara are killed by Nala and Nīla. Rāma conquers Suvela, the chief of the Suvela mountain and Hamsaratha of Harsadvīpa (Vol. IV. p. 273). Vibhīşaņa is made the king of Lanka (p. 275). The Vidyadhara who advises for Visalyā's medical aid is called

Page #131

102
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN Praticandra. There is no request of Mandodarī pleading the release of Sta. Ravana is said to have assumed many dreadful forms of himself simultaneously at the time of his battle with Lakşmaņa. There is no mention of the multiplication of Rāvana's head and arms (p. 296). In other respects it agrees with the PCV.
According to the Vasudevahindi Rāvana acquires Sarvavidyāchedani-vidya. Rāvana is killed with the disc hurled by Lakşmaņa. Other details are not narrated. (I.p.245).
According to the UP, Lakşmaņa acquires Prajñapti-vidyā on the Jagatpāda hill. Sugrīva and other Vidyādharas worship their vidyās and march towards Lanka (68.486-72). Here first Kumbhakarna requests Rāvana to give up Sita. It is followed by Vibhīşana's request and reminding to Rāvana about the vow taken by the latter and the emergence of Lakşmaņa as Nārāyaṇa (68.492). Vibhişaņa being expelled by Rāvana takes shelter under Rāma. Here Hanumat with the permission of Rāma creates an illusory army of monkeys and after crossing the sea spreads terror in Laukā, destroys the garden, burns the army of Rākşasas with the help of a lore called Mahājvāla-vidyā (68.514) and returns to Rāma. Sugriva and Aņumat give their vidyās to Rāma and Laksmana. On being advised by Vibhīşana the Vidyadharas perturb Rāvana meditating on the Aditya hill. From that time the vidyās cease to obey Rãvana. Then ensues a battle. First the Rākşasa army is vanquished by Rāma. Here Rāvana conjures up an illusory severed head of Sītā (68.612). Vibhīşaņa discloses the reality. Then Laksmana is ensnared by Ravana in Nārāca snares. Lakşmaņa destroys them by his magic lore. Rāvana's disc obeys the command of Lakşmaņa and severs the head of Rāvana (68.630).
The MP follows the UP but it does not refer to the request of Kumbhakarņa to give up Sītā. It mentions that Aņumat and other Vidyādharas assume the forms of monkeys and burn the city of Laikā with their fiery tails (76,6-8).
According to the Anāmakam Jātaka, the monkey-chief is unable to go across the sea. Indra assumes the form of a small monkey and assists them in crossing the sea by constructing a passage with stones. The Naga create a poisonous mist by which all the monkeys are overpowered and they fall down on the ground. That small monkey (Indra) cures them with the help of a divine herb. The king (Bodhisattva) pierces, on the advice of the small monkey, an arrow into the lightning which is the Nāga himself and thus the Nāga is killed. The king after retrieving his queen and after learning that his maternal uncle has died, returns to his country.

Page #132

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
SECTION IX
THE ABANDONING OF SITA
103
A. Back to Ayodhyā:
(i) Last Rites of Ravana:-Vibhīṣana getting bereaved at the death of his brother, makes an attempt to commit suicide with a dagger, but Rāma intervenes and saves his life. Then follows the mourning of the death of Ravana by Vibhiṣapa and the wives of Ravana (74). Rama consoles them. Vibhīṣaṇa performs the final rites of Rāvana. On that occasion Muni Aprameyabala arrives there. He ordinates Indrajit, Ghanavahana, Bhānukarna and Marica. Mandodari, Candranakha and other wives of Ravana also accept nunhood under Arya Samyamaśrī (75).
(ii) Meeting Sita:-Rama goes to Sită and accepts her (76). He along with Lakṣmaṇa and Sītā stays in the palace of Vibhiṣaṇa. Rama is offered the crown of Lanka by Vibhiṣaṇa, but he declines the offer. All the girls who were engaged to them during their journey are then sent for and Rama and Lakṣmaṇa marry them (77).
(iii) Back to Ayodhya:-Narada brings a message of Aparajita's suffering and requests Rāma to return to Ayodhya. Accordingly a messenger is sent in advance to Bharata. Rama along with Laksmana and Sītā driving in Puspakavimāna accompanied by the Khecara chiefs and showing the important places of their sojourn to Sita, returns to Ayodhya. Bharata and his mothers receive them heartily (78.79).
The VR does not mention any attempt of Vibhiṣaṇa to commit suicide (6.10.9). Vibhīṣana denies to perform the last rites of Ravana on account of the latter's wickedness, but Rama convinces him to do the same.
First Rama sends Hanumat to convey the news of his victory to Sită. Then Vibhiṣaṇa brings Sītā to Rāma (6.112-114).
Vibhīṣana is made the king of Lanka by Rama (6.112.9).
According to the VR Indrajit and Kumbhakarna are killed in the battle. There is no mention as regards the renouncing of the world by the wives of Ravana and no reference to any other marriage of Rama and Lakṣmaṇa.
Rama does not accept Sitä at once. He doubts her character for her long association with Ravaņa. Sītā enters the fire1 and proves her
1. Bulcke is of the opinion that the fire test did not find mention in the Adi Ramayana (Bulcke, p. 398).

Page #133

104
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
purity (6.116.27). At that time many gods appear and announce Rama as an incarnation of God (6.117.27) and Sītā as that of Lakşmi. Rāma is also called as eighth Rudra? (6.117.8). Here Maheśvara (6.119.4) and Dasaratha who also appear there (6.119.20), request Rāma to go to Ayodhyā to dispel the agony of his mothers and Bharata. Dasaratha tells that fourteen years of his exile have completed. Then appears Mahendra who brings to life all the dead Vānaras (6.120), advises Rāma to go home to console his mothers and Bharata and to accept the crown of Ayodhyā.
Rama travels in the Puspakavimāna. At the request of Sita he takes with him the Vānara ladies also (6.123). He continues his journey showing to Sītā various places of his sojourn and different incidents. He stays at the Aśrama of Bhardvāja and sends Hanumat to ascertain the mind of Bharata. Hanumat goes there in the form of a human being (6.125) Thereafter Rama reaches Ayodhyā. At that time the monkeys assume the form of human beings (6.127).
The TR generally agrees with the VR with the following additions. When Rāvana is killed, his head and arms fall down before Mandodarī (6.103). Here Rāma censures Sītā to obtain real Sītā from the deity of fire. The fire consumes illusory Sítā and the deity offers real Sītā to Rāma (6.109). Various deities praise Rāma as an Avatāra. Hanumat goes to Ayodhyā in the form of a Batu (6.121). When Rāma meets Bharata he creates many illusory Rāmas to facilitate his embrace to all the persons who are present there to receive him (7.6). Hanumat remains there and all the other Vanaras go back to their respective places (7.19).
According to the Rāmopākhyāna, Rāvana's body gets burnt to ashes on being pierced by the Brahmästra of Rama (3.290-30). It does not mention the fire ordeal of Sītā. Rāma gets convinced of the purity of Sītā by the appeals made by various deities. Brahmā tells that he protected Sita's purity through the curse given to Ravana by Nalakūbara (3.291,33). Here Brahmă revives the life of the dead monkeys. In other respects it agrees with the VR.
The Brahmanical Mahapurāṇas and the Upapurānas do not mention the fire ordeal (Bulcke, p. 399).
According to the Anāmakam Jataka, the king after retrieving his queen, questions her purity. She answers that she lived with a mean person, but she was not at all polluted just like a lotus, which though living in water has no attachment for the same. She further asks the
1. In the PCV he is the eighth Baladeva.

Page #134

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
105
earth to give way if she is chaste. The earth gives way and her purity is proved. Hence there is no abandonment of the queen.
B. Lakşmana's Ardhacakravartitva :
(i) Coronation of Laksmana :-According to the PCV Bharata and Kaikeyi accept asceticism (80-83). Rāma refuses the crown. Lakşmaņa is made the king of Sāketapuri (Ayodhya) and Rāma is also consecrated. Vibhișana, Sugriva, Maruti (Hanumat) Pratisūrya (the son of Mahendrarāja), Nīla, Virādhita, Ratnajațin and Bhāmandala are recognised as the lords of Laikā. Kiskindhipura, Srīpura, Hanuruhapura, Rkşapura, Pātālankārapura, Devopagitanagara and Rathanūpura respectively (85).
(ii) Occupation of Mathura by Satrughna Satrughna demands Mathurà for his kingdom from Rāma. It is under the rule of the sonin-law of Rāvana, namely Madhu who is unconquerable on account of his trident (triśūla) which was given to him by a celestial being, Camara. Satrughna encamps on the bank of the river Yamunā and when Madhu is away from the city without his trident, he besieges the city, defeats Madhu and kills the latter's son Lavana. Defeated Madhu accepts monkhood (85). The trident flees away to Camara. Angry Camara spreads epidemic in the city and causes death of its people. Satrughna leaves for Ayodhyā. When seven Munis visit Mathurā, the epidemic subsides and the city prospers again, Satrughna pays homage to those Munis and installs the statues of those Munis (Rişis) in the four quarters outside the city (86-89), to escape further calamity.
(iii) Lakşmaņa's war-campaign :- Once Narada requests Vidyadhara Ratnaratha of Ratnapura of southern Vijayārdha to marry his daughter, Manorainā to Lakşmaņa, but the latter turns down his proposal and insults him. Nārada goes to Lakşmana and instigates him to force marry Manorama. Lakşmaņa attacks Ratnaratha and defeats him. At the request of Manoramā he grants life to her father. Then Ratnaratha marries his daughters Satyadāmā and Manorama to Rama and Lakşmaņa (ch. 90). Thereafter Lakşmaņa conquers all the lords of the southern range of the Vijayārdha mountain and becomes an Ardhacakravartin of Bhāratavarşa (91).
According to the VR Bharata hands over the reins to Rāma by returning the latter's sandals (6.127). Vaśiştha coronates Rāma as the king of Ayodhya. When Lakşmaņa refuses to accept Yuvarājatva that authority is bestowed upon Bharata (6.128). Here Bharata does not renounce the world. He attains heaven along with Rāma (7.110). Vibhīşana and Sugrīva who were already made the lords of Lankā and

Page #135

106
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Kişkindhapura respectively, return to their respective places (6.128). It does not refer to any digvijaya of Lakṣmaṇa or his further marriage.
Here Lavana, the son of Daitya Madhu living in the Madhuvana (on the bank of Yamuna) oppresses the hermits with the help of his trident (triśula) which was presented to him by Rudra for his righteousness (7.61-62). The trident is as powerful as it is mentioned to be in the PCV. Here Lavana is the son of Kumbhīnasī, the sister of Kaikasi, the latter being the mother of Ravana (7.68.14), (7.5.37; 7.61.16). Cyavana along with other Rṣis make a complaint to Rāma about the atrocities of Lavana (7.70.4). Rama sends Śatrughna who kills Lavana when the latter does not have his triśūla with him (7.63-69). The trident flees away to Rudra. The city comes to be known as Śūrasena (i.e. whose army is brave) It becomes a city of plenty after 12 years because the Devas had granted a boon to that effect on the occasion of the victory of Satrughna (7.70).
About the Saptarșis the VR mentions that Rama and Lakṣmaṇa their way to Kişkindha from the Rṣyamuka hill, pay homage to the Saptarșis whose hermitage fell on their way. Sugrīva had told them that those Ṛsis had performed austere penances and had attained heaven (4.13).
on
The TR mentions the coronation of Rāma. (7.12). On this occasion the Vedas assume human form and eulogise Rāma. Śiva also comes there to pay homage to Rama. Then all the others depart to their respective places. Hanumat stays there in the service of Rama (7.20). Then follows the description of the prosperous and happy Ramarajya
According to the Ramopakhyāna, Rāma becomes the king of Ayodhya. He performs 'Daśāśvamedha.' The story is finished here (MB, 3.291).
In the Ananda Rāmāyaṇa there is an account of the marriage of Madanasundari with Yupaketu, the son of Satrughna. King Kambukantha of Śivakāntyāpuri of the south invites various kings to the 'svayamvara' of his daughter Madanasundarī but does not send any message to Rama's sons. Narada learns it and comes to know of the desire of Madanasundarī to become a daughter-in-law in the family of Rama. Nārada informs Yupaketu of it. Yupaketu defeats all the candidates and Kambukantha also. He grants him life at the request of Madanasundari and then marries her (6.8). It further (7.7-9) describes the digvijaya of Rama after the occupation of Mathura by Satrughna.

Page #136

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RÁMA-STORY
107
The PCR agrees with the PCV. According to the PCS Vibhīsaņa attempts to stab himself, but escapes death on account of suddenly falling into swoon (76.2). Here Vibhīsana is crowned by Rāma (78.14). It drops the account of the Saptarșis. The RPS agrees with the PCR. It mentions the name of the Muni as Subala who ordinates Indrajit etc. (p.163). The TSP agrees with the PCV.
The Vasudevahindi follows the VR, but Sugrīva is made the king of a part of the Vidyādhara mountain. Rāma becomes the king of Ayodhyā. He conquers the half of Bhāratavarşa. The story is finished here.
According to the UP, Vibhisana is consecrated as the king of Laikā (68.633). Vibhișana, Sugrīva and Aņumat bring Sītā and Rāma accepts her without any suspicion (68.642). Then they go to Pīthagiri. Rāma and Lakşmaņa get consecrated there at the hands of the Vidyadhara lords. Lakşmaņa lifts up the Koțiśilā and yakşa Sunanda offers Sunanda sword to Lakşmaņa. Then follows the digvijaya by Lakşmaņa and their entry into the city of Ayodhyā. Both of them are enthroned (63.663). The MP agrees with the UP. It additionally mentions that Vibhişaņa tries to commit suicide with a dagger in grief of the death of Rāvaņa, but he is saved by his ministers (78.23.1).
C. Banishment of Sitā:
According to the PCV, in due course of time Sitā develops a pregnancy longing to visit various Jina-temples. Rāma arranges a religious festivity at the Mahendra-udyāna of Ayodhyā (91). Some officers (mayaharayās, eight in number— Vijaya, Sūradeva, Mahugandha, Pingala, Sūladhara, Kāsava, Kala and Khema-- 93.17) inform Rāma of the public censure of Sitā on account of her long duress under Rāvana. Rāma, despite Laksmana's opposition, decides to abandon Sītā under the pretext of sending her on a pilgrimage to Sammeta (holy mountain). Kṛtāntavadana, the general of Rāma's army takes her in a chariot. He abandons her in the Sirhanināda forest across the river Gangā (94) and returns to Ayodhyā. By chance she is given helter by Vajrajaligha, the lord of Pondarikapura, treating her as his sister (96.8). Kệtāntavadana delivers Sita's consolatory message to Rāma. Rāma gets distressed at this unavoidable calamity and performs the last rites of Sītā (96.45).
According to the VR, Rāma while enjoying music in the Aśoka garden learns of Sīta's pregnancy-longing for visiting various hermitages (7.42). In the meanwhile his Vicakşanas inform him of the public

Page #137

108
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN suspicion about the character of Sita (Vijaya, Madhumatta, Kaśyapa and Kaliya have identical names with those of the PCV but the rest of the six bear different names-- 7.43.2). On receiving orders from Rāma, Lakşmaņa takes her in a chariot and leaves Sītā alone near the hermitage of Valmīki, on the other side of the river Gaiga on the same pretext as in the PCV (7.47). Vālmīki takes her to his Āśrama (7.79). On his way back to Ayodhyā, Lakşmaņa abuses Rāma but Sumantra, the charioteer tells him about a prophecy that it was bound to happen (7,50).
The TR does not contain the episode of the abandonment of Sită. According to the Gitāvili of Tulasidasa, Lakşmaņa abandons Sitā in the hands of Vālmīki. Daśaratha died before completing his full age. The rest of his age was being enjoyed by Rāma. Rāma after completion of his own age did not consider it proper to remain with Sítā while enjoying the age of Dasaratha. So he abandoned Sita (Bulcke, p. 441). According to the interpolated Lavakusakānda of the TR, Rāma abandons Māyā Sītā on hearing the report of her censure from a washerman.
The Rāmopākhyā na also does not contain this episode. The Raghuvaṁía agrees with the VR (Raghu. 14).
The PCR agrees with the PCV. The PCS does not mention that the river Gangā was crossed. The RPS mentions additionally that afterwards a search for Sītā is made by the soldiers commissioned by Lakşmaņa (p. 178). The TSP gives a different reason for her abandonment. Sitā's cowives are jealous of her. They ask her to draw a portrait of Rāvana. Sītā then draws the legs of Rāvāņa for she had not seen his face. Her cowives try to instigate Rāma against Sītā with the help of that picture but Rāma does not believe them. They make it known to the public (IV. p. 314). The headmen inform Rāma of the public rumour against Sita. He himself also overhears the same at night from the people (p. 316). His spies also report the same. Then it follows the PCV. Here Laksmana sends Rāma to bring back Sita but she could not be traced out (p. 320).
The Uttarapurāna, the Mahāpurāna, the Vasudevahindi and the Anāmakam Jataka do not contain this episode.
D. Birth of the sons of Sita and her fire ordeal:
(i) Birth and Marriage:-According to the PCV Sīta in due course gives birth to twin sons, Anangalavana and Madanākuša on the 15th day of the bright Śrāvana (97.7.9). Cellaka Siddhartha educates them. Vajrajangha marries his daughter, Sasicūlā (begot on

Page #138

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
109
Lakşmimati) and other 32 girls to Lavaņa (98.2). He with the help of the sons of Sītā defeats Frthu, the king of Pộthvīpura and forces the latter to marry his daughter, Kanakamālā to Aukusa (98.57). Thereafter Lavana and Ankusa launch a war-campaign and conquer many countries. After Sitā's renouncing the world, Khecara Kanakaratha of Kancananagara invites Rama and Laksmana with their sons to attend the 'svayamvara' of his two daughters, Mandakini and Candramukhi. They choose Lavana and Ankusa as their husbands respectively (106.1-12).
(ii) Battle and fire ordeal :- When Lavana and Ankusa come to know from Nārada the reckless treatment of Rāma towards Sītā, they attack Sāketapurī despite opposition from Sítā (99). Bhămandala
joins their side. In the ensuing battle the weapons of Rama and » Lakşmaņa fail to hurt Lavana and Ankusa respectively. Siddhartha
intervenes and discloses the identity of Sita's sons. Rāma and Lakşmaņa then happily embrace Lavana and Ankusa (100).
Further being advised by his well-wishers Rama sends for Sita and asks her to undergo a fire-ordeal to prove her purity. As soon as Sita enters the firepit it gets converted into a reservoir of water and therein Sită appears seated on a divine throne (101-102). Rāma admits his fault, implores Sitā to excuse him and to live with him happily. Sita declines to re-entangle herself into worldly affairs and becomes a nun. She observes penances and attains heaven (celestial birth as a Prati-indra -105.9).
According to the VR also twin-sons are born of Sita in the Aśrama of Valmiki on the Śrāvani rātri. Here the elder is named Kuša because he is purified with the foreparts of the Kusa grass and the younger is named Lava for he is purified with the lower part of the grass, called Laval. On that occasion Satrughna2 is said to have sojourned at the Aśrama on his way to conquer Mathura. He visits the Aśrama again after 12 years on his way to Ayodhyā and overhears the Rāmacarita being recited by Kuśa and Lava (7.71). Śatrughna is not mentioned to have informed all that to Rāma.
The VR does not refer to the marriage, the world-conquest and the battle of Kuśa and Lava with Rāma and Lakşmaņa. In due course Rāma performs a horse-sacrifice (Aśvamedha ) after having killed Sambūka (7.84-92). Valmīki also attends the ceremony along with Kuśa and Lava. As per instructions of Valmiki (7.93.4-17), Kuśa and
1. The Tilaka commentary 7.66.7-9. 2, The Adhyatma Rāmāyaṇa does not mention his presence (7.6.26).

Page #139

110
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Lava recite Rāmāyaṇa. There Rāma learns that they are his sons. He sends a message to Vālmiki to bring Sītā there. He further orders that Sitā should prove her purity by taking an oath (7.95). Accordingly Sita is brought there. Rāma reposes his faith in Sită but for convincing the public he asks Sītā to prove her purity. Sītā comes forward and asks the earth to give way if she is pure. The earth splits (7.97.17) and a divine throne appears, the earth-deity seated on it. The deity lists up Sītā and enters back into the earth along with Sītā. The fire ordeal of Sītā at Lanka is already mentioned.
The TR mentions two sons. The elder is Lava, not Kuśa (7.25) according to the order in which they are mentioned. The interpolated Lavakusakānda of TR refers to the ensuing of a battle between LavaKuśa and the soldiers of Rāma on account of the sacrificial horse. Both the brothers defeat Rāma's army. Sīta enters Patala.
The PCR mentions Siddhartha as a Kşullaka (100.32) and states that Hanumat also joined Lavana and Ankusa in their battle against Rāma and Laksmana (102.170). The PCS does not mention any Kșullaka. Vajrajargha introduces himself as the husband of the sister of Rāma (81.14). Saśicūlā is not mentioned. Pộthu marries his two daughters Kanakamālā and Tarangamālā to Lavana and Ankuša respectively (82.5). Candramukhi is mentioned as Candrabhāgā (86). Vibhîşaņa sends for Trijatā and Laukasundarī. They arrive at Ayodhyā and announce Sita's purity and ask Rāma to arrange an ordeal if he is not satisfied (83.4). In other respects it agrees with the PCR. The TSP follows PCV and additionally mentions the defeating of Vyāghraratha by Vajrajangha on his way to subdue Pșthu (IV. p.322). The RPS agrees with the TSP and further mentions Lavana and Ankusa marrying eight daughters of the king of Podanapura and three hundred of Kuberakānta on their way to the world-conquest. Here Hanumat is said to have joined Lava and Ankusa in their battle against Rama and Lakşmaņa (p.181).
According to the UP Rāma begets eight sons on Sītā. The eldest being Vijayarama and the youngest (68.690 and 706) Ajitañjaya. The MP agrees with it (79.8.12). Sīta accepts nunhood after the initiation of her husband (UP, 68.712; MP, 79.13) into the ascetic fold.
The test of the retrieved queen as found in the Anămakam Jataka is already referred to. Like the PCV some non-Jaina works also refer to the marriage of the two sons of Sitā.
The Raghuvaṁsa (16.54) refers to the watersports of Kuśa with his wife Kumudvatr who is the sister of a Bhujangarāja (16.86). The

Page #140

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
111
Rāmacarita of Sandhyākaranandi (ch.4) refers to Kumudvati's marriage with Kuśa ( Bulcke, p. 445). The Ananda Rāmāyana mentions the marriages of Kuba & Lava Vivahakānda Here Kusa is born of Sita. Lava is not born of her but produced out of 'lavas' (lower part of the Kusa grass) by Vālmīki (5.4.70-75). Like the PCV (106) here Campika and Sumatī, the grand daughters of king Bhūrikīrti (6.1.10) select Kuśa (6.2.92) and Lava respectively (6.3.76) as their husbands in a 'svayamvara' ceremony. Then other marriages of the sons of Rāma and their cousin brothers are mentioned. Lava marries Kañjānanā, a Nāgakanyā (6.7.2) Here Candravadanā is referred to as the daughter of Gandharvarāja (6.6.15). She is married to Citraketu, the son of Lakşmana (6.7.4).
The Kathāsaritsāgara (9.1.71-85) mentions that Sita had to undergo a test in the Aśrama of Valmīki. When the pupils of Valmīki doubt her character, she herself proposes a test. Sítā enters the Tīțima lake. The deity of the earth raises her and proves her chastity?
The battle of Lava and Kuśa with Rama and Lakşmaņa is mentioned in various works :
According to the Kathāsaritsăgara, Laksmana in search of a male person of auspicious signs, required for the Naramedha Yajña imprisons Lava who was returning from the garden of Kubera. Valmiki then sends Kusa. He vanquishes Rāma and Lakşmaņa. When Rāma comes to know the reality, he accepts them as his sons and sends for Sítă (9.1.101-112). Here Lava is elder to Kuša (9.1.92).
Lava as elder brother of Kuća is found in Kaśmīrī Rāmāyaṇa, Tibetan Rāmāyana, Simhalese Rāmakathā and West Acctt. No. 8 & 17 (Bulcke, p. 447).
According to the PCV, Narada becomes the cause of Lavana and Ankuśa's battle with Rāma and Lakşmaņa (99.1-6). In the Rāmalingāmsta Nārada praises the valour of Kuśa and Lava before Ráma. Then Rāma proceeds with his army to Kuśa and Lava (Ch.14).
In other non-Jaina works the sacrificial horse of Rama becomes the cause of the battle.
According to the Uttara Rāmacarita, Lava fights with Candraketu, the son of Laksmana, who guards the sacrificial horse (5.35.1). On that occasion Rāma arrives there. The battle is stopped and they salute Räma. When Kusa reaches there he is pacified by Lava
1. Perhaps the Bșhatkathā might have contained these episodes. 2. Ibid.

Page #141

112
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Thereupon
(6.19.3). Then a drama on Rāmāyana is arranged. Rāma accepts Sita without any ordeal (7.20.1).
According to the Padmapurāna, Lava seizes the sacrificial horse (IV. 54.25) and defeats the commander. Satrughna then subdues Lava. Kuśa arrives there and defeats Satrughna. When Rāma gets information, he sends for Sitā and accepts his sons (IV. 54 67).
The Jaiminiya Aśvamedha agrees with the above account. It further mentions that Kusa and Lava defeat Lakşmana, Bharata and Hanumat as well as wound Rāma. Vālmīki then brings all the soldiers to life (chs. 29-36; Vide Bulcke, p. 451).
According to the Ananda Rāmāyana, Lava in his very young age steals golden lotuses from a lake of Ayodhya after defeating the guards and the soldiers. These lotuses are required by Sītā to get united with her husband. Rāma then invites Valmiki with his brave pupil. Lava seizes the sacrificial horse and defeats the soldiers. Lakşmaņa fights with Lava but the former's weapons do not hurt the latter. He brings Lava with the Brahmăstra and takes him to Rama. Kuća goes there to get Lava released. Lakşmaņa gives a fight but his weapons do not hurt Kusa. Then Rāma fights with Kuśa but his weapons also do not hurt him. Next day Vālmīki discloses the identity of his two pupils. Thereupon Rāma accepts them at once (5.6-8). Then follows the ordeal of Sītā. Here Sitā reunites with Rāma and lives with him. Marathi Bhāvärtha Rāmāyaṇa contains a similar account (7.66-69). (Bulcke, 2. p. 711).
The battle in connection with the sacrificial horse is referred to in the following worksalso, Bengali Rāmāyaṇa of Kșttiv sa, Rāmacandrikā of Keśavadasa (33-39), Gujarāti Rāmāyaṇasăra of Narmada, Kaśmiri Rāmāyana, Reāma Kera (Cambodia), Rāma Kiyena (Syāma) West. Acctts. No. 7;8 & 14, Chalita-Rāma, Govinda Rāmāyaṇa of Guru Govinda and Rāmāyana Masihi (Persian).
There are some works? which do not refer to the horse of sacrifice but the battle is mentioned: Simhalese Rāmakatha, Seri Rama, Seratakānda Rama Jātaka of Syāma, West Accts. No. 6 & 17 and Brāhmacakra of Laos
1. Bulcke, p. 451; 1. A. Buleke, 2. p. 712. 2. Ibid 3. Ibid. p. 281.

Page #142

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
113
E. Renouncing the World :
(i) The acceptance of monkhood by the principal eight sons of Lakşmaņa:-According to the PGV, once Kanakaratha, the Khecara lord of Kancananagara arranges 'svayamvara' ceremony for his daughters, Mandakini and Candramukhi. They select Lavana and Ankusa as their husbands respectively. The eight principal sons of Lakşmaņa out of 250 in all, take it as an affront and fight with Lavana and Ankusa. The ministers of Rāma intervene and avert the disaster. Then the eight Sons of Lakşmaņa accept monkhood under Mahabalamuni (106). The names of these eight sons are : Sridhara (of Višalya), Pệthvītilaka (of Rūpamatī). Mangalanilaya (of Kalyāṇamála), Arjun avřksa (of Vanamalā), Śrīkesin (of Ratimala), Vimalaprabha ( of Jitapadmā ), Sarvakīrti (of Abhayamatí) and Supārsvakīrti (of Manorama). These eight sons are born of eight queens of Lakşmaņa. Višalya is the chief queen of Lakşmaņa among his 16000 wives (91).
The VR does not mention any marriage of Kuśa and Lava. Laksmana has one wife only (ūrmila). He has two sons, Angada and Candraketu (7.102.2). They are installed as the kings of Angadīyapuri in the Kārupatha country (7.102.8) and Candrakāntapuri in the Malla country (7.102.9) respectively. These countries are said to have been conquered by Rāma for them (his nephews),
The PCR mentions Bhagavati instead of Abhayamatī as one of the eight queens of Lakşmaņa. It mentions 17000 (94.17) wives of Laksmana (94.23). The TSP does not mention any fight between the sons of Rama and those of Laksmana (IV. p. 341). It mentions Vimala, Srīkęśin and Satyakīrti as the names of the sons of Laksmana born of Ratimālā, Jitapadma and Abhayavati respectively (IV. p. 313). The RPS follows the PCR but mentions Hemaratha in place of Kanakaratha (p. 195) and Mrgalocana in place of Candramukhi. There is no mention of any quarrel between the sons of Laksmana and those of Rāma (p. 195).
The UP mentions the same number of wives of Lakşmaņa as in the PCV (68.666f) and Pșthvīsundarí as the chief queen (68.704). The MP refers to Pșthvīsundara as the first son of Lakşmana begot on Pșthvssundari (79.9.8). He is made the king of Vārāṇasī after the death of Laksmana.
1. The PCV mentions at 20.187 Prabhāvati as the chief queen. The PCR also
mentions the same name at 20.228,

Page #143

114
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAW
(ii) Death of Laksmana:-According to the PCV, in the course of time Bhāmandala dies on being struck with the lightning (107). Śriśaila (Hanumat) enthrones his son and then along with his wives renounces the world. He attains emancipation (108). Once two celestial beings, Ratnacūla and Manicūla conjure up a scene of bereavement at Saketapuri as if the women are mourning the death of Rāma, to test the mutual deep affection of Rāma and Laksmana. Lakşmana gets shocked with the news of the sudden demise of Rama and dies instantly (109-110). Lakşmaņa lived 11975 years? (114.29).
According to the RPS Hanumat attains emancipation on the Tungagiri (p.196) and only one celestial being creates the scene of Rāma's death (p.196).
The TSP metions Lakṣmaṇa's age to be of 12000 years (IV. p. 347).
There is no mention of Bhamandala in the VR. Hanumat's marriage is not referred to but at 6.125.44. Bharata is said to have offered 16 girls to Hanumat when the latter took to Ayodhyā the message of Rāma's return from Larka. He is blessed with a boon by Rāma on the occasion of the latter's Mahāprasthāna to the effect that the former should live in the world as long as the Rama story lasts (7.108.31). As regards the death of Lakşmaņa it is narrated that once Kāla, the god of death, goes to Rāma and asks for a secret meeting with him to convey to him the message of Maharși Atibala (7.103.2). There it is decided that if any third person overhears them he should be killed. Accordingly Lakşmaņa is installed as the guard on the door to ward off the entry of any third person. At that time Durvāsā Rși comes there and threatens to curse Rāma and his whole family to death if he is not given permission to see Rāma. Lakşmaņa prefers his own death to the destruction of the whole family. So he disturbs Rāma's secret talk (7.105). Rāma does not kill Lakşmaņa but exiles him (7.106.13). Lakşmana then performs meditation on the bank of the Sarayū river. At that time Indra lifts up Lakşmaņa and takes him to heaven 'tridivarii' (7.106.17). For the son of Hanumat see the story of Hanumat under "Intervening Stories.” The interpolated Lavakusakānda of TR agrees with the VR.
According to Brahmapurāņa Hanumat learns on the occasion of the horse sacrifice that Sītā has been abandoned by Rāma. He proceeds to Godāvarī to perform penances (ch. 154). According to the Rāma Kiyena Hanumat renounces the world. (Bulcke, p. 652, fn. 2).
1. PCR, 119.50.

Page #144

115
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RAMA-STORY
(iii) Accepting of monkhood by Lavana and Ankuśa:-According to the PCV, Lavana and Ankuśa get dejected with the worldly miseries on account of the sudden death of Lakṣmaṇa and the distress of the whole family. Thereafter they accept asceticism (110.41).
(iv) Attack on Rama's territory:-Rama becomes mad on account of being overwhelmed with the grief of the loss of his father and his brother Lakṣmaṇa. At such a time Vajramālin and Ratnaraksa, who are the sons of Sunda and the grandsons of Candranakha attack Rama (113.19). The timely help of two celestial beings (Kṛtāntavadana and Jatayu who had already died) makes the invaders flee away. These two celestial beings also help in removing the madness of Rama. Rama realises his folly and performs the last rites of the dead body of Lakṣmaṇa. He offers his kingdom to Śatrughna but the latter declines the offer and wishes to renounce the world along with him (113.68f).
son enthrones the (v) Rama's Nirvāņa:-Rāma of Lavana (114.1) and himself accepts asceticism under Suvratamuni (114.15). At that time Śatrughna, Sugrīva, Vibhīṣaṇa, Nala, Nila and Viradhita also renounce the world. Many ladies also accept nunhood under Arya Śrīmati (114.1). Sugrīva and Vibhiṣaṇa are said to have enthroned their sons Angada and Subhusana as the kings of Kişkindhipura and Lankapuri (114.4) respectively. Śatrughna enthrones his elder son at Mathura (114.18). Rama as a mendicant reaches the place of Koțiśila and performs meditation there. The Prati-indra (Sita as a celestial being) attempts to distract and perturb him in vain (117.5f). Then Rama attains omniscience on the 12th day of the bright Magha. In course of time Rama attains Nirvāņa, final liberation (118.89). Rama lived for 17000 years (118.86). He had 8000 wives among them Sita, Prabhavati, Ratinibha and Śrīdāmā were his queens 91.18).
According to the VR, after the death of Lakṣmaṇa, Rama intends to lead the forest life and therefore (7.107.2) he offers the crown of Kosala to Bharata1 but the latter declines the offer. Then Rama installs Kuśa as the king of Kuśāvatī (Southern Kośala) and Lava as the king of Śravasti (Uttarakośala 7.108. 4 & 5) (7.107.17). It does not refer to Rama's madness or any attack on his territory.
The VR mentions two sons of Bharata viz. Takṣa and Puşkala (7.100.6). Bharata2 conquers the Gandharvas (7.100.10 to 101.2) and
1. According to the PCV Bharata renounces the world.
2. The PCV does not mention any son of Bharata.

Page #145

116
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
makes his sons the kings of Takşaśīla and Puşkalavati, newly established after their names, respectively.
Satrughna? also enthrones his sons Subāhu and Śatrughāti as the kings of Mathurā and Vaidišā respectively (7.108.10). He leaves Mathura and goes to Ayodhyā. Sugrīva transfers his kingdom to Angada (son of Vali 7.108.23) and goes to Rāma. Rāma advises Vibhīşaņa to continue as the king of Lanka and advises Hanumat to live long in the world. Then Rama along with Bharata, Satrughna, the ladies of the harem and many others proceeds towards the river Sarayū on a Mahāprasthāna (7.109). Brahma appears and eulogises Rāma as an incarnation of Vişnu (7.110.8). Rāma along with his brothers enters the divine spirit of Vispu (Ibid, 12). The Vanaras and the Rkşas enter their divine abodes. Sugriva enters the solar orbit (Ibid, 21). The rest of the people attain heaven (tridivam 7.110.25). Rāma's age is mentioned to be 11000 years (7.104 12). Except Sita' no other wife of Rāma is referred to.
The interpolated Lavakuśakānda of the TR agrees in its essentials with the VR
sma.
birth, noo we
According to Brahmapurana (ch 154) Rāma remembers of Sita and proceeds to the river Godavari for observing penances.
The Ananda Rāmāyana though does not mention many wives of Rama but there are references to many married women who want to establish sexual relations with Rama. Rāma declines their proposal and promises to marry them in his next birth, when he would be born as Krşņa. Here Rāma tells that he will have 16000 wives in his future life (7.4.21-47), Four Brahmin girls who were kidnapped by Dundubhi and other 16000 women request for marriage (7.11.52-73 and 7.12), but Rāma declines to marry them now, with the same promise for future.
According to the Naradapurāna (Pū. ch. 79) and the Padmapurana (Pata, ch, 100) Vibhisana is imprisoned by the Dravadia ns. Rāma gets him released (Bulcke, p. 415). The Ananda Rāmāyana mentions that when Vibhîşana is defeated by the grandson of Kumbhakarna. Rāma goes to Lařka and restores Larkā to Vibhişaņa after defeating the grandsons of Kumbhakarņa (7.4.80-85). According to Rāma Kiyena, Rāvana's son imprisons Vibhīşana. Bharata and Satrughna get him
1. The PCV does not refer to any son of satrughna. 2. In the southern version Manthara refers to many would-be wives of
Rāma, VRTP.

Page #146

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE RĀMA-STORY
117
released (Bulcke, p. 414). According to the Seratakānda and the Seri Rama, Sita and Rama after their reunion perform penances (Bulcke, p. 455).
According to the Dasaratha Jātaka, Rāma is said to have ruled for 16000 years.
The PCR agrees with the PCV. The PCS agrees with the PCR leaving out some details. The TSP (IV. p. 345) mentions that the sons of Sunda, Indrajit and other hostile Vidyadharas attack Ayodh ya. Rāma's age is said to be of 15000 years (IV. p. 352). The son of Lavana is named as Anangadeva (IV. p. 347). According to the RPS, Lavana and Arkusa attain emancipation on Pāvāgiri (p. 197). The sons of Indrajit and Kumbhakarna assist Sunda in attacking Säketapuri (p. 197). Rāma attains emancipation on the Tuigagiri (p. 200). The son of Lavana is called Anaigalavaņa (p. 198).
According to the UP Rāma's age is 13000 years (67.150). The MP agrees with it (69.13). The UP does not mention Rama's madness. Rama and Lakşmaņa migrate to Vārāṇasi after handing over the reign of Ayodhyā to Bharata and Satrughna (68.688). Here Rāma after the death of Lakşmaņa en thrones the eldest son of Laksmana begot on Pșthvīsundari (UP, 68.704). Out of the eight sons of Sīta, seven become monks while the eighth, the youngest, Ajitañjaya is made the king of Mithila (68.706) Thereafter Rāma along with his 180 sons, Sugrīva, Anumat and Vibhisana take to asceticism (68.711). Rāma and Anumat get emancipation on the Sammeta (68.721). The number of the wives of Rama is the same as in the PCV (UP, 68.666f). The MP (79.9; 79.12-14) agrees with the UP.

Page #147

CHAPTER IV
INTERVENING STORIES 1. Introduction :
In addition to the main Rama-Story the Paumacariyaṁ (PCV) contains 64 side stories. Of them some are mere episodes or incidental references to some detached events. They all cover not less than half the volume of the work. Some of them are dealt with in great detail while others are sketched and a few are summarily referred to. The longest story is Rāvana-Carita which runs over 11 cantos-i.e, one-fifth of the whole volume. Next to it is that of Añjanāsundarí which is spread over four cantos. Otherwise generally they range from 7 to 70 verses. However the smaller ones are finished in 5 to 7 verses and the smallest ones are summarily given in 2 to 3 verses. There is one instance when merely the name of the story is referred to.
In course of relating the main story, Gautama, the chief disciple of Lord Mahāvīra, narrates some side episodes' or stories either independently or in reply to some point raised by or some information sought by king Śreņika. Besides him some monks, who come into contact with the characters of the main story or the intervening stories, also relate some of the narratives in reply to the querries made by the latter. Not only that but even the characters of the main or the intervening stories narrate some of the stories to their co-characters to explain one or the other point. Thus we find that generally many sub-stories are fitted into the texture of the main story and sometimes sub-stories also contain further intervening stories. Occasionally this strata of sub-stories may be traced even to the fourth layer. This is generally the form in which we find all our ancient story-books, such as the Vasudevahindi of Sanghadásagani (VH), Samarā iccakahā and the Mahapuräņa.
These sub-stories can be said to be of two types i.e. (I) Informative and (II) Didactic. The informative stories can be further grouped as (A) the stories of eminent persons, which describe in short or detail the biographies of or some episodes associated with the life of or the advent of some eminent persons of the Jaina Faith, (B) the stories of legendary kings, which narrate the lives of some legendary kings or some episodes or events associated with them; and (c) the stories of genesis, which explain the origin of a class of society or a religious practice or some dynasty. The didactic stories can be grouped as (A) religious-cum-moral stories which support some religious principle or

Page #148

INTERVENING STORIES
119
practice and illustrate some moral point, and (B) stories of general prudence which impart worldly wisdom. The didactic stories of group A are generally the previous-birth-stories in which some instructions are brought home by co-relating the present and the past life of cause and effect or the law of Karma. They explain the truth of transmigration of soul in worldly life. They further bring to light the causes of suffering and happiness, misery and plentifulness, and rise and fall. They preach that one should lead a righteous life and tell us that non-attachment and non-aversion are the summum bonum of life. The didactic stories of group B are told to guide the characters in the ways of the world,
1-The informative stories number twenty. They can be accounted as follows :
A. Caritas of eminent persons :
This group contains 11 stories. Nos. 1, 2 and 3 narrate the lives of Rāvana, Añjanäsundari and her son Hanumat, and Nárada respectively who are associated with the main story.
Stories Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 7 give in brief the biographies of four Tirthaikaras viz. Lord Mahāvīra whose chief disciple Gautama is the narrator of the main story; Lord Rşabha who is the usherer of the new era and is associated with the origin of social classes, professions and some dynasty; Lord Ajita who is associated with the origin of the Rākşasa dynasty; and Lord Munisuvrata during whose Tirtha Rāma and Rāvana are said to have lived.
Stories No. 8, 9, 10 and 11 relate the duel between the first Cakravartin Bharata and his brother Bahubali, the end of 60000 sons of second Cakravartin Sagara, the initiation of the fourth Cakravartin Sanatkumāra and the life of the tenth Cakravartin Harişeņa respectively.
B. Legendary kings of the Ikşvāku-vamsa :
This group contains four stories-i. e. Nos. 12, 13, 14 & 15 which explain the causes which led to the initiation of some Ikşvāku kings and illustrate the crude and wicked ways of worldly life. Thus the story of Vajrabahu narrates the cause of his initiation. The story of Kirtidhara and Sukošala relates how a mother takes her revenge in her next birth by killing her own son. The story of Naghuşa and Simhikā illustrates that even a faithful, courageous and chaste queen may be censured and deprived of her position by her own husband. The story of Sodasa explains the possibilities of a king going astray and invading his own son.

Page #149

120
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
C. Stories of genesis :
This group contains five stories-i. e. Nos. 16, 17, 18 and 19 as well as 20, which inform us about the origin of the Brāhmaṇa class, Animal-sacrifice, Vánara-vamsa and the Harivamsa respectively.
II—There are forty-four didactic stories. They can be accounted as follows:
A. Religious-cum-Moral stories :
The first group has thirty-eight stories which illustrate different points viz. the painful consequences of desecrating the Jina-idols (34), of torturing the monks (21 & 32), the Samgha (26) or the animals (44 & 51), of punishing others and causing breach of faith (22); the suffering brought about by murdering monks (40) or other human beings (23, 24 & 42); and the good fruits of giving protection to other's life (28 & 39). They further illustrate that abusive speech invites miseries (50); that the act of kidnapping others is retributed (35); that unchastity and unfaithfulness bring about desertation (47) while chastity and faithfulness procure rise and bountifulness (48). They exemplify that enmity intimidates religious advancement (38 & 54) while love and sympathy (25), true friendly help (30) and affection (36) are reciprocally rewarded. They further teach us that to much attachment causes delusion (45 & 53), anger brings about downfall (29) and deceit earns rebirth as an animal (52). They illustrate the fruits of observing vows (49), penances (31, 33, 37, 43, 56 & 58) and offering gifts to monks (57) as well as the harm resulting from forming a 'nidāna' (27 & 46). The story No. 55 illustrates variedly the results of 'nidāna', penances, affection, attachment, censure and confession and the story No. 41 illustrates the crude ways of wordly life.
B. The stories of general prudence :
They are 6 in number and illustrate the benefits of helping the ignorant (59), the futility of too much attachment (60), the veracity of the axiom that only the brave deserve the fair (61), They further establish that greed is the cause of enmity between even one's kith and kin (62 & 63) and emphasise the necessity of prudence in forming family ties (64).
2. INFORMATIVE STORIES. A-Caritas of Eminent Persons.
1. Rāvana Carita : According to the Jaina tradition, Rāvana is the eighth Prativă. sudeva who is killed by the eighth Vasudeva, Laksmana. A Prativa.

Page #150

INTERVENING STORIES
121
sudeva is a rival of a Vasudeva. He is equal to Vásudeva in power and prowess. Rāvana is a Khalanayaka in the Rāma-story but his place in the Jaina mythology is equally important with that of other 62 (salākāpuruṣas) illustrious persons of the Jaina Faith. On account of this importance, the PCV devotes (15 cantos-5-19 or nearly 80 i. e. 18-95 leaves) one fourth of the total volume (335 leaves) to the description of his Carita. The PCV narrates his early life and valorous feats in the beginning of the work i. e. preceding the narration of the main story where his downfall is related.
The Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa deals with Rāvana-carita in the Uttarakānda just before the exile of Sītā. It is narrated to Rāma, on his own request, by Agastyamuni. The TR treats of it in the beginning.
It is the Rāmopākhyāna which narrates Rāvana-carita in the beginning of the Rāma-story and the same is the case with the Tibetan Rāmāyana, the Khotanese Rāmāyaṇa, the Seri Rāma, the Seratakānda of Indonesia, the Rāma Kiyena and Rāma Jataka of Syāmadeśa.
(a) Beginning of hostility between the ancestors of Rākşasa Răvara and those of Vidyadhara Indra:
(i) Losing of Lanka by Sukeśa and its re-occupation by Mālīn:According to the PCV there existed friendship between the Vánara and the Raksasa kings since the time of the Vānara king Mahodadhiraval of Kiskindhipura, the great grandfather of Sugrīva and Rākşasa king Taditkeśa? of Laikāpuri, the great grandfather of Rāvana (6.9397). As the time passed on, there came an occasion when Srimāla, a Vidyādhara princess of Adityapura, in her 'svayamvara' ceremony chose Kişkindhi, the grandson of Mahodadhirava as her husband. At this selection Vidyadhara prince Vijayasimha of Rathanūpuracakravālapura felt humiliated and so he wanted to subdue Kiskindhi. On that unhappy occasion Sukeśa (Sukesin) a descendant of Raksasa Taditkeśa of Laňkā arrived there to help his friend, Kişkindhi. When Vijayasirha was killed in the battle, Kişkindhi and Sukeśa had to face Aśanivega, who was the father of Vijayasimha and grandfather of Indra, in a further battle. This time Kişkindhi and Sukesin could not survive the fierce attack so, they fled away and took shelter in
1. Mahodadhirava was a very far descendant of Srikantha who was the first
lord of the Vānaradvipa with his capital at Kişkindhipura (See ch. 5 Origin of various Vanisas). Taditkesa was a very far descendant of Meghavāhana who became the first ruler of Larkāpuri (See Ibid).

Page #151

122
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMCARIYAM
Pātālankarapura1. Asanivega then put Laṁkāpuri under the rule of Nirghatadanava (6.147-206).
As the time passed Sukeśa's wife Indrānī gave birth to Malin, Sumalin and Malyavat. When the opportunity came, Malin killed Nirghātadanava and reoccupied his ancestral town (6.235). Thereafter Malin married Candramati, the daughter of Bhogavati by Himaraja of Hemangapura. Sumalin got wedded to Prītimahāsundarī, the daughter of Pritimati by Priyankara of Pritipura. And Malyavat took Kanakāvalī as his wife, who was the daughter of Kanakaśrī by Kanaka of Kanakapura (6.241).
In the VR there is no reference to the rendering of any assistance by Sukeśa to any Vanara or no mention of any friendship between their ancestors. Here Sukesa is the son of Vidyutkeśa (7.4.23) and the grandson of Praheti, the first Lord of the Rākṣasas. Sukesa's wife is Devavati (7.5.3) and their first son is Malyavat, second Sumalin and third Malin. They pleased Brahma with their penances and acquired the boon of invincibility (7.5.14 ajeyāḥ). Further Viśvakarman granted them the city of Lanka for their abode (7.5.26). Thus they occupied Lanka for the first time and made it a colony of the Rākṣasas. Thereafter Narmada, a Gandharvi, married her three daughters Sundari, Ketumati and Vasuda to them respectively (7.5.30-41).
The TR does not contain this account and so is the case with the Ramopakhyāna of the MB.
(ii) Killing of Malin, the grand uncle of Ravana, and appointment of Vaisravana as the Ruler of Lanka by Indra: -As the time lapsed, Sahasrara, the son of Asanivega begot a son Indra on his wife Mānasasundari. He was named Indra because his mother, when he was in her womb, had developed a pregnancy longing to have all the paraphernalia of celestial Indra at her disposal. Her desire was duly fulfilled by Sahasrara with the power of his vidyās. In due course Indra's sway began to expand and he established all the paraphernalia like that of the celestial Indra. Indra's (also called as Suravai-Surapati-7.41) rise could not be tolerated by Malin, hence the latter along with his two brothers attacked Indra. But he was killed by Indra in the battle. Then Sumalin and Malyavat made a retreat and took shelter in Pātālankarapura (7. 1-50), Thereafter Indra appointed four Vidyadharas namely Soma, Varuna,
1. It is called 'Dugga' (7.166) i. c. a well-fortified place for the refuge of the defeated and helpess.

Page #152

INTERVENING STORIES
123
Kubera and Yama as the Lokapalas (rulers) of the East, the West, the North and the South respectively. They were the sons of Adityakīrti and Makaradhvaja, Varunā and Megharatha, Kanakāvali and Surakhecara, and Sriprabhā and Kālagni respectively.
Further Indra appointed Vaiśravana (Vesamaņa), the Yaksa prince of Yakşapura as the ruler (fifth Lokapāla) of Larkāpuri. He was the son of Visvasena (Vísasena) born of Kośikā (Kosiya), the daughter of Vyomabindu of Kautukamarigalapura. He is called Dhanada also (7.53-55).
According to the VR on the strength of the boon granted to them by Brahmā, they (Mályavat etc.) started oppressing the Suras, Devas, Rșis, Nāgas and Yakşas as well as the Indras (7.5.44). The Suras and the Rșis then made a complaint to Śiva (God), but the latter sent them to Visņu (God) who promised them to kill their oppressors (7.6.21). When Malyavat came to know of it, he decided to annihilate the Devas totally (7.6.44). So he along with his two brothers attacked Devaloka (the territory of the Devas), but Vişņu assisted the Devas and killed Malin (7.7.43). At this Sumālin and Mālyavat fled away to Laikā. But seeing that the fight was going on, they came back and after a hot discussion with Vişnu and Indra they resumed fighting. This time they had to flee away to Patāla (7. 8. 22 or Rasātala 7.8.29) for their safety. Larkāpuri was given to Dhanesvara or Vaisravana by his father Viśravas or Paulastya.
About the advent of Vaiśravaņa it is said that Pulastya, the son of Prajāpati was a Brahmarşi. He went to the Aśrama of Trņabindu, a Rājarşi to perform penances. Once the latter's daughter, Vedasruti came into the range of the sight of Pulastya and became pregnant on account of being cursed by the latter to that effect (7.2.13). She was then married to Pulastya by her father. She gave birth to a son who was called Paulastya after his father's name and Viśravas on account of hearing the Vedas recited by her mother (7.2.31). Viśravas married Devavarṇini, the daughter of Muni Bharadvāja and begot a son Vaisravana on her. Brahmā being pleased with the penances of Vaiśravaņa made him the fourth Lokapāla. conferred on him the title of Dhanesa and presented him with the Puşpakavimāna (7.3). Here it is said that Yama. Indra and Varuṇa were other three Lokapālas (7.3.17). Thereafter Paulastya made Vaisravana the ruler of Lanka which was already vacated by the Rākşasas (7.3.25-31), Mālin and Sumālin as mentioned above.
1. Here Kubera and Dhanada are two separate persons. In the VR Vaisravana,
Dhanada and Kubera are the same and one person.

Page #153

124
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
The TR merely refers to Larkāpurī as the colony of the Rakşasas (Nišicara), the killing of the Rakşasas by the Devas (te saba suranha samara sarghāre 1.179) and Larkāpuri's occupation by the guards of Yakşapati (Kubera) with the help of Sakra.
According to the Rāmopakhyāna (MB, 3.274), Vaisravana is the grandson of Prajāpati (Brahma) and the son of Pulastya born of Gau. Pulastya himself is said to have become Viśravas to take revenge upon his son Vaisravana who had already left his father and gone to Brahmā. Brahma had conferred upon Vaiśravaņa, the title of Dhanesa (Kubera) and had made him a Lokapāla. Brahmā further made him the Adhipati of the Yaksas, installed him as the king of Larikā inhabited by the Raksasas, and provided him with the Puspakavimāna.
The PCR (chs. 6-7) agrees with the PCV. It mentions Visvasena as Viśravá (Vaisravas) and Kośika as Kausiki (7.127). The PCS describes Indra (Vidyādhara) as celestial Indra with all his divine paraphernalia (8). There is no reference to the mother of Vaiśravana. The RPS states that Vidyadhara Indra named the Vijayārdha territory as 'Svarga' and the Vidyādharas as 'Devas' (p.27). The TSP refers to the name of the mother of Indra as Citrasundarī. Sahasrara assumed the form of the celestial Sakra to fulfil the pregnancy whim of Citrasundari (IV. 113-114).
The Vasudevahindi, the UP and the MP do not contain this episode. The Vasudevahindi merely mentions Soma, Yama, Varuna and Vaisravana as step brothers of Daśagrīva (Rāvana), having sway over the Vijayārdha mountain. They were born of Devavarņini, the first wife of Vimśatigrīva.
In the Buddhist Pali Jatakas there are references to Vessavana as the lord of the Yakkhas' but his relation with Rāvana is nowhere mentioned.
(b) Re-occupation of Lankāpuri by Rävaņa:
(iii) Birth of Ratnāšrava and his marriage :- According to the PCV, in course of time Sumālin's wife Prītimatī gave birth to Ratnaśrava and other two sons (7.59) at Patalankārapura. Ratnāśrava then started acquiring vidyās at Kusuma-udyāna to restore his ancestral city. At that time Vyomabindu left his daughter Kekasī (the sister of Kośika) in the service of Ratnaśrava. After acquiring Mānasasundari-vidyā, Ratnaśrava established the city of Kusumakāntapura and married Kekasi (7.75).

Page #154

INTERVENING STORIES
125
(iv) Birth of Rāvaṇa and his brothers:-According to the PCV, in course of time Kekasī, the wife of Ratnaśrava gave birth to Rāvana, Bhanukarņa, Candranakha and Vibhīṣaṇa (7.96-98). The first son of Kekasī, in his babyhood, rolled down the cot and caught hold of a necklace bedecked with nine jewels which had been given to Meghavahana, the first lord of Lankapuri by Bhima, the Rākṣasādhipa and it had passed on to Ratnaśrava as a paternal property. When Kekasi out of curiosity put it round his son's neck, she found that the face of her child got reflected in those nine jewels and so he was named Daśamukha1 (7.96). Bhanukarna's other name was Kumbhakarna2 (8.57). There is a reference to the dreams seen by Kekasī before giving birth to her children. These dreams depicted cruel nature of Rāvaņa (varakūrakammakārī) and righteousness of other two sons (sucariyāņubhavenam) 7.76-84.
According to the VR (7.9), Sumalin while staying at in the Patala observes Dhaneśvara (Vaiśravana of Lanka) soaring in the sky in his Puspakavimāna with all his splendour. He plans to usher in the rise and prosperity of his own family and then desiring to get a son by Paulastya sends his daughter, Kekasī to marry her to Paulastya i.e. Viśravas. As she approached the Muni in hard times hence Viśravas predicted that cruel sons (krürakarmaṇaḥ) would be born to her. On her imploration the curse was modified to the effect that her last son would be (dharmātmā) religious minded. In course of time Kekasi gave birth to Daśagrīva having ten heads and twenty arms, Kumbhakarna having huge body, Surpanakha of abominable countenance (vikṛtānana) and Vibhiṣaņa" having religious inclination. At 3.17.22 Khara and Daṣana are referred to as the brothers of Surpanakha and at 7.24.37 Khara is cailed as (matṛśvaseyas to bhrātā) the cousin brother of Surpaņakhā.
The TR merely refers to Ravana as having ten heads and twenty arms, as belonging to the family of Pulastya (1.176) and mentions Vibhīṣana as the step brother of Ravana. Surpanakha is called the sister of Rāvana, Khara and Duşaņa (3.17 to 3.23).
1. He was called Ravana on account of making a loud cry for safety (ravo kao9.78) on the occasion of lifting up the Kailasa mountain to disturb
muni Vali.
At his father-in-law's town Kumbhanagara som e one made a sign on account of his big ears, hence Bhanukarna was called Kumbhakarna (Tatheva kumbhanayare, kena vi saddo kao sinchenam, daṭṭhūņa pavarakanņe tti).
3. The Gaudiya and the NW versions of VR refer to Ravana and Vibhiṣaṇa as the sons of Nikaṣā (Bulcke,p. 418).
2.

Page #155

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
According to the Ramopakhyana, when Vaiśravana knew of his father's (Pulastya but now Viśravas) anger he appointed three Rākṣasīs— Puspotkață, Raka and Mālinī as the attendants (paricārikāḥ) of Viśravas who begot Kumbhakarņa and Daśagrīva on the first, Vibhiṣaṇa on the third and Khara and Surpanakha as twins on the second Rākṣasĩ (MB, 3.275).
126
The PCR mentions Ratnaśrava as the only son of Sumalin (7.133). The PCS agrees with the PCR and mentions the incident of naming of Daśagrīva in his boyhood (9.4). The RPS follows the PCS. The TSP agrees with the PCR. According to the UP (68.8-13) and the MP (70.4) Pulastya is the great grandson of Sahsragrīva. Pulastya begets Ravana on Meghaśrī. According to the Vasudevahindi, Vimśatigrīva has four wives Devavarņinī, Vakraja, Kekasī and Puspotkaṭā.1 Devavarnini's sons are Soma, Yama, Varuna and Veśravana. Kekasi has Ravana, Kumbhakarna, Vibhiṣana, Trijata and Surpanakha. Vakrajā has Mahodara, Mahāhasta, Mahāpārsva2, Khara and Āsālikā; and Puspotkață has Trisāra, Duḥsāra, Vidyutjihva and Kumbhināsā.
(v) Acquisition of vidyas by
Ravana:-According to the PCV (7.99-173), once Daśamukha having observed the splendid paraphernalia of Vaisravana soaring in the sky in the Puspakavimāna came to know of the past history of Lanka from his mother. Then he decided to regain the lost glory. He went to the Bhima forest along with his brothers, performed penances there and mastered various vidyās (supernatural powers) such as Ākāśagāminī, Kāmadāyinī, Kāmagāmī etc. (54 in all) Kumbhakarna acquired Nidrāņī etc. (five in all) and Vibhiṣana Siddhartha etc. (four in all).
At that time the Yakṣa lord established Svayamprabhapura for their habitation. Once Sumalin advised Daśamukha to restore the lost glory and to reoccupy their ancestral Lankapurī.
According to the VR, Kaikasi once having observed the splendour of Vaiśravana advised Daśagrīva to attain the prowess like that of Vaisravana (7.9.43). Then Daśagrīva, Kumbhakarṇa and Vibhīṣaṇa went to Muni Gokarna's Asrama and performed austerities. Brahma granted to Rāvana the boons of immortality from one and all except from the human beings and of changing his shape to his desires (7.10.25). Vibhiṣaṇa was favoured with the boon of
1. In the VR Puspotkață is the daughter of Sumalin and the sister of Kaikasi (7.5,40) and Suparsva is mentioned as the son of Sumalin.
2. Ibid.

Page #156

INTERVENING STORIES
127
immortality and undisturbed devotion to righteousness. Kumbhakarna was deluded by Sarasvati on the advice of Brahma who was requested by the Gods to do so to get him rid of his habit of devouring men and gods. Therefore, according to his demand Kumbhakarna was granted the boon of remaining in slumber for years together (7.10.45). But at 6.61.27 it is said that at the request of Ravana the boon was modified to six months' duration.
After having obtained these boons they went away to Śleṣmātaka forest and lived there (7.10.49). Thereafter Sumalin encouraged Daśagrīva to recapture their ancestral Lanka. First Dasagrīva declined to fight with his stepbrother but at the counsel of Prahasta he decided to restore Lanka to his own family (7.11.20).
The TR mentions that Daśaśīṣa neglected to demand immortality from the Vanaras and the Manujas. Kumbhakarna was favoured with six months' slumber (1.177). The cause of performing penance is not referred to. The deluding of the mind of Kumbhakarna by Sarasvati is mentioned.
According to the Rāmopakhyāna, with an envy to equal Vaiśravana, they performed penances. Ravana was granted immunity from all but human beings. Kumbhakarna was favoured with Mahātinidrā (3.275).
The PCR (7. 324) agrees with the PCV. It has changed the names of some of the vidyas and added two more vidyas to the credit of Rāvana. In the PCS (9.12) some of the vidyas differ from those of the PCV and the PCR. According to the RPS (p. 29) Kekasī once observed Kubera's splendour and then wept. On enquiry from Rāvaṇa she narrated the history of Lanka. The TSP agrees with the PCR and mentions a few more vidyas (IV. p. 122). According to the VH, Ravana acquired Prajñapti-vidya and that also after occupying Laikā.
(vi) Marriage of Ravana and his progeny:-According to the PCV Vidyadhara Maya, the lord of Surasangītapura married his daughter, Mandodari begot on Hemavati, to Daśagrīva (8.21). Further Ravana is said to have wedded many Vidyadhara girls by the way of the Gandharva (8.38) and the Rākṣasa forms of
marriage. (6.51).
Kumbhakarna married Taḍitmālā, the daughter of Surupanayana and Mahodara of Kumbhapura while Vibhīṣaņa was wedded to Pankajasadṛśa, the daughter of Nandavati and Viśuddhakamala of Jyotiprabhapura.

Page #157

128
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Mandodari in due course gave birth to Indrajit and Meghavă. hana. Indrajit was named as such on account of his having (ruvena Indasariso 8.63) countenance like that of Indra.
According to the VR also Dänava Maya's daughter Mandodari was married to Rāvana. But her mother Hemā is said to be a nymph and Maya as the ruler of Hemamayapura (7.12.19).
Ravana is here also referred to have kidnapped the daughters of various kings, Rşis, Devas, Danavas, Gandharvas, Pannagas, Asuras, Yakşas etc. (7.24. 1-6).
Kumbhakarņa married Vajrajvālā, grand daughter of Vairocana (7.12.23) and Vibhişana was wedded to Sarama, the daughter of Sailūşa, a Gandharvarājā (7.12.25).
Mandodarī had one son Meghanada (7.12.28). He was named Indrajit by Brahma in memory of his conquering Indra (7.30.5).
The TR refers to the marriage of Rāvana with Mandodari and other girls, the latter by force (TR, 1.178.182). It does not refer to the wives of Kumbhakarna and Vibhīşaņa.
The PCR agrees with the PCV. It mentions Maya as a great friend of the father-in-law of Vibhīşana (8.150). The name of the mother-in-law of Vibhisana is Nandamála. The PCS agrees with the PCV. The RPS follows the PCR. The TSP follows the PCV. Here Vira is the father-in-law of Vibhīşaņa (IV. p. 124).
According to the Vasudevahindi, Mandodari's first child was prophesied to be ominous bringing destruction to her parents. But as she was beautiful so Rāvana married her and decided to abandon the first child of Mandodari. Other marriages are not mentioned. The UP (68.18) and the MP (70.6) agree with the VH.
(vii) Conduct of Kumbhakarņa:- According to the PCV Kumbhakarņa is religious-minded, trained in various arts, well-versed in traditional knowledge and of enduring character. He takes pure and sumptuous food. His sleep is timely. There is no diabolic and abnormal trait in him (8.58-59), He takes a vow of performing daily worship of the Jinas (14.154). The PCR (8.145-148) depicts him in the similar way.
In the VR Kumbhakarņa is said to be dominated by ‘Kama'. He used to take a huge quantity of flesh of boars and buffaloes and was addicted to drinking of wine and blood. He slept six to nine months. His slumber was so deep that it could not be disturbed by drum-beats, or by the strokes of clubs and pestles or even by the trampling of his body by elephants. Even the Raksasas could not withstand the force of his

Page #158

129
INTERVENING STORIES
breath. He used to devour living beings, oppress gods and destroy hermitages (6.60,61; 7.10.39f).
In the TR the same diabolic traits of Kumbhakarna have been mentioned (1.180).
of
and
(viii) Defeating Vaiśravana and Yama:-According to the PCV, Bhanukarṇa started plundering the territory of Dhanada (Vaiśravana Lanka) wealth by kidnapping women, domestic animals (8.66). Then Vaiśravana sent an envoy to Sumalin to prevent his grandson from nefarious activities, but Ravana after insulting the envoy challenged Vaiśravana for a battle. Before the ensuing of the battle on the Guñjavara mountain, Vaiśravana having realised the futility of a battle with Ravana, the son of his mother's sister, wanted to avert it, but Ravana did not agree. In the battle Ravana routed the Yakṣa soldiers, wounded Vaiśravana and took possession of his Puspakavimana. Vaiśravana was removed by his soldiers to Yakṣapura. After recovery he renounced the world (8.128).
Further Rāvana subdued Bhuvanālaṁkāra elephant in the valley of Sammetaśikhara (8.212-225) and encamped there.
7
In the meanwhile Vanara Kişkindhi who had also taken shelter along with Sukeśa in Pātālankarapura begot two sons namely Adityarāja and Ṛkṣarāja (6.214). On attaining suitable age they attacked Yama who was the Lokapala of the South ruling at Kişkindhipura, to regain their ancestral kingdom. Unfortunately they got imprisoned and were exposed to hellish tortures1 by the Yama. Then a Khecara approached Ravana sojourning on the Sammeta and requested him to assist the release of the Vanara princes. Accordingly Ravana defeated Yama, installed Adityaraja and Ṛkṣarāja as the kings of Kişkindhipura and Ṛkşapura respectively. Thereafter Rāvana went to his ancestral Lankapuri (8.227-285) and ruled there.
According to the VR, after being favoured with the boons Rāvana was advised by his grandmaternal father Sumalin to take back Lanka from Dhanada (Vaiśravana). First Ravana declined to demand Lankāpuri from his own elder stepbrother but on being further advised by Prahasta, he sent him (Prahasta) to
Dhanada
Dhanada for the same. at the advice of his father transferred Lanka's to Rāvana and he himself made Kailāśa as
crown
1. Karaviya ya niraya Jameņa Veyannimaiya bahave.........naraesu kaya kayanten am-8.232-233.
9

Page #159

130
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
his abode (7.11).
Then follows the marriage of Surpanakhā1, Rāvana2 and his brothers and the birth of the sons of Ravana (7 12). Thereafter Ravaņa started ruining the Devas, Ṛsis, Yaksas and Gandharvas and the Nandanavana etc. (7.13.8-9). Kumbhakarna is here referred to have undergone a long slumber. At 6.61.19 there is a reference to his kidnapping of other's wives (parastriharanam). Then follows the despatch of an envoy by Dhaneśvara to prevent Ravana from committing heinous crimes, the killing of that envoy by Ravanņa (7.13), Ravana's attack on Dhanada at Kailasa (7 14), the killing of the Yakṣa soldiers, the censure of Ravana by Dhanada (Kubera), the defeat of Kubera, the removal of Kubera to Nandanavana by his soldiers and the occupation of Puspakavimāna of Kubera and of Lanka by Ravana (7.15.35). There is no reference to the subduing of any elephant by Ravana.
According to the VR, Narada instigated Rāvana to conquer Yama (7.20 16) on the one hand and alerted Yama to face Ravana (7.21.6) on the other. Ravana then defeated the soldiers of Yama. Yama tried to kill Ravana but he was immediately prevented by Brahma (7.22.38-48). Ravana then entered into the Rasatala for further victory.
The TR refers to the extermination of Kubera and the Yakṣas from Lankapuri and the wresting of Puspakavimāna from Kubera (1.179). Yama's defeat is also referred to (1.82).
The Ramopakhyana (MB, 3 275) refers to the defeat of Kubera and the occupation of Puspakavimāna by Rāvana.
The PCR agrees with the PCV, but it mentions that Ṛkṣaraja was made the king of Kişkindhipura. The PCS does not mention Vaisravana's request to Ravana to avoid battle. Here Ucchuraya (Ṛkṣarāja) is made the king of Yamapuri (12.13). The RP'S follows the PCR, but no battle is mentioned between Vaiśravana and Rāvana. The former renounced the world and Rāvana paid homage to him (IV. p. 126).
According to the Vasudevahindi Ravana on being oppressed by his stepbrothers Soma, Yama etc. left his father's city and went away to Lanka. According to the UP and the MB Ravana's ancestor, Sahasragriva had already occupied Lanka on being expelled from his father's city by his nephew.
1. See further.
2. Already described.

Page #160

INTERVENING STORIES
131
(c) Rāvana's war-campaign and his emergence as a Prativasudeva or Ardhacakravartin of Bhāratavarşa:
(ix) Abduction of Candranakhā:-According to the PCV, Kharadūşana, the son of Meghaprabha expelled Khecara Candrodara? and usurped the latter's capital Pātālaňkārapura. He abducted Candranakhā when Rāvana was away from Larkāpuri to marry Trņakañcu (Taņukañcu 9.11), daughter of Avali. Rāvana prepared to kill Kharadūşaņa but Mandodarī prevented him from doing so, to save Candranahhā from becoming a widow (9. 10-23).
According to the VR, Khara and Dūşaņa are two brothers (3. 17. 22). Khara is called as Mātņśvaseya bhrātā of Sūrpanakhā (7. 24. 37). Here Śūrpanakhā marries Vidyujjihva, a Kālakeya Dānavendra, She is not abducted (7. 12. 2). Rāvana is said to have ignorantly killed Vidyujjihva at Asmanagara on his way to Rasātala (7.23. 17), on a war compaign. Here during the absence of Rāvana from Lajikā, Raksasa Madhuof Madhupura abducts Kumbhinasi, (7. 25. 25). She is mentioned as the daughter of Sumālin i, e. she is the sister of the mother of Rāvana (7.5. 40). But at 7.25.23, she is referred to as the daughter of the daughter of Mālyavat, the elder brother of Sumālin i. e. she is the sister of Rāvana from maternal side and so she is called 'bhagini' (7.25.39) of Rāvana. Rāvaņa attacks Madhupura to kill Madhu, but Kumbhinasi's imploration to save herself from becoming a widow (7. 25. 43) prevents Rāvana from killing Madhu.
The TR does not contain this episode.
The PCV mentions Āvali's daughter as Tanūdarī (9.24) and the latter's father as Pravara. Pātāla ikārapura is called Alankārodayapura. According to the PCS, Khara and Dūşaņa are two persons (12.3.5) who abduct Candranakhā, and then kill Candrodara. Rāvana sends Mārica and Maya to celebrate the wedding of his sister (12.4). The RPS agrees with the PCR but mentions the killing of Candrodara (p. 37). The TSP mentions Candrodara as the son of Adityarājas. At the time of the abduction of Candranakhā by Khara, Rāvana had gone to Meru to pay homage to the Jina shrines (IV. 129). Düşana is the younger brother of Khara. Mandodarī even requests Rāvana to make Khara the lord of Patalaukārapura.
1. The text of PCV (9, 18) is not clear (See PCR, 9. 37). 2. For Madhu of the PCV see "The Occupation of Mathurā by Satrughna' under
intervening stories. 3. Perhaps a wrong reading of the text of the PCV, which is not clear in itself,
is followed.

Page #161

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
(x) Raising the Kailasa mountain:-According tot he PCV, Ravana demands in marriage Śrīprabha, the sister of Vali and asks Vali to accept his suzerainty. Vāli declines. Ravana attacks him. Vali crowns his brother Sugrīva and renounces the world to avoid the battle and political degradation (Väli and Sugrīva are the sons of Adityaraja of Kişkindhipura). Sugrīva marries his sister to Ravana (9.24-50).
132
Thereafter while proceeding to Nityaloka to marry Ratnavali, Daśamukha's aerial car stops suddenly over the Kailasa mountain. As Muni Vali had stopped it so Daśamukha lifts up the peak of the mountain upon his arms to perturb the Muni meditating there. Vali then presses down the peak with his toe as a result of which Dasamukha gets overpowered and makes a loud cry for safety (ravo kao 9.78)1. Ultimately Vāli rescues Rāvana. Rāvana begs pardon of Văli and eulogises the Jinas with his Viņā. At that time the strings of his Viņā get discorded. He extracts sinews from his arm and uses them in place of the strings of his Viņa. At this Dharanendra gets pleased with his (Ravana's) devotion and courage favours him with the AmoghavijayaSakti (a weapon 9. 101).
According to the VR, Rāvana is first captured by king Väli and then released with a declaration of friendship (7.34). This episode is narrated after the discomfiture of Ravana at the hands of Sahastrarjuna. After defeating Kubera, Daśamukha comes down the Kailasa and as he enters the Saravana his aerial car is stopped by Nandisvara (Sankara). Daśagrīva laughs at the monkey-like face of Nandisvara. Śaňkara curses him to the effect that he would be killed by the monkeys. At this Daśagrīva gets angry and lifts up the Kailasa upon Mahadeva (Sankara) presses down the mountain with his toe. Daśagrīva makes an alarm. He eulogises Śiva for 1000 years. The latter gets pleased with his devotion and names him as Rāvaņa because his loud cry made the three worlds scream. (lokatrayam ravitam & lokaravanam 7. 16. 37-38). Śiva further favours him with the Candrahasa2 sword. The Amoghavijaya is said to be presented to Ravana by Maya on the occasion of the former's marriage with the latter's daughter Mandodari (7. 12. 21).
his arms.
The TR only refers to the raising of the Kailasa by Ravana (1. 17.9) and his fight with Vāli (5. 22).
1. So he was called Ravana.
2. The PCV refers to Ravana's sword of this name (8. 13), but it does not mention how it came into his possession. The PCR tells us how it was obtained by Ravana (8, 36).

Page #162

İNTERVENING STORIES
133 The Ramopakhyāna (3. 275. 40) states that Daśagriva made the worlds weep, hence he was called Rāvana (rāvayāmasa lokānyattasmādrāvana ucyate).
The PCR mentions that Mandodarī requested monk Vali to rescue Rāvana (9.157). The PCS refers to a personal combat and the humiliation of Rāvana at his being lifted up by Váli (12. 10) before the latter's renunciation of the world. Otherwise it follows the PCR. The RPS follows the PCR and further mentions that Rāvana assumed the form of Indra and raised the mountain with his one lac arms (p. 38). The TSP mentions a battle between the soldiers only. In the combat Vali first seizes Rāvana (IV. p 131), then releases him and thereafter he renounces the world.
According to the Ananda Rāmāyana, Rāvana prepares a lute with various parts of his body, using the sinews of his body as strings and pleases Śiva who offers him Párvati to be his wife (1.13.28f).
(xi) Rāvana's conquest-expedition:-According to the PCV, thereafter Rāvaņa conquers the Khecara chief of various islands and encamps at Pātālańkārapura. Here Kharadūşaņa greets Rāvana and shows him army of 14000 soldiers (10.19).
According to the VR, Rāvana after killing Kalakeya Dānavendra Vidyujjihva returns to Larkā. Śūrpanakhā bewails the death of her husband. Rāvana consoles her and sends her along with Khara who is equipped with a battalion of 14000 Rākşasas to occupy the Dandakavana (7.24.36).
(xii) Defeat of Sahasrakirana, the Māheśvara king:-Further, according to the PCV, Rāvaņa encamps on the Vindhya hills, on his expedition to conquer Indra. There he performs a worship of the Jaina idol placing it on the dune of the bed of Narmadā. Suddenly a gush of water which was first pooled over by some mechcnical devices and then released by Sahasrakirana, the king of Māheśvaranagara, who was playing watersports with the members of his harem in the river, disturbs Rāvana's worship. Enraged Rāvana imprisons Sahasrakirana. Muni Satabāhu, the father of the prisoner gets his son released. Thereafter Sahasrakirana becomes a monk. When Anaranya of Ayodhyā learns it he also renounces the world (10.25-88).
According to the VR, Rāvana goes to Mahişmatipuri to subdue Arjuna Kārtavīrya. The latter is playing watersports in the river Narmada by preventing the flow of the water with his one thousand arms (bāhūņāṁ sahasrasya 7. 32. 4). He suddenly releases

Page #163

134
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
the water which sweeps away the flowers collected by Rāvana, on the bank of the river to worship Siva. Here Rāvana is captured by Arjuna and released on a request from Pulastya (7. 31-33). Anaranya is said to have been defeated by Rāvaņa (7. 19. 23). Anaranya on that occasion cursed Rāvana that he would be killed by Daśarathi Rāma.
The TR merely refers to the fight of Sahasrabahu with Rāvana (5. 22).
The PCR, RPS and TSP agree with the PCV. The PCS mentions Sahasrakirana fighting with his 1000 arms (15. 3. 7).
(xiii) Stopping of the Yajña of Marutta:- According to the PCV, further Rāvana overpowers king Marutta of Rājagpha and stops his animal sacrifice. He also saves Nārada who was heckled by the Brahmins when he (Nārada) tried to explain that a true sacrifice did not involve any killing. Marutta marries his daughter Kanakaprabha to Rāvana (ch. 11).
According to the VR, Rävaņa challenges Marutta of Usirabīja country to fight or to accept his suzerainty. But Marutta at the advice of his priest continued the performance of the Māheśvara-sattra (sacrifice) and withdrew from fighting. Rāvana took it as the defeat of Marutta and went away (7. 18).
The PCR (ch. 11), the RPS (p. 42 f) and the TSP (IV. 141 1) agree with the PCV. The PCS (15. 8. 9) merely refers to it.
: (xiv) Marriage of Manorama with Madhu:- In due course Rāvana marries his daughter Manoramā! (12. 8) begot on Kanakaprabhā to Madhu, the son of Harivāhana and the lord of Mathurā.
In the VR this marriage can be compared with that of Kumbhinasi who is abducted by Madhu, the Rākşasa king of Madhupura (7.25) and the marriage of Surpanakha with Vidyujjihva (VR) with that of the abduction of Sūrpapakhā by Kharadūşana (PCV, 9.12).
(xv) Defeat of Nalakūbara and rejecting of the love proposal of Uparambhā :-According to the PCV, Rāvana after having gone to Aştāpada to pay a homage to the Jina shrines, attacks Nalakübara (Nalakuvvara”) the Lokapāla of Indra at Durlarghyapura. But Rāvana's soldiers do not find it possible to enter the fort which was protected by
1. At 11. 101 she is called Vicitrarupā Kệtacitrā. 2, Whether he is the same Kubera who was appointed as the Lokapāla of the
North by Indra after killing. Malin or he is Kubera's son or quite a different person is not clear.

Page #164

135
INTERVENING STORIES
fiery ditches and mechanical contriviances. At that time Nalakübara's wife, Uparambha sends a love proposal to Ravana. Ravana uses this opportunity as a strategy and acquires Asalika-vidya from her. By the help of that Vidya he forces his entry into the fort, defeats Nalakübara and censures Uparambha for her unchaste proposal (17.36-72).
According to the VR, Ravana on his way to conquer Suraloka rapes a nymph, Rambha who was proceeding to her husband Nalakūbara, the son of Vaiśravana (7.26.41). Nalakübara curses Ravana to the effect that his head would split into seven parts if he any more tries to rape any unwilling woman (7.26.59).
The PCR additionally refers to the seizing of Sudarsanacakra of Nalakübara by Ravana (12.145). The PCS mentions that Uparambha had offered the Vidya and the Cakra along with her love proposal (15.15). The RPS follows the PCR but does not mention Sudarsanacakra (p. 50). The TSP follows the PCS.
(xvi) Imprisoning of Indra :-According to the PCV, Rāvaṇa attacks Indra at Rathanupura, the capital of Vijayārdhagiri. Sahasrara advises his son Indra to marry his (Indra's) daughter Indra to Rāvana and asks him to conclude 'sandhi' with Rāvana declines it and with the assistance of his Lokapālas fights against Rāvana. Jayanta, the son of Indra kills Śrīmālin (Sumālīn). Indrajit captures Jayanta while Ravana imprisons Indra. Jayanta is released, but Indra is taken to Lanka as a captive (12.73-144). Sahasrara proceeds to Lanka, accepts to make Indra perform the menial services of Ravana and gets his son released. Rāvana liberates Indra declaring him as his friend. Indra then accepts monkhood and in due course attains emancipation (ch. 13),
According to the VR, Indra demands help from Visņu, but the latter is helpless. In the battle Sumalin is killed (7.27). Meghanāda fights with Jayanta, but the latter is rescued by his maternal grandfather, Puloma (7.28). Indra is here imprisoned by Meghanāda (7.29). Prajapati goes to Lanka and confers the title of 'Indrajit' on Meghanāda. He further grants the demand of Meghanāda that he would be favoured with a chariot and horses every time he performed a 'homa' and he would not be killed in the battle as far as he drove in it, but if he left the 'homa' unfinished, he would be killed (7.30.11.14). He gets Indra released. Indra thereafter performs the Vaisnava-yajña and attains heaven (tridivam).
The TR refers to the defeat of Indra at the hands of Meghanāda (Indrajit).

Page #165

136
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN The PCR agrees with the PGV. The PCS (16-17) depicts Indra completely like the celestial Indra. His ministers Parāśara, Kautilya, Manu etc. advise him to establish friendship with Rāvana and he sends Citrāngada to Rāvana for the same. But Närada incites Rāvana for a battle. Citrangada offers Indra's daughter to Rāvana, but Rāvana demands all the cities situated on the Vijayārdha mountain. There Candra, Yama, Kubera, Keśarin, Kanaka, Agni, Anala, Anila, Sürya and Jayanta also are taken to Lankā as captives. They are released when they agree to perform menial services of Rāvana. The RPS agrees with the PCV. Indra and his Lokapālas agree to perform menial services (p. 52). The TSP agrees with the PCV, but Rāvana before attacking Indra, is said to have first asked Indra to accept his suzerainty (IV. 157-9).
(xvii) Accepting of a vow under Muni Anantavīrya:-According to the PCV, Rāvana once returning from Meru pays homage to omniscient Muni Anantavīrya and accepts a vow of not molesting any unwilling woman (14.1-153).
In the VR the curse of Nalakūbara can be compared with it. The PCR, PCS, RPS and TSP agree with the PCV.
(xviii) Rāvana's emergence as Ardhacakravartin after the defeat of Varuņa:-According to the PCV, thereafter Rāvana attacks Varuņapura as Varuņa declines to accept the suzerainty of Rāvana (16.10). In the battle Kharadūşana is captured by Rājīva, Pundarika, Jalakānta and other sons of Varuņa. Rāvana then sends for the help of Prahlada. Pavanañjaya prevents his father Prahlāda and he himself goes to the assistance of Rāvana (16.35). He fights with Varuna and at last concludes a peace treaty with Varuņa on behalf of Rāvana. Thereupon Kharadūşana is released (18.3).
But Rāvana was not satisfied with the 'sandhi' concluded with Varuna He along with his allies and Hanumat, the son of Pavanañjaya reattacks Varuņapura (also called Rasātalanagara 19.8) captures the sons of Varuna and Rāvana imprisons Varuņa. Ultimately Rāvana releases the captives, reinstals Varuņa as the lord of Varuņapurī and returns to Larikāpurī. Then the Sudarśanacakra and the divine staff (danda rayapa) appear and come into the possession of Rāvana. The occasion is greeted as the establishment of his suzerainty over the three parts of the Bhārata country (tikhandahivai 19.44) Thus he becomes Ardhacakravartin or Prativāsudeva i.e. a rival of Vasudeva Lakşmaņa.

Page #166

INTERVENING STORIES
137
According to the VR, after defeating Yama, Rāvana enters the Rasātala, conquers the Nāgas of Bhogavatīpurī, makes friends with the Nivātakavaca Daityas of Manimayapuri, conquers Ašmanagara and kills Vidyujjihva (Śūrpanakha's husband, already referred to), fights with the sons of Varuna and overpowers them. He further challenges Varuna, but the latter was not there at that time. Varuņa's minister Prahāsa admits the defeat of the sons of Varuna. At this Rāvana gets elated and returns to Laikā. No second fight with Varuna is mentioned.
The TR merely refers to the vacating of their respective places by the Lokapālas as Rāvana attacks them. He is further said to have subdued Ravi, Sasi, Pavana, Varuņa, Dhanadhārī (Kubera), Agni, Kala, Jama, the Kinnaras, Siddhas, Manujas, Suras and the Nagas. Rāvana is called the paramount emperor of the whole world. 1
The PCR mentions that Varuņa married his daughter Satyavati? to Rāvana (19. 99). The PCS follows the PCR and further adds that Hanumat made an attempt to bind the enemies with his magic tail (20.8 1). The RPS follows the PCS and refers to the binding of the enemy-soldiers by Hanumat with the help of his 'la igūla' charm (p. 69). The TSP follows the PCV.
The Ultarakānda of the VR contains some interpolated chapters. The first five chapters after 7. 33 describe the discomfiture of Rāvana at the hands of Bali, the former's attack on Sürya, Candra and Māndhata and his defeat at the hands of Kapiladeva. These descriptions do not find place in the PCV.
Out of the next five chapters inserted between 7. 37 and 7. 38, the first chapter describes the birth of Vāli and Sugriva. This account of the VR has been compared with that of the PVC. The next three chapters describe the purpose of Rāvana's decision to abduct Sitā. It is said that Rāvana kidnapped Sītā to attain emancipation at the hands of Rāma, i. e. Hari or Vişņu. This account has been referred to in the Comparative Rama-story' at relevant places. Then the fifth chapter narrates the humiliation and defeat of Rāvana at the hands of the women of Svetadvīpa. This account has no mention in the PCV
1. Bhujabala bisva basya kari rāk hesi kou na sutantra)
Mandalika mani Rāvana rāja karai nija mantra//-1. 182. 2. According to the PCV she is married to Hanumat (19. 32). 3. See 'Vanara Vamsa under 'Orgin and Genealogies of various Varhsas'.

Page #167

138
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
The last three interpolated chapters after 7.59, which narrate the complaints made by a dog, a vulture and an owl in the court of Rama, have no references in the PCV.
2. Añjanasundari and Hanumat :
Once Rāvana pays homage to omniscient Muni Anantavīrya and listens to a religious discourse from him. On that occasion Hanumat is also there. Listening to the name of Hanumat, Śreņika enquires about his life. Gautama then narrates the story (15-19).
King Mahendra of Mahendranagara had a young daughter, Añjanasundari begot on his wife, Hrdayasundari. He declined to betroth Añjanasundari to Daśamukha or his sons, or Vidyutprabha of Kanakapura, who were proposed as alternative grooms by his ministers. He decided to marry her to Pavanañjaya, the son of Khecara Prahlada of Adityapura and Kirtimati. Once he went to the Vijayārdha mountain to worship the Jina idols and there he settled with Prahlada to perform the marriage on the bank of the Manasa lake. Both the parties went there. Pavanañjaya, out of curiosity and being oppressed by the cupid, went along with his friend Prahasita to the palace of Añjana. He developed a dislike for Añjana as he saw that Añjană did not at all resent but smiled at the words of Miśrakeśī, a maid-servant of Añjanasundari, who had been praising Vidyutprabha and throwing slush on him. He instantly got angry and tried to murder Añjana and Miśrakeši, but Prahasita's timely intervention saved the situation. Pavanañjaya dissented to the proposed marriage and fled away. When his father and father-in-law persuaded him, he married Anjanasundari but soon abandoned her in a secluded palace.
Once Pavananjaya while on his way to Lanka to assist Rāvaņa, encamped on the Manasa lake. There he observed a desperate bird suffering from the pain of the separation from her male mate. His heart melted and he immediately along with Prahasita returned to the palace of Anjanasundarī. He met her after 22 years of separation and copulated with her. Next morning he handed over to her his finger-ring in memory of their union and departed for Lankā.
In course of time the signs of Añjana's pregnancy became visible. Kirtimati suspecting her character banished her without believing in the evidence of the ring of Pavanañjaya shown to her by Añjana. Vasantamālā a maid-servant and very intimate with Añjanā accompanied the latter to Mahendranagara, but her parents afraid of their own disrepute did not give shelter to her. Then Añjana along with Vasantamālā entered a forest. There she was consoled by muni Amitagati,

Page #168

INTERVENING STORIES
139
They stayed into a cave and on the Caitrakriṣṇāṣṭami Añjanā gave birth to a male child. As she was bewailing her misfortune, her maternal uncle Pratisurya, the son of Citrabhanu of Kuruvaradvipa happened to reach there. He consoled her and proceeded with her to Hanuruhapura driving in an aerial chariot. On the way the child fell down from the chariot. The child was found to be quite safe but the slab of the hill on which he fell down was crushed to pieces, so he was named Śrīśaila. He was called Hanu because he was brought up at Hanuruhapura.
Pavanañjaya after assisting Ravana in defeating Varuna returned home, but he did not find his wife there. Desperately searching for Añjana in vain he decided to die. Prahasita went to the parents of Pavanañjaya and delivered the sad message. Then Prahlada went out in search of his son. On the way he met Pratisurya. Both of them searching further found Pavanañjaya in a forest. There Pratisurya narrated the birth of Hanu to Pavanañjaya and took him to Añjanā who was staying at Hanuruhapura.
Hanumat was duly brought up there. He was trained in various arts and sciences. When he grew young he assisted Ravana in defeating Varuna. He married Satyavati, Anangakusumā, Harimālinī and Padmarāgā who were the daughters of Varuna, Candranakha (the sister of Ravana), Nala and Sugrīva respectively. He further married many other girls of Kinnarapura. Thereafter he ruled at Śrīpura. He referred to have enthroned his son and to have renounced the world, along with his wives (ch.108).
The PCR (15.7) names the mother of Pavanañjaya as Ketumatī, Prahlada and Mahendra are said to have met on the Aṣṭāpada and there they settled the marriage ('5.75). Kuruvaradvipa of the PCV is called Hanuruhadvipa (17.346). It is additionally said that Hanumat was named Śrīśaila on account of his taking birth on a slab in the cave (17 402). Satyavati's marriage with Hanumat is not. mentioned in it. The PCS agrees with the PCR. But it mentions that Pavanañjaya abandoned Añjana for 12 years (18.8.9). Pavananjaya is said to have given an armlet (kaukana) to his wife as token of his secret meeting with her (19.1.4). Hanu's wife Harimālinī is here mentioned as Śrīmālinī. His marriage with the girls of Kinnarapura is not mentioned. He is said to have married thousands of other girls (20.12). The RPS agrees with the PCR. It adds that Pavanañjaya on getting angry with the remarks of Miśrakesi attacked the city of Mahendra but Prahasita intervened and saved the situation (p.57)..

Page #169

140
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN The TSP follows the PCV with these alterations. The name of the mother of Pavanañjaya is Ketumatí. Prahlāda and Mahendra met on the Nandīśvaradvīpa and there they settled the marriage. When Pavanañjaya was searched out by Prahlāda, he was found to be preparing a pyre for burning himself into the fire (IV. p. 162-181).
The UP (68.275-280) does not contain the story of Añjanāsundari Here Amitatejavāk, the son of Prabhañjana of Vidyutkāntapura born of Añjanā was named as Aņumāt by the Vidyadhara as he on the occasion of a test being taken of his powers, fixed his right foot on the summit of the Vijayārdha mountain, struck the aerial car of the sun by the stroke of his left leg and soon afterwards he assumed the form like that of a particle of sand (trasareņupramăņam). He possessed the Vikriya-țddhi also. The MP (73,8) mentions Makaraketu as the original name of Anumat (Aņumettu) and his father's name as Pavana who was the Vidyadhara ruler of Khaņaruikantapura, Anumāt is called the twentieth Kamadeva (73 20.96) and Hanumat also. Some scholars hold that 'Hanumat' is the Sanskrit form of a Dravadian word 'Āņa Mandi' i. e. Ape who was a Dravadian deity' (see Bulcke, p. 111). The name Apumāt in the UP though interpreted in a different way seems to have some relation with the Dravadian word.
In the VR (4.66) Jāmbavat relates the story to Hanumat to encourage him to take a flight over the sea to reach Laikā, Again at 7.35-36 Agastya narrates the story to Rama on the latter's request as follows :
Kesarin's wife Añjanā also called as Puñjikasthala was a very beautiful nymph, the daughter of Vānarendra Kuñjara. She became a Kamarūpiņīvānari on account of a curse. She used to wander from place to place assuming human form. Once Marut, being enamoured of her figure embraced her. At this Añjanā resented the illegitimate approach of Marut. Then Marut pacified her by telling her that he entered her body mentally only and for that she would give birth to a wise and brave son who would be equal to him in taking high flights. Añjanā gave birth to a monkey child. Considering the sun to be a fruit the child took an upward flight to catch it. Indra became angry with him and struck him with his thunder-bolt, as a result of which he fell down on the summit of a hill and his jaw was broken. Therefore, he was named as Hanumat. At this Vayu (Marut) ceased to flow. Then the Suras pleased Marut. At that time Brahma granted to Hanumat the boon of indestructibility from weapons. Indra granted him the boon of dying at his own will. He was acclaimed as the 'kşetraja' son of Keśarin, 'aurasa' son of Marut and also as 'Váyusuta'. He was equal

Page #170

INTERVENING STORIES
141
to them in strength, in speed and in taking flight respectively. At 7.35-36 Kesarin is called the ruler of Sumeru mountain. The monkeychild is said to be hungry and therefore, he is said to have taken a flight to catch the sun. At that time his mother had gone out to collect some fruits. Vāyu is said to have become cool to protect the child from the scorching heat of the sun. The child is said to have chased Rahu and the elephant of Indra also. Various gods are said to have granted him many boons. In due course Hanumat started destroying the 'āśramas' of Rşis. They all cursed him to forget his own power until he was not reminded of it by some one else. He performed panances and got learned in many Vidyās. The VR does not mention his assistance to Rāvana or his marriage. But at 6.125.44 it is mentioned that when Hanumat took the message of Kāma's return from Laukā, Bharata offered to him sixteen girls in marriage.
In various non-Jaina works there are references to the sons of Hanumat. The Jaimini Bhārata (Merāvana carita) and the Gujarātī Narmakathākoşa mention that a fish drank the sweat of Hanumat as he went to the sea to take bath after burning Lanka and she gave birth to a son. According to the Ananda Rāmāyana (1.9.216), Makaradhvaja was born on that occasion. The Marathi Bhāvārtha Rāmāyana, the Kannarese Mairāvana Kalaga and the Rāmalingāmsta also refer to the son of Hanumat (Bulck, p. 402), According to the western accounts No. 7 and 8, Hanumat copulated with a 'makarī'. The Seri Rama states that his semen fell down at the time of jumping over the sea and the queen of the fishes became pregnant. The Seri Rāma (Pātānr version) and the Hikāyata-mahārāja Rāvana mention that at that time Hanumat begot children on the queen of the fishes.
The Rama Kiyena mentions that Hanumat begot a son on the daughter of Vibhīsaņa (Bulck, p. 401) and another son on the daughter or Rāvana (Bulcke, p. 403).
3. The birth of Nārada :
When Răvana reaches Rajagặha on the occasion of the performance of a sacrifice by king Marutta, Nārada also happens to arrive at that place. Hearing the name of Narada, Śreņika enquires about Nārada, then Gautama narrates the story (9.49.68).
A Brahmin named Brahmarūci leading the life of an anchorite lived in a forest with his wife Kūrmı. Once some monks on having observed that Kūrmi was pregnant, criticised the anchorite for his attachment to his wife and gave a discourse on the fruits of perverse

Page #171

142
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
conduct. Brahmarūci then aceepted monkhood. In course of time Kūrmi gave birth to a son and after abandoning him in a forest, she became a nun. That neglected child was nourished, educated and trained by some celestial beings. He was also granted the supernatural power of faring into the sky. Once having observed her mother living the life of a nun, he accepted the vows of right conduct. Later on he came to be known as Devarși. He used to wander from place to place as he liked.
The PCR (11. 116-158;, the TSP (IV. p. 151) and the RPS (p. 46) agree with the PCV.
According to the Bhāgavatapurāra (1.5-6), Nárada was born of Brahma. He was a slave son in his previous birth. He served the followers of Vedas and Yogins and wanted to meet Hari.
4. Lord Mahāvira, the twenty-fourth Tirthagkara :
After having given the contents of the text in the first chapter, the author narrates in brief in the following canto the life of Lord Mahāvīra and his sojourn at Vipulagiri where his chief disciple Gautama related the Rāma-story to king Śreņika (2.21-98).
Siddhārtha reigned Kundagrāmapura (also called Kundapura 20.50). His wife Trisala (also called Priyakāriņi 20.50) gave birth to a son. He was named Mahāvīra by the Surendras because he had, in his childhood, sportively shaken the Meru mountain with the strike of his toe. At the age of 30, he renounced the world and in due course he attained omniscience. He wandered from place to place delivering sermons in the Ardhamāgadhi language (2.34). Once being accompained by the Gañadharas and the Samgha he sojourned on the Vipulagiri (at Rājagsha). On that occasion king Śrenika of the Magadha country went there to pay homage to him. Next day the king approached Gautama the chief disciple of Lord Mahāvíra and requested him to clear off his doubts about the Rāma-story. Then Gautama narrated the complete story of Rāma to Srenika. At 20.50 it is mentioned that Mahāvīra attained deliverance at Pavā.
The Kalpasūtra (19-20) refers to Siddhārtha as a jñātra Kşatriya (nāyānam khattiyānam) and Trisalā as his wife. It mentions Priyakāriņi and Videhadinna (Su. 109) as other names of Trišala. The Tiloyapaņņatti (4.549), thc UP (74.256; 75.8) the MP (96.6) and the HVP3 (2.16) refer to the name of the mother of Mahāvīra as Priyakāriņi, The Șatkhandāgama (Vol. IX. p. 119ff) and the HyPJ (2.18) name her as Trišalā also,

Page #172

INTÉR VENING STORIES
143
His birth place is mentioned as Khattiyakundaggămanayara in the Kalpasūtra (19-20) and as Kundalanayara in the TP (4.549). The Kalpasūtra refers to the transfering of Mahāvīra's embryo from the womb of Devānanda into that of Trisala and the marriage of Mahavira, but the PCV does not refer to them.
5. Lord Rşabha, the first Tirthankara : Gautama commences the narration of the true story of Padma (Rāma) to śreņika with a brief account of the Universe, the factor of Time and the advent of the fourteen Kulakaras and thereafter relates the biography of the first Tirthaikara (3.61-4.81) with whom is associated the origin of the Ikşvāku, Soma and the Vidyādhara-vainsa.
The first Tirthaukara was the son of Marudevī and Nabhi, the fourteenth Kulakara. His birth was preceded by a shower of gems and gold (rayanavutthi, hirannavutthi 3.67,68) hence he was called Hiranyagarbha. He was named Rşabha (Usabha 3.106) because at the time of the birth of his embryo the complexion of his mother had become as white as the Kunda flower and the moon (kundasasivappo 3.108). He had a mark of Śrīvatsa on his chest and his height grew up to 500 bows. Dhanada had built a city for his habitation. Rşabha for the first time established villages, towns and cities. He introduced various sciences and professions. He originated three social orders viz. Kșatriya, Vaisya and Sudra'. He had two wives-Sumangală and Nandā, one hundred sons, Bharata and others and two daughters Brāhmi and Sundari. He for the first time taught politics and other social sciences to his subjects. In course of time on seeing a blue garment (nīlam vásam datthum 3.122) he proceeded to Vasantatilakaudyana, seated in the Sudarśana palanquin and after having pulled out five hand-fulls of hair from his head he accepted monkhood (3.136). He along with his four thousand disciples undertook to observe fast for one year. The monks who could not withstand the extremities of the penance left him and became Tāpasas (3.143). He made Nami and Vinami as the first lords of the Vidyadhara-vamsa (3.161 ). After the completion of one year he broke his fast at Gajapuranagara accepting the juice of sugarcane offered to him by Sreyāṁsa, the king of that city. That occasion was hailed as bringing into motion the second wheel of the chariot of Religion (dhammarahassa bīyam cakkaṁ samuddhariyam 4. 15). He then absorbed himself in meditation of the right type (pasatthajhāņam 4. 16) in
1. See 4.65-85 for the origin of the fourth social order.

Page #173

144
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Śakaṭamukhaudyāna and in course of time he became omniscient. He had eighty four apostles (Ganadharas), Vṛṣabhasena being the foremost and eighty four thousand disciples (4. 35). He passed the rest of his life delivering sermons on Religion and in due course he attained liberation (nivvāņa) on the Kailasa (aṭṭhāvaya-aṣṭāpada 4.88) mountain.
Rṣabha is referred to as the first Tirthankara in the Samavāyānga (Su. 24) and the Tilopapannatti (4. 512). The Vasudevahindi (p. 158ff) gives a detailed biography of Rṣabha. There are some differences also. The PCR (3. 169) and the PCS (12. 2. 1) refer that Dhanada built the first city while the AP (12, 96) and the RPS (p. 3) mention that it was built by Indra.
The VR (p. 161), the PCR (3. 219), the AP (14. 160) and the MP (3.21. 11) all account differently for naming him as Rṣabha.
The Svetambara tradition names his two wives as Sumangala and Sunanda (VH, p. 161) while the Digambara tradition mention Yaśasvati and Sunanda (AP, 15.70: MP, 4. 8. 1), but the PCR (3.260) and the PCS (2. 87) refer to Sunanda and Nanda.
The Kalpasūtra (Su. 210) and the VH (p. 162) mention' one hundred sons of Rṣabha. The AP (16. 4-7) and the MP (5-13-14) mention 101 sons of Rṣabha.
The PCR agrees with the names of the garden and the palanquin associated with the renouncement of the world by Rṣabha (3.277f). That place came to be known as Prayaga (3. 281). The RPS (p. 5) follows the same. The naming of that place as Prayaga is referred to in the PCV (2.11.4) also. The Kalpasūtra (Su. 210) and the VH (p.163) name the garden as Siddharthavana. The AP (17.81), the PCS (2.11.2), the TSP (I.p. 165), the CJSC (12.143) and the Sukhabodhika Tika (p.147) agree with it.
The Kalpasutra (Su. 210) mentions removing of four-handfulls of hair only. And the PCV (4.8) as well as the PCR (4.5) mentions that at the time of breaking his fast at Gajapura he had long hair grown on his head. The idol of Rṣabha worshipped by Janaka on the Vijayardha mountain is referred to as having hair-lockets on its head (PCV, 29.39; PCR, 28.85).
The name of the person who offered alms to Rṣabha at the time of the latter's breaking fast is identical in all the works.
The Kalpasutra (Su.212f), Tiloyapannatti, PCR (4.32f) and the RPS (p.6) agree with the PCV as regards the number of apostles and the disciples of Rṣabha.

Page #174

145
INTERVENING STORIES
In the Brahmanical tradition the Visnupurāņa (2.1) refers to Rṣabha as the son of Nabhi and Merudevī. He had 100 sons, Bharata being the eldest. Rṣabha performed various sacrifices and observed penances. He attained liberation in the state of nakedness. The Bhagavatapurana (5.6) states that the son of Nabhi and Merudevī was named Rṣabha on account of his various excellent qualities. He was the incarnation of Viṣņu. He married Jayanti, the daughter of Indra. He taught to the people the lay-man's duties and directed his sons to observe penances, to control senses, to meditate on self (soul) to do away with 'avidya' and desires, and to have regard for all living beings. He renounced the world in Digambara state. He observed various austerities and then ended his life. Many other Puranas also refer to Rṣabha. The Manusmrti mentions him as the first Jina (see p.27, Int. of Adipuraṇa-B.G.K. edition).
6. Ajitasvamin, the second Tirthankara:
After having narrated the biography of Rṣabha, Gautama relates the life of the second Tirthankara, Ajitasvāmin and associates with him the origin of the Rākṣasavamsa (5.48-61, 123 and 167).
Tridasanjaya, the son of Dharaṇīdhara ruled at Saketapuri. He begot on his wife Indurekha (Indalehā) a son called Jitaśatru. Jitaśatru married Vijaya. She was the daughter of king Ananda of Podanapura born of Kamalamālā. Vijaya gave birth to Ajitasvamin. Having once observed a withering lotus-garden Ajitasvamin renounced the world. He broke his fast at Saketapurī by taking the food offered by Brahmadatta. During the twelfth year of his renunciation he attained Kevala. He had 90 Ganadharas and one lac minus nine disciples. Once Vidyadhara Meghavahana took refuge under him. He was made the first lord of Rākṣasadvipa by Bhima, the lord of Rakṣasa gods (5.137). Ajita sermoned on religion and in course of time attained Nirvana on the Sammeta mountain.
The Samavayanga (Su. 24), the Kalpasūtra (Su. 203) and the Tiloyapannatti refer to Ajitanatha as the second Tirthankara and his parents as Jitaśatru and Vijayā. There are differences as regards other details in various works.
The PCR (5.71), PCS (5.3.2) and RPS (p. 14) mention that in the fourteenth year of his renunciation Ajita attained Kevala while the UP (48.42), the MP (38.21) and the TSP (II. p. 99) agree with the PGV.
The TP and the PCR (5.73) agree with the number of Ganadharas mentioned in the PCV but they mention one lac disciples. The PCS 10

Page #175

146
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
(5.3.5), the UP (48.43f) and the MP (38.25) agree with the PCR. The RPS (p. 14) mentions 80 Ganadharas while the TSP (II. p. 219) refers to 95.
7. Manisuvrata the twentieth Tirthükara :
After having narrated the Ravaṇacarita and the origin of the Harivansa, Gautama relates the biography of twentieth Tirthaikara, Munisuvratanatha whose congregational period is associated with the advent of Rama and Rāvana (21.11-28).
Sumitra, who belonged to Harivamsa, ruled at Kuśāgranagara, His wife, Padmavati gave birth to a son. He was named Munisuvrata because his mother was observing vows when the embryo was growing in her womb. Once having seen a winter-cloud waning away Munisuvratanātha enthroned his son, Suvrata and accepted asceticism. He broke his fast at Rājagļha by accepting the alms offered by king Vịşabhadatta. He performed penances and attained Kevala under the creeper Campaka. After having established the Tirtha he attained deliverance on the Sammeta mountain.
The Samavāyānga (Su. 24), the Kalpasūtra (Su. 184f) and the Tiloyapannatti (4.545) refer to Muni Suvratanātha as the 20th Tīrthankara. The PCR (21.10-12) and the TSP (IV. p. 79) agree regarding his parentage given in the PCV. The UP (67.21), the RPS (p. 71) and the MP (68.3) name his mother as Somā.
The RPS (p. 75) names his wife as Şumangala. The HVPJ (16,55). and the TSP (IV. p. 81) name her as Prabhavati.
The PCR and the Hypj mention Vrşabhadatta, the TSP and the CVJC call him Brahmadatta while the UP (67,45), the MP (68.7) and the RPS name Vrşabhasena who offered alms to Muni Suvratanātha.
8. Duel between Bharata and Bahubali :
This episode is narrated by Gautama just following the attainment of omniscience by Rşabha (4.36-56).
Bharata, the first son of Rşabha became the sovereign ruler (Cakravartin) of Bharata, but his brother, Bahubali who reigned Takşašila did not accept suzerainty of the former. Therefore, Bharata sought a battle with Bahubali. At the initiative of Bahubali a sight duel and wrestling took place between them. As Bharata got overpowered so he threw his discuss at Bahubali but the latter was not hurt at all. At that moment Bahubali developed the feeling of renunciation. Bharata tried in vain to prevent his brother from

Page #176

INTERVENING STORIES
147
renouncing the world. He bowed to Bahubali and returned to Sāketapuri. Bahubali performed meditation in the standing posture and duly attained salvation.
The Utlar adhyayana (18. 34), the Jambudvipaprajñapti (3. 41.71) and the Tiloya pannatti (4. 515) mention Bharata as the first
Cakravartin.
The Vasudevahindi (I. p. 187) agrees with the PCV and adds that Bharata before the commencement of the duels had sent his envoy asking Bahubali to accept his sovereignty. Bahubali was very proud of himself hence he was not attaining Kevala. It was his sister Brahmi who reminded and helped him in controlling his passion. The Avasyakacurni (I. p. 210) adds wordy duel and boxing. It mentions the efforts of both Brahmi and Sundari in helping Bahubali to control his passion.
The PCR (4. 67-78) mentions that Bahubali ruled at Pautanapura. It does not refer to the efforts of Bharata in dissuading Bahubali from accepting monkhood. It adds that during the period of his meditation some creepers coiled round and an ant-hill grew around the body of Bahubali. Many venomous snakes also surrounded him. The PCS (ch. 4) refers to Bharata's sending, of an envoy to Bahubali. It adds water-duel to those mentioned in the PCR and states that the duels were arranged by their ministers. Here Bharata helps in subduing the passion of Bahubali. The HVPJ (11.77-102) agrees with the PCS. The AP (26), the MP (12.17) and the RPS (p.6) also mention three duels. The TSP (I.p. 274) refers to the sending of an envoy. It (I.p. 312) adds a voice-fight to those referred to in the PCV. It states that the gods had arranged the duels and mentions both the sisters.
In the Bhagavatapurana (5.7f), Bharata is mentioned as the son of Rṣabhadeva, an incarnation of Vişņu. But the story does not agree with the Jaina tradition. After his name the country came to be known as Bharatavarṣa1 (5.7.3). At 9.20 another Bharata is mentioned as a Cakravartin who was the son of Dusyanta born of Sakuntala. He belonged to the Puruvarśa. He performed many sacrifices and gave presents to Brahmins.
9. Death of the son of Sagara:
The story is narrated by Gautama after relating the establishing of Meghavahana as the first lord of Lankapuri and the emancipation of Ajitasvāmin, the second Tirthankara (5.168-203).
1. See Visnupuraṇa, 2.1.32.

Page #177

148
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Sagara (the cousin brother of Ajitasvāmin and the second Cakravartin) had sixty-four thousand wives and sixty thousand sons. Once his sons went to the Aştāpada mountain on a pilgrimage and on being advised by the ministers, they dug a ditch around the mountain and got it filled up with the waters of the Ganges for the protection of the shrines situated on the mountain. At this the lord of the Nāgas bit all of them except Bhima and Bhagiratha. When their brothers were dead, Bhima and Bhagiratha returned to Saketapuri. The ministers prevented them from reporting the news to Sagara and themselves first explained to Sagara the ephemeral nature of the world and then broke the sad news. At this Sagara bewailed and after having enthroned Bhagiratha, the son of Jahnavi, he renounced the world and in due course attained emancipation.
The Uttarādhyayana (18.35), and the Tiloyapannatti (4. 515) refer to Sagara as the second Cakravartin.
The PCR (5. 247-283) mentions 96000 wives of Sagara. There is no reference to the advice of the ministers to dig the ditch. The HVPJ (13. 27-30) merely refers to the burning of the sons of Sagara. The PCS (5. 10-14) states that Bhagiratha took intiative in digging the moat.
The Vasudevahindi (I. 300-305) and the commentary of Devendragani on the Uttaradhyayana mention that at the advice of Jahnū, the moat was dug. At that time the Nāgarāja was pacified. Then the Ganges was diverted to the moat. This caused hostility with the Nāgarāja ferocious sight burnt the sons of Sagara to ashes. A Brāh min is said to have tried to save Sagara from being afflicted with grief. He went to Sagara with the corpse of his son and requested him to cure his deceased son. Sagara called for a physician who demanded the ash from such a house where no one had died so far. At this demand Sagara realised the law of Karma. Instantly the news of the death of his sons was disclosed to him. Further it is stated that the waters of the Ganges over-flew the ditch and caused peril to the people. Bhagiratha, the grandson of Sagara then diverted the Ganges towards the eastern ocean. Thus the river was first called as Jahnavi and afterwards as Bhagirathi. The TSP (II p. 33f) agrees with this account except that the Brahmin went to Sagara with a corpse and asked him to bring, as promised by a deity, the fire from a house where no one had died so far so that the dead could be revitalised.
The Uttara purāņa (ch. 48) and the MP (39) narrate that Mahabala and Manicūla (as celestial beings) had decided mutually to enlighten one another whoever was born first in the mortal world. Mahabala was born as Sagara. Manicūla then twice tried to enlighten

Page #178

INTERVENING STORIES
149
Sagara but in vain. When the sons of Sagara dug the moat, Manicula assumed the form of a snake and brought their end. Again he assumed the form of a Brahmin and reported to Sagara the death of his own son on account of the cruelty of Yama. Sagara advised him to perform penances to kill Yama and save the life of his son. At this stage the Brahmin broke the news of sad demise of the sons of Sagara. Sagara developed aversion towards the world and renounced it. Manicula revitalised all the dead sons of Sagara. The RPS further (ch.3) adds to the above account that Manicula had deprecated the sons of Sagara for their dependence on the earnings of their father. Sagara then engaged them to the work of digging the moat. The UP, the MP and the RPS mention that all the sons of Sagara afterwards renounced the world.
Of the Brahmanical literature, the VR (1.38-44) states that Sagara had two wives, Keśini and Sumati. Once a sacrificial horse of Sagara was kidnapped by Indra. Sumati's sixty thousand sons dug out the earth in search of the horse. It enraged the Nagas, Asuras etc. When they complained to Brahma, he prophesied that Kapila (Vasudeva) would burn the sons of Sagara. Further in search of the horse, the sons of Sagara reached Rasatala and saw the horse there. When they ran towards Kapiladeva, he burnt them to ashes.
Sagara sent his grandson Amśumat to trace out his sons. On reaching Patāla, Amśumat was requested by Garuda to perform 'jala-kriyā' of the deceased ones. He performed penances on the Himalayas but the Ganges did not descend. His grandson Bhagiratha observed penances for one thousand years and pleased Brahmā. He pleased Śiva also. Then the Ganges descended from the heaven on to the head of Śiva and followed Bhagiratha on the land. In its course the river destroyed the hermitage of Jahnu, a ṛṣi. Enraged Jahnu drank all the water of the Ganges. He released it from his ears only at the request of the Devas, Gandharvas and the Rṣis. The stream followed Bhagiratha upto the Rasatala and the deceased ancestors of Bhagiratha attained heaven. Thus the river came to be known as Jahnavi as well as Bhagirathi.
The Visnupurana (4,4) does not contain the intervention of Garuda and the penances of Amśumat. Here Kapila had prophesied before Amśumat that his grandson would bring the Ganges on the earth. It does not contain the episode of Jahnu. The Bhagavatapura na (9.8-9), the Padmapurana (Uttarakhanda, 21-22) and the MB (3.106-109) agree with the Vişnupurana. In the MB the names of the wives of Sagara are Vaidarbhi and Saibya, the latter having 60000 sons.

Page #179

150
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
10. Sanatkumāra : At the time of listening to the parentage and the enumeration of the previous births of the sixty-three illustrious persons of the Jaina faith, Srepika makes inquiry about the cause of the handsomeness of Sanatkumāra (the fourth Cakravartin). Gautama narrates the story (20.114-132).
Meghabahu on account of professing the Jaina faith was reborn as a Yakşa. He served some Sramanasangha and after his death was reborn as king Dharmaruci, son of Suprabhā and Tilakasundari of Mahapura. He renounced the world and was reborn as a celestial being. From there he was reborn as Cakravartin Sanatkumāra being the son of Sahadeva of Gajapura. Once on being praised by two gods for his handsomeness, he got puffed up and after having taken a bath and having adorned his body with resplendent garments he reappeared before the gods. But this time his countenance had become mild. Being told of it by the gods, he renounced the world, bore hardships suffering from many diseases, performed penances and attained many mystic powers. Once when he went to Vijayapura, his diseases vanished and he was greeted with a down-pour of gems (35.69-70). After his death he was reborn in the Sanatkumāra heaven.
He is referred to in the Uttar ādhyayana (18.37), the Sthānāngasūtra (10.718) and the Tiloyapannatti (4.515). The Maranasamāhi (410-411) mentions that Sanatkumāra suffered diseases.
The VH (p.233) mentions him as the son of Aśvasena and Sahadevi. The two celestials went to see him in the disguise of Brahmins. When Sanatkumāra suffered from diseases, Indra went to him as a physician, but the former refused to take his treatment and preferred to suffer his own karmas though he had powers to cure his diseases. The previous births are not narrated.
The PCR (20.137-163) mentions Hemabāhu for Meghabāhu. In the UP (61 104-130) his previous births are not narrated. He is the son of Anantavīrya of Vinitanagara (Ayodhyā) born of Sahadevī. He is said to have attained emancipation. The MP (59 17) agrees with the UP.
The TSP (III. p. 167f) describes four previous births of Sanatkumāra but the theme differs. According to it, king Vikramayaśas kidnapped the wife of Nāgadatta. The king after his death was reborn in the Sanatkumāra heaven and thereafter as a merchant Jinadharma at Ratnapura. Nāgadatta was reborn as a Brahmin. He became a threestave ascetic and out of previous enmity he took food in a hot dish arranged to be put on the back of Jinadharma with the help of the

Page #180

INTERVENING STORIES
151
king of Ratnapura. Jinadharma renounced the world and was reborn as Indra and that ascetic (Nāgadatta) as his elephant. Indra got reborn as Sanatkumāra, his parents being Sahadevi and Aśvasena of Hastinapura. The TSP furnishes more details about his marriage. In other respects it agrees with the PCV. The two gods came again as physicians to cure monk Sanatkumāra but he did not like to take any treatment and decided to suffer his own Karmas.
Devendraganin, the commentator of Uttaradhyayana narrates the same version of the story as related in the TSP. Sanatkumāra is said to have belonged to the Kuruvamsa.
In the Brahmanical literature, Sanatkumāra is said to be one of the mind-born sons of Brahma. The other three sons are Sanaka. Sananda and Sanatana (Bhagavatapuraņa, 3. 12. 4).
They are described as counsellors and companions of Viṣņu (MWSD).
11. Harişena:
After defeating Vaiśravana, on his way back to Laikā. Rāvana enquires about the patron of the Jina-temples seen on the way. Sumalin narrates to Ravana the story of the tenth Cakravartin who was the patron of those temples (8. 143-210).
Simhadhvaja of Kampilyapura had two wives, Vapra and Laxmi belonging to different faiths. Vapra's son, Hariṣena left his country on being distressed by the quarrel between his mothers on the question of the preference of taking out their chariots in the procession. He reached a hermitage and there on seeing Madanavali, the princess of Campāpuri developed love for her. At this the recluses turned him out. He resolved to construct Jina-temples if he got the hand of Madanavali. On his way he married the daughters of the king of Sindhunada. Further he married Jayacanda, the daughter of king Indradhanu of Suryodayanagara. Two Vidyadhara lovers of Jayacanda got disgruntled and attacked Hariṣeņa. Hariṣeņa defeated them and emerged as the tenth Cakravartin. He attacked Campāpurī and married Madanavali. He returned home and fulfilled the desire of his mother, Vapra by rotating the Jina-chariots. Further he got many Jina-temples constructed. In course of time he renounced the world and attained emancipation.
The Sthānanga (p. 544) refers to Harişeņa along with Bharata and Sagara and mentions that he was a king who became a monk. The Uttaradhyayana (18.42) refers to him as Muni who reached perfection. The Samavayanga (5.157) and the TP (4.515) calls him tenth Cakravartin.

Page #181

152
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN The PCR (8.281-400) agrees with the PCV and mentions that the chariot was to be moved out on the Aştānhikaparva. The PCS (11.2) gives a brief account of his exploits within a period of eight successive days. The RPS (p.33) agrees with the PCR, The TSP (IV. p. 362) calls him the son of Mahāhari and Merā. He is said to have lived during the life time of Jina Nami, the twenty-first Tirthaikara. Here the account does not agree with that of the PCV. His Digvijaya and attaining the status of a Cakravartin are narrated. The UP (67.61-88) calls him the son of Padmanātha of Bhogapura and Aira. His Digvijaya is narrated but the incidents of the PCV do not find mention in it. The MP (68.9-11) agrees with the UP. Both the latter works mention him to have lived during the congregation of Munisuvratanātha, the twentieth Tirthankara and in the PCV also the story is narrated to Rāvana, hence Harişeņa was at least not born after the congregation of Munisuvratanātha.
B-Legendary Kings of the Ikşvākuvamsa. After having described the life of Munisuvratanātha and the birth of Janaka, Gautama while enumerating the kings of the Ikşvākuvamsa narrates, to Śreņika the following episodes and stories associated with the ancestors of Dasaratha (21.41 to 22.95).
12. Vairabāhu's renunciation :
During the congregation of Munisuvratanātha, Vijaya, the ruler of Sāketapuri had two sons, Vajra bāhu and Purandara begot on his wife Himacūlā. Vajrabāhu married Manoharā, the daughter of king Bāhuvāhana and Cūdāmaņi, of Nāgapura. When Vajrabāhu was returning home after his marriage, his brother-in-law, Udayasundara jokingly asked the former looking at a monk meditating on a hillock whether he intended to become a monk. At this Vajrabāhu instantly accepted asceticism. Consequently Manoharā also became a nun. When Vijaya knew of it, he enthroned Purandara and himself became a monk (21.4 p-77).
The PCR (21.73.139) agrees with the cpisode but it mentions Surendramanyu and Kīrtisamā as the parents of Vajrabāhu and Purandara. Vijaya and Hemacūlini are their grandparents. The name of the wife of Vajrabāhu is Manodayā and her father's name is Ibhavāhana. Here Udayasundara is taking back his sister along with he husband to his home town and Vijaya and Surendramanyu both renounce the world. The RPS (p.81) agrees with the PCR. It names

Page #182

INTERVENING STORIES
153
Manoharā as Carvi and her father as Hastibāhu of Hastināgapura. The TSP (IV. p. 182) follows the PCV. It calls Manoharā as Manorama and her father as Ibhavāhana.
13. Kirtidhara, Sabadeyi and Sukošala : Purandara's son Kirtidhara married Sahadevī, princess of Kuśasthalapura. In course of time when Kirtidhara was blessed with a son named Sukošala, he renounced the world. Sahadevi was not willing with her husband's renunciation. She banned the entry of her husband Kirtid hara and other mendicants into the city to prevent her son from being influenced by them. When Sukošala came to learn of it, he approached Kirtidhara. After consoling his intimidating wife Vicitramālā and declaring their unborn child as the heir to his throne, he also became a monk. In due course Sahadevī died of 'Ārtadhyāna' and became a tigress. Bearing the previous en. mity she tore off Sukošala to pieces, but Sukošala on account of his pure meditation attained liberation and Kirtidhara became omniscient. The tigress remembered her previous birth at the sight of the teeth of her son and lamented over her deeds. She observed fast for three days and thereafter she was reborn as a celestial being (21.78 to 22.47).
The Bhattapariņna (161), the Maranasamahi (466-467) and the Saṁthāraga (63-64) say that Sukošala was strangled by his mother, now a tigress. The PCR (21.140-22.100), the RPS (p.81f) and the TSP (IV. p. 184f) agree with the PCV.
14. Naghuşa and Simhikā: Sukošala's son, Hiranyagarbha begot Naghuşa on his wife Mrgāvati. When Naghuşa was out of his kingdom to conquer the northern region, his wife Simhikā exhibited valour by chasing away the southern kings who had attacked her country. Duly Naghuşa returned home. He got displeased with such a behaviour of his wife as it was against the custom of the nobles that a queen should appear in the public. He admonished and dethroned Simhikā from the position of a 'mahadevī. Once Naghuşa fell ill. No physician could cure him. On that occasion Simhikā with the power of her chastity cured her husband by merely sprinkling some water over his body. At this Naghuşa restored his wife to her original status and after enthroning his son, Sodāsa he accepted asceticism (22.50-71).
The PCR (22.101-130) adds that Simhiká further conquered other kings of the south. The RPS (p. 82) follows the PCR. The TSP (IV. p. 186) agrees with the PCV.

Page #183

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
The VR (I. 70) merely refers to Naghuşa as the son of Ambarīșa. The MB (5. 11-18) states that Naghusa was once made Devarāja (Indra) by the Rşis. He wanted to enjoy with Śaci, the wife of Indra. He rejected the mantras (hymns.) of Brahma and insulted Rṣis, hence he lost his status and was transformed into a serpent. When he came into contact with Yudhisthira he regained his original form (MB, 3. 179-181).
154
15. Sodāsa:
Sodasa, during a religious festivity of eight days, desired to take meat. On that occasion the meat was prohibited hence his cook brought him some human-flesh. Sodasa got addicted to it and for its supply children were killed. His subjects revolted against him and banished him and his cook. They enthroned his son Simharatha. Sodasa was known as Simhasodasa because his food was like that of a lion. Sodasa proceeding towards the south met a monk and accepted vows of a layman. Fortunately he became the king of Mahapura whose ruler had died heirless. Sodasa attacked his son who had refused to pay homage to him. He defeated his son but soon restored the kingdom to him and thereafter renounced the world (22. 71-95),
The Bhattaparinna mentions, that Sodasa suffered being a slave
of taste.
The PCR (22. 132-152) and the RPS (p. 83) agree with the PCV. But the latter work mentions a city-Kotval in place of the cook. The TSP (IV. p. 187) agrees with the PCV.
According to the Vasudevahindi (I. p. 197), Sodasa was the prince of Kañcanapura. He started to take the flesh of peacocks when the meat was prohibited in the city by his father. Once his cook served him with the flesh of a dead boy. He found it very tasteful. The human flesh was kept supplied to him by killing children. When the public agitated against this practice, his father banished him. He wandered like a Rākṣasa and reached the Tilavastuka settlement. There he was killed by Vasudeva who had also reached there on his wandering tour. Sodasa is called as Puruṣādaka (Purisão) also.
The VR (2.110.29) refers to Saudāsa as the son of Raghu. He bore four names-Pravṛddha, Puruṣādaka, Kalmāṣapāda and Saudāsa. The Tilaka commentary (1.70 39) refers to the curse given by Vasistha and the burning of the legs of Saudása. The Visnupurana (4.4.39f) calls him the son of Sudāsa and the grandson of Sarvakāma. He once killed a vyāghra' in the forest. That 'vyaghra' became a Rākṣasa. Saudāsa performed a sacrifice which was being presided over by Vasistha.

Page #184

INTERVENING STORIES
155 When Vaśiştha went out that Raksasa assumed the form of Vašiştha. He asked Saudása to feed him with human flesh and disappeared. Real Vaśiştha was served with it. He cursed Saudása to become a Rākşasa, but at the request of the former the latter moderated efficay of the curse to the period of twelve years only. Saudāsa wanted to recurse Vašiştha by sprinkling water over him. But his wife prevented him from doing so. Hence he poured the water on his own feet and as a result of it his feet got burnt. Thus he came to be known as Kalmāşa pāda. In course of time he developed the nature of a Raksasa and started devouring the human beings. Once he devoured a muni copulating with his wife, just like a 'vyāghra' would devour an animal (4.4.63). The wife of that muni cursed the Rākşasa that he would die the moment he tried to satiate his sexual desire. After 12 years he regained his original nature. His wife Madayanti reminded him of the curse given by the Brāhmani. Saudāsa then never copulated with his wife. It was Vaśiştha who helped the birth of an embryo into the womb of Madayanti. When the child was not born even after the lapse of seven years, her womb was struck with a stone (aśmanā) and the new born child was named Asmaka.
C-Stories of Genesis.
16. Origin of the Brāhmaṇas : Following the episode of the duel between Bharata and Bahubali, Śreņika requests Gautama to tell him the origin of the fourth Varna (caste). Gautama relates the following episode (4. 64-84).
Once Bharata invited the disciples of Rşabha to accept food from his house. Rşabha refused to send them because the food particularly prepared for the monks was not acceptable to them. Then Bharata sent for the lay-votaries. The real votaries did not enter his house with the fear of causing 'hisa' to the living beings of the barley seeds sown in his courtyard whereas the followers of the wrong-faith trampled on them and went to his house. The real followers were marked on their bodies with the Kakiniratna to distinguish them from the pretenders. They got puffed up on account of being greeted by Bharata. Matisāgara informed Bharata of the prophecy of the Jina that those who have been honoured by him would later on, after the deliverance of Lord Mahāvīra, compile the Vedas full of lies and propagate animal sacrifices. Bharata then turned out of his city all those lay-followers and got them beaten by the people. They all took refuge under Rşabha and the latter prevented Bharata from torturing them (ma-haņa). Therefore, they came to be known as the Māhanas (Brāhmaṇas).

Page #185

156
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
The PCR (4. 92-122) agrees with the account of the PCV. The RPS (p. 7) mentions that as they were protected by Rṣabha hence they called themselves as born of the mouth of Brahma (i. e. Rṣabha). It does not use the word 'mahana'. Some other works also do not refer to this incident. According to the AP (38. 21) those who did not walk on the germinated seeds were named as Brahmaņas. At 41. 54 Rṣabha is said to have told Bharata that they would distract from the right path in future, still as they are righteous at present, they should not be dishonoured. The MP (19. 4) agrees with the AP.
The Vasudevahindi deals with this topic in detail (p.183). It states that when Rṣabha did not accept the food. Bharata invited the Śravakas for dining. He further requested them to take food at his house daily and asked them to recite. 'Jito bhavam'. This recitation made him realise that he has been overpowered by the senses which are the real enemies. In due course others, who were not Śrāvakas, also began to take food at his house. He then examined them. The real ones observed the vow of not killing the living beings and it was on account of this principle-'mā haṇaha jive tti tao Mahaņa tti vuccanti'-that they were called Mahaņas. Bharata asked them about the layman's vows. The holders of five Apuvratas were marked with one line, those of additionally of three Gunavratas with two lines and those also of Sikṣāpadas with three lines of Kakiņīratna. In this way the Mahaņas were originated. They used to study Aryaveda which was composed to guide their conduct. According to the Acărăngacurni of Jinadasagaņi Varya (p.5) those who warded off the people who caused injury to anyone were called Mahaņas. The Avaśyakacurņi of Jinadasagani Mahattara (p. 213f) mentions that they abandoned all the injurious activities, studied the scriptures and took food at the house of Bharata. They were then marked accordingly. They used to recite-jaha tubbhe jita aho bhavan vardhate bhayaṁ ma haṇāhitti', i. e. 'You have won (the passions), the fear grows, do not kill'. Hence they were called Brahmanas (māhaņas). The TSP (I. p. 343) agrees with the Avasyakacurni and further adds that the three lines drawn with the Kākini represented right faith, right knowledge and right conduct. It says that for their study the Veda were purified by the way of including into them the praise of the Arhats and the right practices of the munis and the laymen. Gradually the Mahaņas became known by the name of Brahmanas and they reached the stage of wearing the sacred thread, though originally there were three lines on their bodies.

Page #186

INTERVENING STORIES
157 In the Brahmanical tradition the Rgveda (10.7.90) mentions that the Brāhmaṇas are the mouth, the Rajanyas (Ksatriya) the arms, the Vaisyas the thighs and the Śūdras the feet of Prajapati. The Mahābhārata (12.296. 5-6), the Manusmrti (1.31), the VR (3.14.30), and the Vişnupurāņa (1.6.6) speak in the same light and declare that Brahmaņas originated from the mouth of Prajāpati and they constitute the first and the foremost varņa of the four-fold society.
17. Vasu, Parvataka and the Origin of the Yajña :
Răvaņa while on his war compaign reaches Rājapura (Rājagpha). There an animal sacrifice was being performed by king Marutta. Listening to the name of sacrifice (Jaņņa-yajña) Śreniką inquires about its origin and Gautama narrates the story (11.6-45).
Kșirakadamba, the preceptor of Ikşvāku king Vasu of Ayodhyā (the son of Ajita or Jiyārirāya 11.21 born of Surakāntā), had two more pupils, his own son Parvataka and brahmin Närada. Once on being enlightened by Căraņa muni, he became a Jaina monk. In due course there grew a controversy between Parvataka and Narada about the meaning of 'aja' which was to be used in the sacrifices. They went to Vasu for clarification. He gave his judgement from his bright crystal seat (phalihamaya asaņa) in the favour of Parvataka on the recommendation of the latter's mother explaining that 'aja' meant a goat and not the corns which would not germinate as advocated by Nárada. On account of telling a lie the earth split up and absorbed Vasu into it. He went to the seventh hell. Parvataka having been humiliated by the public, performed perverse penances and after his death, he was reborn as a Raksasa. He transformed himself into a brahmin and preached animal-killing, taking meat and drinking of wine on sacrificial occasions.
The Bhattaparinnā states that Vasu went to hell for telling a lie. The PCR (11.13-104) mentions Yayāti in place of Ajita. The PCS (15.9) refers to Vasu who went to hell on account of telling a lie, but the story is not narrated. The HVPJ (ch. 17) agrees with the PCV. The VH (p. 188-193) describes the topic under the Origin of the Anarya Veda.' It mentions that Vasu who belonged to Harivansa reigned Suktimati. Here Kșīrakadamba is said to have examined the prudence of his pupils through the test of killing an artificial ram. Parvataka killed it while Närada did not, because there was no place where no body could see his action. Therefore Kșīrakadamba made him his heir. The crystal slab is said to have been given to Vasu by a hunter. Parvataka was humiliated by the people for enmeshing Vasu to tell a lie. It further states that Madhupingala could not marry Sulasā on account of the

Page #187

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
intrigue of Sagara, the king of Saketa. After his death he became Mahākāla deva. He wanted to take revenge upon Sagara. He met Parvataka and introduced himself as Sandilya, a friend of the father of Parvataka. He promised to propagate Parvataka's view on 'aja'. He spread epidemic in Śuktimati. Parvataka propogated animal-sacrifice. Thereby the disease was stopped. He spread epidemic in the country of Sagara. The latter sent for Parvataka. He preached animal-sacrifice there too and Mahākāladeva by the power of his maya exhibited that the sacrificed animals attained heaven. Sagara then performed many animal-sacrifices. Narada prevented Sagara from killing animals, but the latter was so much influenced by Parvataka and Mahakaladeva that he could not realise as to where lay his own good. Therefore he attained hell. Sandilya thus popularised his teachings which were incorportated into a book called Anarya Veda.
158
The Uttarapurana (67.212) states that the animal-sacrifice was started by Mahakalasura. The story agrees with Vasudevahindi with minor changes. Vasu is said to be the son of Visvavasu of Suvastikāvati and Śrīmati. Parvataka is turned away by the monks when he explains 'aja' as a goat. Here Vasu does not decide the controversy. Parvataka meets Mahākāla and propagates animal-sacrifices. Sagara is entangled. A monk tries to prevent Sagara but in vain. Viśvabhu, the minister of Sagara is also involved. Here Narada appears and tries to interpret the right meaning of 'aja' but Parvataka intervenes and opposes him, Then they go to Vasu who tells a lie. Viśvabhū again starts animalsacrifices. Parvataka and Viśvabhu go to hell. Mahākāla reappears and confesses his guilt.
The MP (69.23) mentions that Vasu was the prince of Śrāvastipura. therwise it follows the UP. The TSP (IV. 143) mentions Abhicandra as the father of Vasu and ruler of Suktimati. Parvataka is said to have explained the reference to 'aja' in the Ṛgveda as 'meşa' a goat. Then the account follows the VR. Thereafter the Asura prompts Parvataka to propagate drinking, establishing of illicit relations in the Gosava sacrifice, flesh-eating and animal-killing. The RPS (6) mentions that Vasu belongs to Suvastikāvatipura. Further it follows the UP up to the acceptance of monkhood by Kṣirakadamba. Then it follows the version of the PCV upto the death of Vasu. Thereafter with the assistance of Mahasura, Parvataka prepares many counterfeit hymns and inserts them into the Vedas. He instigates Sagara to perform animal-sacrifices. The advice of a monk to abstain from animal-sacrifices is believed by Mahasura. Sagara takes to animal-sacrifice and goes to the seventh hell,

Page #188

159
INTERVENING STORIES
The MB (12.335-337) contains the story as follows:
Vasu, also known as Uparicara was a great king of the Satya age. He was a disciple of Bṛhaspati and a devotee of Visņu. He followed the tenets of Satvata and the Pañcarātra system. He performed an Aśvamedha without killing any animal. He offered the oblations with the forest-produce. Once he was appointed as an umpire to decide a controversy between the Gods and the sages over the interpretation of the word 'aja'. He showed partiality for the Gods and maintained that it meant a goat and not the grains of corn. Thereupon the sages cursed him to get born in a hellish region. While living in the hell, he was nourished by a stream of clarified butter. It was poured for him by the priests. It was an obtation offered in the sacrifices and was named as 'Nasordhāra'. Being advised by the Gods, he continued to worship Visņu. In due course he attained freedom by the favour of Visņu and ascended to Brahmaloka. The MB (13.6.342) also mentions that Vasu attained hell on account of being cursed by the Rṣis. The Matsyapurana (ch.142) contains the story. Here the controversy is between the Indra and the Ṛsis. The point is whether the 'jangama' creatures or the 'sthavara' objects should be oblated in the sacrifices. Vasu, the son of Uttanapada advocated 'himsātmaka' yajña i.e. the oblation of living beings. He attained hell on being cursed by the Rsis.
18. Srikantha and Puspottara:
19. Amaraprabha and Gunamati : 20. Sumukha and Viraka:
For stories Nos. 18, 19 and 20 see 'Origin of Vanaravaṁśa', "Adoption of Vahara-emblem" and 'Origin of Harivamsa' in the chapter "Origin and Genealogy of various Vamsas".
3. DIDACTIC STORIES
A-Religious cum Moral Stories.
21. Muni Sañjayanta's torture at the hands of Vidyadhara Vidyutdamṣtra:
While enumerating the names of the kings of the Vidyadhara Vamsa. Gautama relates the following episode illustrating the consequences of torturing a muni (5,20-26).
Once Vidyutdaṁṣṭra (Vijjudadha), the Vidyadhara lord of the Vijayardha mountain kidnapped muni Sñjayanta who was meditating

Page #189

160
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
at Aparavideha and carried him to the Pañcasangamaya hill. There he tortured him by pelting stones at him. The monk did not get disturbed at all and attained Kevala. On that occasion Dharanendra paid his obeisance to the monk and seized off the supernatural lores of the king. When the king apologised, Dharanendra restored the 'vidyās' to him.
The PCR (5. 25-84) agrees with the above account. The Vasudevahindi (I. p. 251) gives additionally the names of the parents of Sanjayanta as Sañjaya and Satyasri of Vitāsokanagara in the Aparavideha. It further states that the monk was alleged to be the cause of a calamity, hence Vidyutdamstra ordered his feudals to kill him. The MP (57) mentions Sañjayanta and Jayanta as the sons of king Vaijayanta of Vitāśokanagara. Both the sons renounced the world. The latter was reborn as Nāgendra. Vidyutdarşțra is said to have punished muni Sañjayanta because his aerial car had suddenly stopped where the muni was maditating. Then Nagendra threw away Vidyutdańșțra into the sea, but he was saved by a celestial being. The RPS (p. 8) names the mother of Sañjayanta as Sundari and further agrees with the MP.
22. The previous births of Sañjayanta and Vidyutdamặtra or
the story of Srivardhana and Jvalanasimha :
The Dharanendra who had rescued muni Sañjayanta from tortures of Vidyutdarnstra requested Kevalin Sañjayanta to tell him the cause of him (Muni's) trouble. The muni narrated the story (5. 26-41) illustrating the consequences of punishing others.
Merchant Hitaðkara of Sakatagrāma was reborn as Śrīvardhana, the king of Kusumăvati. A brahmin of that place was reborn as a celestial being on account of his perverse penances. That celestial being was reborn as brahmin Jvalanasimha and became the priest of the king. He swindled some property belonging to merchant Niyamadatta. It was detected by a courtezan. Srivardhana then banished the priest. The latter performed some penances to take revenge and was reborn as Vidyutdamstra while king Śrīvardhana and merchant Niyamadatta were reborn as Sanjayanta and Dharanendra respectively.
The PCR (5 34-46) agrees with the PCV. It mentions Kusumāvati as Kumudavati and Jvalanasimha is called Vanhibikha. The theft was detected by the king himself while playing the game of dice with the priest. The Vasudevahindi (I. p. 253-262) mentions the name of the king as Simhasena and that of his priest as Śrībhūti belonging to Simhapura. The name of the merchant is Bhadramitra. He deposited some valuables with the priest when he was going out on a

Page #190

INTERVENING STORIES
161
mercantile journey. But on his return the priest denied to have kept any deposits. Simhasena appointed his minister to investigate the matter. He invited the priest for playing dice and exchanged his ring for that of the priest. The king sent his door-keeper and procured the deposited wealth of that merchant from the wife of the priest with the help of the ring of her husband. Further various rebirths of them are described till they are born as Sanjayanta, Vidyutdamṣṭra and Nagendra respectively. The HVP (20.20-126) names the characters as mentioned in the Vasudevahindi. Here the queen detects the hidden jewels which were deposited by the merchant named here as Sumitradatta. It also describes various rebirths of them. The RPS (p.9) agrees with the HVP.
23. The previous births of Vidyadhara Purnaghana and Sulocana or the story of Bhāvaṇa and Haridāsa:
On account of the ancestral enmity when Purnaghana was slain in the battle by Sahasranayana, Meghavahana the former's son fled away and took refuge under Ajitanatha. Sahasranayana chased Meghavahana and reached there. At that time the Ganadhara enquired about the previous births of the fathers of Sahasranayana and Meghavahana. Then Ajitanatha, the second Tirthankara narrated the story (5.82-91) explaining the consequences of committing murder.
Haridasa, a merchant-son of Kirtimati and Bhavana of Adityaprabhapura, lost all his wealth in the game of dice when his father had gone out on a trade voyage. His father returned home in due course and came to know that his son had gone to commit burglary in the palace. He started meditating in his house to save his son from that vice. In the meanwhile Haridasa returned home and killed his father under the suspicion of considering him enemy. Haridasa was then reborn as Sulocana and Bhāvana as Pūrṇaghana. On account of this enmity Purnaghana had killed Sulocana, the father of Sahasranayana. This was the cause of enmity between Sulocana's son, Sahasranayana and Purnaghana.
According to the PCR (5.96f) Bhavana belonged to Sadṛtupura and his wife is called Ataki. The rest of the story is identical except that many more previous births of Purnaghana and Suloca na as dogs, jackals, cats, bulls, mungooses, males in Puşkalavatī and as celestial beings are mentioned. The RPS (ch. 3) follows the PCR. Here the town is Marutpura. Bhavana's wife is Cataki. Haridasa killed his father in a tunnel when the latter went there in search of his son. It
11

Page #191

162
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
adds two more rebirths as crocodiles and he-buffaloes to those of the PCR. The TSP (II. p. 164) agrees with the PCV. Here the losing of wealth in the game of dice is not referred to. Bhāvana returned from his voyage at night. As he entered his house, he was killed by Haridāsa who suspected the former to be a thief. It is mentioned that the father and the son passed through several painful rebirths.
24. Tbe previous births of Vidyadhara Megha vāhana and
Sahasranayana or the story of Sasi and Avaliya :
Having listened to the preceding story, Cakravartin (Sagara), who had married the sister of Sahasranayana and had helped Sahasranayana, asked the Jina to narrate the previous births of the sons of Purnaghana and Sulocana (Meghavāhana and Sahasranayana respectively). Then the Jina narrated the story (5. 93-111) explaining the consequences of instigating some one to commit murder.
Saśi and Avaliya were the pupils of Rambhaka of Padmapura. Once Avaliya purchased a cow from a cowherd. But immediately on being instigated by Sasi, the cowherd killed Avaliya and sold the same cow to Sasi. Avaliya was reborn as a Mleccha. He killed Sasi when the latter was proceeding to Tamraliptinagara. Sasi was reborn as a bull. The bull on being killed again by that Mleccha was reborn as a cat. The Mleccha was reborn as a rat. The rat was killed by the cat. Thus killing each other they transmigrated as hellish beings, animals, slaves, and lords of demons. Sasi was reborn as Kulandhara and Avaliya as priest Puşyabhūti. The priest wanted to kill Kulandhara but being enlightened by a monk he accepted monkhood and was reborn in Sanatkumāra heaven. Kulandhara was also reborn there. Both of them were further reborn as the servants of king Vrşabha of Ariñjayapura in Dhătakikhanda. They renounced the world along with the king and became celestial beings in the Sahasrāra heaven. From there Sasi was reborn as Meghavāhana and Avaliya as Sahasranayana.
According to the PCR (5.113-133) Rambhaka is named as Sankhikorambha. He was a wealthy man. He caused disruption between his pupils, Sasi's journey to Tamraliptinagara is not mentioned. In place of Vrsabha, the king is named as Sahasrasira. The PCS (5.7.10) refers to them but the story is not narrated. The RPS (ch. 3) calls Sarikhika a brahmin. It agrees with the PCR with minor changes in names and animal lives. The TSP (II. p. 164) calls Rambhaka a wandering mendicant. It mentions the enmity between Sasi and Avaliya, but does not give details about their further births.

Page #192

INTERVENING STORIES
163
25. The previous birth of Sagara or the story of Rambhaka :
Sagara had helped Sahasranayana in attacking Purnaghana so he further asked as to what was the cause of his sympathy for Sahasranayana. Then Ajitanātha narrated the story (5.112-119) illustrating the good results of having sympathy and love for others.
Rambhaka became a celestial being on account of the offerings made to a monk. He was reborn successively as prince Vakrakirti at Candrapura, a celestial being and then as the son of Candramati and Mahāghoṣa of Ratnasañcayapura in Aparavideha. He renounced the world and was reborn as a celestial being in the Prāņata Kalpa, and thereafter as Yaśaskirti, the son of Yasodhara and Jaya in Pșthvīpura. He renounced the world and was reborn in the Vijaya heaven. From there he was reborn as Sagara. As Āvaliya was very dear to Rambhaka so Sahasranayana was to Sagara.
The PCR (5.134-140) names the parents of Vakrakīrti as Hari and Dharādevī. According to the RPS (p. 15) Sankhika (Rambhaka) was first reborn in Devakuru and then as a celestial being. Vakrakirti is named Vratakīrti and Yaśaskīrti as Jayakīrti. The TSP (II. p. 165) mentions that Rambhaka passed through various good existences and was reborn as Sagara.
26. The Previous Birth of Bhagiratha or the story of a potter:
Following the episode of the burning of the sons of Sagara, Bhagirath requests muni Śrutasāgara to tell him the cause of his and Bhima's escape from death. The monk narrates the story (5. 204-216) illustrating the consequences of torturing the Sangha.
Once a Saigha of the Sramaņas on a pilgrimage to the Sammeta mountain was tortured by all the inhabitants of a village despite the opposition from a potter. In course of time when some villager committed theft, the king burnt the whole village. The potter who was out of the village on that occasion escaped death. That potter was reborn as a rich merchant and all the villagers as the inhabitants of Varāțaka. The merchant then was reborn as a king while the villagers as (māivāhā=mātņvāhakāḥ) worms. Those worms were trampled down to death by an elephant. The king renounced the world and attained heaven. From heaven he was reborn as Bhagiratha while the worms passing through various births became the sons of Sagara.
The PCR (5. 285-315) and the RPS (ch. 3) agree with the PCV. The TSP (II, p. 214) mentions the Virāța country for Varāțaka. Jahnu

Page #193

164
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
is mentioned as one of the sons of Sagara. Devendraganin, the commentator of the Uttaradhyayana mentions Bhagiratha as the son of Jahnu.
27. The previous births of Rakṣasa Mahārakṣa or the story of Pritinkara:
Following the enumeration of the kings of the Rākṣasa dynasty and the story of the previous birth of Bhagiratha, Maharakṣa is said to have developed aversion on having seen a bee die in the interior of a lotus. He paid homage to monk Śrutasagara and asked him about his previous birth. The monk narrated the story (5.227-235) illustrating the results of forming a 'nidana'. Having listened to this story
Mahārakṣa renounced the world.
Prītinkara, the son of Hitankara and Madhavi of Potanapura once eulogised the Jinas on having learnt that the king of that town had performed a great worship of the Jinas. Thereafter having been reborn as an Yakṣa, he saved a monk from a calamity in Aparavideha. Being again reborn as Udita, the son of Khecara Taḍitangada and Sriprabha in the Vijayardha, he saw the splendour of a celestial being proceeding to perform the worship of the Jinas and resolved (nidana) to do the same, He performed penances and was reborn as a celestial being in the Iśana Kalpa. From there he was reborn as Mahārakṣa.
The PCR (5.345-355) contains the same story. The PCS (5.5.16) does not refer to this previous birth story.
The RPS (ch.3) agrees with the PCV.
28. The previous birth of Vanara Śrikantha or the story of two merchant brothers:
The previous birth of Vanara Śrikantha is narrated following his installing as the first lord of Vanaradvipa. Once having got enlightened by the splendour of Indra and finding himself unable to reach the Nandiśvaradvipa, Śrīkantha enthroned his son, Vajrakantha and himself renounced the world. Vajrakantha then requested a monk to narrate the previous birth-story of his father. The monk related it (6.60-65) to him illustrating the fruits of saving other's life.
The wives of two merchant brothers caused dissention between the brothers. The younger one adhered to the wrong faith while the elder one observed the layman's vows. Once the younger one killed a man before the king. The elder saved him by giving some

Page #194

INTERVENING STORIES
165
wealth to the king and further pacified his younger brother. The elder was then reborn as the lord of the celestial beings while the younger one was reborn as a celestial being only. From there the younger one was reborn as Śrikantha and that Indra (celestial lord) enlightened Śrīkantha because of having regard for the younger
brother.
The PCR (6. 155-160) mentions that the younger brother lived the life of a hunter. The elder one through a test found out that the younger one had affection for him. Therefore, the elder one gave some wealth to the younger one and ameliorated the latter's
conditions.
29. The previous birth of Rakṣasa Taḍitkeśa or the story of Datta and a hunter:
It is narrated following the adoption of the figure of Vanara (monkey) as the state emblem by Amaraprabha. Once the wife of Taditkeśa, the Rākṣasa king of Lanka, was injured by a monkey while sporting in a garden. That monkey was killed by the king. The monkey then being reborn as Udadhikumāra, a celestial being again disturbed the king sporting there. When Taditka śa questioned the At this both of celestial being, the latter related the previous incident. them proceeded to a monk and enquired about the cause of their transmigration. The monk narrated the story illustrating the consequences of nursing the feeling of revenge (6.134-147). Having listened to the story Taditkeśa installed his son Sukeśa and himself renounced the world.
Two persons killing each other were reborn one as a hunter in Banaras and the other as Datta, the son of a minister in Śrāvasti, respectively. The latter became a monk and sojourned at Kasipura in a garden. When he was meditating, that hunter arrived there. He abused and beat the monk. As the monk became angry and thought of beating the hunter in his turn, he lost the valuable fruits of his penances and was reborn as an inferior celestial being. Therefrom he descended as Taditkeśa while the hunter was reborn as a monkey.
The PCR (6.227-328) and the PCS (6.10-16) agree with the PCV. The RPS (ch. 4) contains minor differences as regards the places of rebirth. The TSP (IV. p. 110) states that the hunter killed the mendicant. The hunter is said to have first passed through the hellish life and then was reborn as a monkey.

Page #195

166
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
30. The previous birth of Madhu and his acquiring the Salaratna (trident) or the story of Prabhava and Sumitra :
Rāvana married his daughter Manorama (Kệtacitra 11.101, 12.8) to Madhu of Mathură, who possessed a divine weapon (Salaratna). Hearing this, Śreņika asked as to how the weapon was acquired by Madhu. Then Gautama narrated the story (12.10-35) illustrating the fruits of true friendship.
Prabhava and Sumitra were very intimate friends. Sumitra on becoming the king raised the status of Prabhava. Once Sumitra was forcibly carried to a forest by a turbulent horse. The Bhilla chief of that place married his daughter, Vanamāla to him. She was very beautiful. Prabhava got attracted to her. When Sumitra learned it, he sent his wife to the house of Prabhava. Prabhava on finding Vanamāla there got surprised. He developed hatred for his life and tried to kill himself. But Sumitra who was secretly observing from out side intervened and saved Prabhava. In course of time Sumitra renounced the world and was reborn as a celestial being. From there he was reborn as Madhu. Prabhava wandering through the life of Sikhin (human being) was reborn as Camara Kumāra, the lord of the Bhavanavāsī Gods. Because of previous friendship Camara presented to Madhu a divine weapon (trisularatna).
The PCR (12. 21-69), the TSP (IV. p. 152) and the RPS (p. 48) contain the same story.
The VR (7.61) mentions that Madhu was a Daitya. He was righteous and had great affection for the Suras. Siva presented a Sūla to Madhu on account of the latter's piety and further granted a boon that as long as he maintained friendship with the Suras and the Vipras, the Sula will remain with him. Madhu further requested Siva that the Sūla should pass on to his successors, but Śiva promised this much only that it would further remain with his son only.
31. The previous births of king Indra or the story of
Sahasrabhāga: After getting released from the captivity of Rāvana, Indra requested muni Nirvāṇasāgara to narrate to him his previous birth. Then the monk related the story (13.21-31) elucidating the good fruits of performing austerities.
A diseased girl of Sikhipura lost her parents and lived on begging. After her death, she was reborn as wife of a Kimpuruşa and

Page #196

167
INTERVENING STORIES again as king Sahasrabhāga, the son of Dhāriņi by Gomukha of Ratnapura. On account of observing the vows, he was reborn as a celestial being and then as Nandivardhana, the son of Gunavalli. Having enjoyed the kingdom he renounced the would. He performed penances and in due caurse died. Having passed through the life of a celestial being in the Graiveyakavimāna, he was reborn as a Vidyādhara king named Indra.
The PCR (13.54-66) and the RPS (ch. 7) agree with the above story. The RPS however calls Nandivardhana as Samantavardhana.
32. Indra's another previous birth or the story of Ahalyā :
Continuing the narration the monk advised Indra not to brood over his defeat and reminded him of a sinful incident in his previous life pointing out the dire consequences of censuring, cursing or hurting a monk for which he was humiliated at present (13.33-52) by Rāvana. On having heard the following story, Indra (Šakra) renounced the world and attained emancipation.
Ahalyā (Ähalla), the daughter of Vegavati and Jvalanasiṁha of Ariñja yapura chose Ānandamálin, the king of Candravartapura as her hushand in her 'svayamvara'. In course of time Anandamālin renounced the world and sojourned on the bank of the river Harsāvali. Indra who had got disgruntled on account of not being selected by Ahalyā developed jealousy for Anandamálin. He went to the bank of that river and tied the limbs of the monk. On this occasion Muni Kalyāṇagunadhara, the brother of Anandamālin cursed Indra but his (Indra's) wife Sarvašrī's immediate intervention and imploration pacified the monk and saved Indra from being burnt to ashes.
The PCR (13. 67-117) agrees with the PCV. The TSP (IV. 160) mentions the name of Indra in his previous birth as Taditprabha, the lord of Sūryāvartapura. Indra is said to have tortured muni Anandamălin on the Rathāvarta mountain. Sarvasri is named as Satyaśrī. The RPS (ch, 7) names Ānandamālin as Nandamāla.
The VH (p. 292) contains the story of Ahalya and Vasava (Indra). It is akin to that of the VR and has no relation to that of the PCV.
The VR (1. 48) narrates that Indra assumed the form of Gautama and in the absence of the latter, he committed adultery with Ahalya, the wife of sage Gautama. When Gautama returned, he cursed Indra, as a result of which the latter's testicles got severed off and thus he

Page #197

168
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYA became impotent. Ahalyā was also cursed by Gautama to remain invisible for one thousand years and to return to her original form when Rama visited the place. At 7. 30. 17€ it is said that Indra becomes gloomy on being defeated by Meghavāhana (Indrajit). Then Pitāmaha (Prajapati) reminds Indra of his previous sin and narrates the above story and further adds that he himself had created Ahalyā very beautiful to look at. Indra had thought that she would become his wife, but she was married to Gautama. At this Indra became angry and committed adultery with her. Then Gautama cursed him to the effect that he would be subdued and humiliated in the battle by his enemy. The present defeat was the result of his ‘duşkịt'.
33. The previous birth of Srisaila or Hanu, or the story of
Damayanta:
When Añjana was banished by his mother-in-law, she entered a forest along with her companion Vasantamāla. There she paid homage to a muni meditating near a cave. Vasantamālā enquired of the monk about the cause of Añjanā's plight and the previous life of the unfortunate child who was still in the womb of Añjanā. Then the monk narrated the following story (17, 43-58) thereby explaining the fruits of observing penances.
Damayanta, the son of Priyanandin and Jayā of Mandarapura, on account of offering some gifts to a monk, passed through the birth of a celestial being and then was reborn as Simhacandra being the son of Priyangulakşmi and Harivāhana of Varapura. On account of his devotion to the religion, he passed through the life of a celestial being and was reborn as a son of Kanakodari and king Sukantha of Vijayārdha. He reigned Arunapura and in due course renounced the world under Muni Lakşmidhara during the tirtha of Vimalanātha. He observed penances and after passing through a celestial life, he was reborn as a child in the womb of Añjanāsundari.
The PCR (17. 141-164) names Varapura as Mrgāúkanagara and Harivāhana as Haricandra. The TSP (IV. p. 172) agrees with the PCR and the RPS (ch. 9) agrees with the PCR, but it names Priyangulakşmi as Priyalakşmi.
34. The previous birth of Añjanāsundari or the story of
Kanakodari : After narrating the preceding story the monk related the following story (17. 59-70) illustrating the consequences of desecrating a Jina. idol.

Page #198

169
INTERVENING STORIES
Kanakodarī, the wife of Sukantha had Lakṣmi as her cowife. Once Kanakodarī out of jealousy threw away in the street a Jina-idol which was installed by her cowife. When a nun, Samyamaśrī delivered a discourse on the right conduct, Kanakodarī reinstalled that idol in a shrine. She observed vows and was reborn as Añjanā.
The PCR (17. 166-196) agrees with the PCV. The PCS (19. 7. 3) merely refers to the throwing away of the Jina-idol in her previous birth by Añjana. The TSP (IV. 173) agrees with the PCV. The RPS (ch. 9) adds that the idol was not thrown out but concealed for 22 'ghatikās', hence Añjana had to suffer separation from her husband for 22 years.
35. The previous birth of Bhamandala or the story of Madhupingala and Kundalamandita:
Having listened to that a celestial being was guarding the embryo (of Bhamandala) conceived by the wife of Janaka, Śreņika enquired as to what was the relation between the god and the embryo. Then Gautama narrated the story (26. 1-73) elucidating the consequences of kidnapping another's wife.
Madhupingala, the son of a Purohita (Dhumaketu) and Śākhāmahila fell in love with Citrotsavā, the daughter of king Cakradhvaja of Cakrapura and Manasasundari. He absconded with her to Vidagdhanagara. There she was kidnapped by prince Kundalamandita. Distressed Madhupingala renounced the world and was reborn as a celestial being. Kundalamandita was captured by king Anaranya (of Saketa) on account of causing upheaval in the latter's territory. Later being pleased with his services Anaranya released him. Then Kundalamandita accepted layman's vows under a monk and when he was out to vanquish his foes, he died on the way and his soul1 descended into the womb of Videha, the wife of Janaka. The celestial being (Madhupingala) was guarding that embryo (of Bhamandala) to take revenge upon him. (When Bhamaṇḍala was born, he was kidnapped by that celestial being).
The PCR (26. 1-119) calls Manasasundarī as Manasvinī. The PCS (22. 6) merely refers to the story. The TSP (IV. p. 196f) mentions Madhupingala as the son of Svāhā and Dhumakeśa.
1.
At that time another soul of a celestial female also descended into her womb. That was the soul of Citrotsava who passing through some other births was reborn as a celestial being (See Story No.36). Thereafter she was born. as Sitä.

Page #199

170
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Citrotsavā is named Atisundari.1 The RPS (p, 97) names Śakhāmahilā
as Svāhā.
36. The previous births of Candragati along with Madhupingala, Kundalamandita and Citrotsava or the story of Vimuci, Sarasa, Atibhūti and Kayāṇa :
After having listened to the religious discourse and the cause of enlightenment of Candragati from monk Sarvabhutaśarana, Bhāmaṇḍala enquired about the cause of Candragati's affection for him. Then the monk narrated the story (30 60-77) explaining the fruits of nurturing affection for others.
a
Brahmin Vimuci of Darugräma had a son Atibhuti begot on Anukośa. Another brahmin named Kayāņa kidnapped Sarasa, the wife of Atibhuti, Distressed Atibhuti wandered from place to place. In the meanwhile miserable Vimuci and his wife Anukośa renounced the world and were reborn as celestial beings. Atibhuti and Kayāņa passing through various rebirths were reborn as goose and (Madhu-) Pingala respectively. The goose after passing through the life of a Kinnara was reborn as Kundalamandita. Sarasa after renouncing the world was reborn as Citrotsava while Vimuci and Anukośā (the celestial beings) were reborn as Vidyadhara Candragati and Puspavati respectively, the latter being the wife of the former. Kundalamandita was reborn as Bhamandala who was adopted by Candragati as his son. Candragati had affection for Bhamandala on account of their mutual relations in the previous birth.
The PCR (30.116-135) adds that Uri, the mother of Kayāņa was reborn as Videha, the wife of Janaka. It mentions more rebirths of the Vasubhūti. It characters. The TSP (VI. 195) calls Vimuci as mentions the names of the parents of Kundalamandita as Prakāśasimha and Pravaravali. Atibhūti's more rebirths are mentioned. The RPS (p. 86) names Kayāņa as Kapāna, the son of Rudra and Kūrī. Sarasă Kūrī is reborn as Videha, the is referred to as the daughter of Vimuci.
wife of Janaka.
37. The previous births of Dasaratha, Janaka and Kanaka or the story of Upasti, Bhüri, and Upamanyu :
Having listened to the account of Bhamandala's reunion with his
1. The translation in the TSP seems to be faulty. Atisundari should be an adjective of Citrotsavā.

Page #200

INTERVENING STORIES
171
real parents, Sreņika enquired about the cause of Dasaratha's prosperity. Then Gautama told that once Dasaratha was informed of his own previous birth by Sarvabhūtasarana as follows (31. 1-35).
Upāsti, a girl who was devoted to the wrong faith and was hostile to the monks, transmigrating through different existences in the form of a hell, sub human, human (as Bhadravaruņa at Angapura, etc.) and calestial being was again reborn as Nandivaradhana, being the son of Pșthvi and Nandighosa of Puşkalāvati. Nandighosa renounced the world, performed penances and was reborn as a celestial being and from there as Muni Sarvabhūta. Nandivardhana transmigrating through the life of a celestial being was reborn as Surañjaya, the son of Vidyutlatā and Vidyadhara king Ratnamālin of Sasipura in Aparavideha.
Bhūri of the Gandhāra country took vows and again gave them up at the advice of Purohita Upamanyu. That Purohita transmigrating through the life of an elaphant was reborn as Arihasana, the son of Bhūri and Yojanagandhā. He renounced the world and became a celestial being. Bhūri'na) passing through the life of Dagakirtidhara in the Daņdakāraṇya and then that of a hellish being was reborn as Ratnamālin as mentioned above. Once Ratnamálin was prevented by that celestial being (Upamanyu) from attacking the king Vajravaranayana of Simhapura and was told of his previous life. At this Ratnamālin and his son Sūrañjaya renounced the world.
Sūrañjaya after having performed penances became a celestial being and then was reborn as Dasaratha while Ratnamālin and the celestial being (Upamanyu) were reborn as Janaka and Kanaka respectively.
The PCR (31 1-57) names Bhadravaruņa as Dhāraṇa born at Candrapura and Bhūri as Bhūti. It mentions Bhūti (mrga) to have been reborn as a deer in the Mandāraṇya in place of Dagakīrtidhara in the Dandakıranya. That deer was reborn as Kliñja in a low family and then descended to hell. It calls Arihasana as Arisūdana. The TSP (IV. p. 208) mentions Bhadravaruņa as Varuņa, born at Candrapura. Bhûri is mentioned to have first become a python who got burnt into a forest conflagration and then was reborn as Ratnamālin after passing through the life of a hellish being. Sarvabhūti is named Satyabhūti. The RPS (p. 95) follows the PCR but in place of king Bhūtimga there is a deer.
In the TR Manu Svayambhu is said to have pleased Prabhu (Bhagavāna) with his penances. He demanded a boon of

Page #201

172
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
getting a son like him (tumhahi samāna suta). Accordingly Prabhu granted the boon. Manu ascended to the capital of Indra and from there he was reborn as Dasaratha and Prabhu himself as his son Rāma (Balakāṇḍa, 142-152). Manu's wife Śatarupā was incarnated as Kausalya. At another place (1.186) Kasyapa and Aditi are mentioned to have been reborn as Dasaratha and Kausalya.
38. The previous births of Muni Deśabhuṣaṇa and Kulabhuṣaṇa or the story of Udita, Mudita and Vasubhūti:
Following the eradication of the calamity caused to the monks, Kulabhuṣaṇa and Deśabhuṣana on the Vamśagiri hill by a celestial being named Analaprabha, Rama enquired about the cause of the calamity. Then the elder monk Deśabhuṣaṇa narrated the story (39.36-126) illustrating the consequences of committing murder or adultery and causing betrayal of faith.
King Vijayaparvata of Padmininagari once sent his envoy Amṛtasara to another country. Amṛtasara went there along with his Brahmin friend Vasubhuti. The latter had illegitimate connection with Upayoga, the wife of the envoy. He killed Amṛtasara and returned to Upayoga who advised him to kill her sons, Udita and Mudita also. Vasubhuti's wife broke the news of the intrigue. Udita assassinated Vasubhuti. The latter was reborn as a Mleccha. Udita and Mudita renounced the world and while proceeding to the Sammeta hill lost their way in the forest. That Mleccha began to beat them, but the Senapati (i. e. the chief of the Mlecchas) rescued them. Those monks were reborn as devas and that Mleccha passing through subhuman existences and the life of a Tapasa became a Jyotiskadeva. Udita and Mudita descended from the heaven and were reborn as Ratnaratha and Citraratha respectively, being the sons of king Priyavrata of Ariṣṭapura and his first queen Padmābhā. The Jyotiskadeva was born of his second queen, Kanakābhā as Anuddhara. Ratnaratha married a princess, Śrīprabha. Disgruntled Anuddhara could not tolerate it. He caused upheaval in the territory of Ratnaratha. Then the latter banished Anuddhara. The latter became a Tāpasa. Ratnaratha and Citraratha renounced the world, attained heaven and were reborn as Deśabhusana and Kulabhuṣaṇa, the sons of king Kṣemankara of Siddharthanagara and queen Vimala. Once, on account of developing love unknowingly for their own sister, they became disgusted with the wordly life and renounced the world. Their father also became a monk and got reborn as Garudadhipati. That Tapasa

Page #202

INTERVENING STORIES
173
(Vasubhūti) proceeding on his tour reached Kaumudīnagari. There he got attracted to the beauty of the princess, therefore, the king of that city punished him. Then that Tāpasa passing through miserable rebirths was reborn as a son in an unfortunate family. His father died at an early age and his mother was abducted by a Mleccha. He again became a Tāpasa and then became a Jyotişkadeva, named Analaprabha. When he heard Kevalin Anantavīrya saying that Deśabh ūşana and Kulabhūşana would attain omniscience, he created calamity to intimidate them.
The PCR (39.81-225) agrees with the PCV. The PCS (33) calls the Senāpati as Bhillarāja. Anuddhara's later births are not mentioned and he is directly said to have been born as Amaraketu (Analaprabha). The TSP (IV. p. 234) and the RPS (p. 1121 ) agree with the PCV.
39. The previous birth of the Mleccha Senāpati or the story of
two Farmer Brothers and a Bird :
Padma (Rāma) having listened to the preceding story requested Deśabhūşaņa to tell him the reason that led to the rescue of the Senā pati by the two monks (Udita and Mudita) from the tortures of the Mleccha. Then the monk narrated the story (39.67-72) elucidating the fruits of saving one's life.
Two farmer brothers once purchased a bird from a fowler and saved its life. She was to be killed by the fowler for his food. That bird was reborn as the chief of the Mlecchas and those two farmers Udita and Mudita.
The PCR (39. 136-143) names the two brothers as Surapa and Karsaka and not as two farmers. The PCS (33.1) follows the PCR. It mentions the Mlecchāddhipati as Bhillarāja. The TSP (IV. p. 334) refers to a deer in place of the bird. The RPS (p. 113) follows the PCR and the TSP both.
40. The previous birth of Jaţāyu or the story of Daņdaka:
In the Dandakāranya when Rāma enquired about the previous birth of the vulture (Jațāyu), Muni Trigupti related the story explaining (41.18-37) the consequences of executing the monks.
1. The PCV. 39.68 reads Jakk hatthananivāsi, sahoyarā karisayā do vi' while
the PCR, 39.137 reads 'surapaḥ karşakaścāstān yakşasthāne sahodarau'. It is a clear evidence of artificial names adopted by Ravişena for 'sa hoyarā karisayā-the farmer brothers of the PCV.

Page #203

174
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMCARIYAN
Dandaka, the king of Karnakundalanagara and husband of Maskari once threw a dead serpent round the neck of a Sramana monk who was lost in meditation. Next day the king got surprised with the fortitude of that monk who had remained all along undisturbed. He worshipped that monk. At this a mendicant (parivrājaka) developed jealousy against the monk. He disguised himself as a śramaņa monk and entered the harem of the king. The king lost his faith in the Śramana monks and eventually got all the śramanas crushed to death. One śramaņa monk who had escaped the execution got angry and destroyed the whole city with the fire of his anger. That place was named as Dandakāranya and the king was reborn as a vulture (Grddha).
The PCR (31.54-97) gives the same account. The PCS (35.4) mentions Dandaka as the king of Dandakapura, originally a votary of Buddhism. His wife is named Durnayasvāmini. She became jealous as her husband accepted the Sramaņa faith. She removed her valuables and threw them into a temple to charge the Sramaņas with theft. But the king did not believe in it. Then she intrigued a false Šramaņa monk to sit beside her. This incident enraged Dandaka and he executed the monks. Dandaka and his queen passed through hellish existences. Further the king wandered through several births and was reborn as the bird. The RPS (p. 115) mentions Karnakundalanagara as Karyakundala. Maskari once charged a monk with infirmity of the flesh when he went to her for alms. Then it follows the PCV. The TSP (IV. p. 237) gives a different story. Kumbhakārakața was the capital of Dandaka. Purandarayaśā, the daughter of king Jitaśatru of Śrávasti and queen Dhāriņi was the wife of Dandaka. Palaka, a messenger of Dandaka started corrupting Jitaśatru because he followed the Arhat-faith (Jainism). Skandaka, the son of Jitaśatru silenced
Palaka in a debate. Skandaka renounced the world and along with · his five hundred pupils went to Kumbhakārakața to enlighten his sister.
Palaka secretly planned a plot against Skandaka. He convinced Dandaka that Muni Skandaka was not a monk but a hypocrite who along with his pupils had come there to kill him and to usurp his kingdom. To that effect he managed to produce some weapons alleged to be discovered from the place where the monks had stayed. Then by the order of Dandaka, Palaka crushed all the pupils of Skandaka. At this horror Skandaka made a 'nidāna' to destroy the family and the kingdom of Dandaka. Skandaka also was crushed to death, He became a Vahnikumāradeva. The broom of Skandaka which was, per chance, picked up by a bird fell in the palace of his sister, She apprehended

Page #204

INTERVENING STORIES
175
the murder of her brother. She reviled Dandaka and became a nun. Skandaka (deva) then burned Daņdaka, Pālaka and the people of that city to ashes. Dandaka was reborn as the bird1.
According to the VR (7. 79-81), Muni Agastya narrated the story of the Dandaka forest to Rama as follows:
Danda, the youngest son of Ikṣvāku was a stupid fellow, hence he was granted the kingdom lying between the Vindhya and the Śevāla mountains. Danda established a capital there. It was named Madhumat. Once Danḍa raped Araja, the daughter of Rși Bhargava. Then Bhargava cursed Dandaka as a result of which Dandaka, his relations and his country were burnt to ashes. After his name that region came to be known as Dandakaranya.
About Jaṭayu, it is said that (VR, 3.14) Kasyapa married six daughters of Prajapati Dakṣa. One of them namely Tamra gave birth to Kroñci, Bhāsī, Śyenī, Dhṛtarăștri and Suki. Suki's daughter, Nată gave birth to Vinată whose sons were Garuda and Aruna. Sampati and Jatayu were the sons of Aruna and Syeni (probably another Syenī) Jatayu is further introduced as friend of Dasaratha.
The Sarabhanga Jataka (V. p. 134) mentions Dandaki as a powerful ruler of the kingdom of Dandaka in the Vindhya region. His capital is said to be Kumbhavati. The kingdom of Dandaki was destroyed by a natural catastrophe.
41. The story of Rucira and Pravara:
Follwing the previous birth story of Jaṭayu or the story of king Dandnka, Muni Sugupti who along with Trigupti was received by Rama in the Daṇḍakāranya, narrated the (cause of their renouncement) story to enlighten the vulture (Jatayu) (41.40-64) by illustrating the futility of the worldly bonds.
Being requested by Śrī, the wife of king Acala of Banaras, a monk named Sugupti prophesied that she would be blessed with two sons. In course of time two sons were born and they were named Trigupti and Sugupti.
Purohita Soma of Gandhāva tinagari had two sons Suketu and Agniketu. Suketu became a Jaina monk under Anantavirya while Agniketu became a Tapasa at Banaras. Suketu on being equipped with the instructions given by his teacher, went to
1. This story of the TSP is found in the Nisitha Curṇī, 16. p. 1113.

Page #205

176
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
enlighten his brother. He asked Angiketu to narrate the future of a certain girl who had arrived on the bank of Jahnavī. Agniketu admitted his ignorance. Then Suketu informed him thus: 'She is Rucirā, the daughter of Pravara, a merchant. She will die after three days and will be reborn as a sheep in the house of Visala of Kuvvaragrāma. The sheep on being killed by Visāla will be reborn as a she-buffalo and then as the daughter of Visāla, the maternal uncle of Pravara”.
Having listened to it, Agniketu got enlightened. In due course Pravara's marriage was settled with the daughter of Visala. At that time Agniketu narrated to the girl her previous birth. She got enlightened and wanted to renounce the world. At this developement Pravara instituted a case against Visāla in the court of Acala at Banaras. Then the reality was made known. The girl renounced the world. The princes, Trigupti and Sugapti also became monks under muni Anantavīrya.
The PCR (41.107-137) mentions Giridevi as the wife of king Acala. Visala is referred to as Vilāsa and Kuvvaragrama as Jakarvaragrama. Vilása is called the maternal uncle of Rucirā and the daughter of Vilasa is named as Vidhurā. One additional birth of Rucirā as a she-goat is mentioned. The RPS (p.117) follows the PCR. The PCS and the TSP do not contain this story.
42. The previous births of Hasta, Prahasta, Nala and Nila or
the story of Indhana and Pallava :
Following the narration of the killing of Hasta and Prahasta by Nala and Nila in the battle, Sreņika enquired of Gautama about the former's previous births. Gautama narrated the story ( 58.1-19 ) illustrating the consequences of following wrong faith and committing murder.
Indhana (Indhaka) and Pallava, two agriculturist brahmin brothers were votaries of the Jaina faith and used to show due respect to the monks. They were killed by other two brothers who were the followers of wrong faith. The dead ones were reborn in Harivarsa and thereafter in the celestial abodes. The culprits after their death passed through various subhuman existences, became Tapasas and then were reborn as Hasta and Prahasta. Those two celestial beings were reborn as laymen, observed the vows and after their death were reborn as Nala and Nila.
The PCR (59.1-34) contains the same story. The RPS (ch. 23) mentions that Indhaka and Pallava were killed by two Bhillas who

Page #206

INTERVENING STORIES
177
after being reborn as Tāpasas passed through the life of Jyotiska devas and then were reborn as Hasta and Prahasta.
43. The previous births of Višalya and Laksmana or the
story of Anangasarā and Punarvasu: When Lakşmaņa received injuries on being hurt by the "Sakti: hurled by Rāvana there happened to arrive Khecara Candramandala who suggested Rāma to procure the bath-water of Višalyā, with which Lakşmaņa could be cured because he himself had been cured with it. At this news Rāma enquired about the source of the sacred bath-water. Candramandala replied that he himself had been told of it by Bharata. Bharata had come to know of it from his maternal uncle Dronamegha when the latter's family had totally escaped while the whole country was u nder the peril of epidemic. Their escape was due to the efficacy of the bath-water of Višalyā, the daughter of Dronamegha. Bharata enquired of Muni Sarvahita the cause of the curative power of that bathwater. The Muni narrated the story to the former (63.24-70) elucidating the fruits of penances. The story runs as follows in two parts :
(A) Anangasarā, the daughter of Cakravartin Tribhuvanānanda of Pundarikavijaya was abducted by king Punarvasu of Pratişthāpura. The abductor was chased and his chariot was broken down. Anangasarā fell down in a forest, She performed penances for several years, Khecara Labdhisāra tried to take her to her parents, but she did not consent to his proposal because of the fear of her vows getting broken. The matter was reported to her father who duly arrived there but found that his daughter who was performing 'sallekhana' was swallowed by a huge serpent. At this the king renounced the world, Anangasarā was reborn in a celestial abode. Punarvasu died with a resolve (nidāna) to get her again, hence he after passing through the life of a celestial being was reborn as Laksmana and Anangasarā as Višalyā. It was on account of the result of her previous penances that her bath-water proved to be a panacea for various diseases.
(B) A Merchant and a Buffalo :-On further enquiry the monk narrated the cause of the spreading of the epidemic in the whole country.
Vindhya, a merchant of Gajapura, went to Sāketapurī loading heavily one of his he-buffaloes. That buffalo fell sick, died, and was reborn as Pavanāsuradeva. Remembering the previous tortures inflicted on him by the people, that Deva had polluted the air with infectious germs.
12

Page #207

178
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN The PCR (64.49-112) narrates the same stories. In the PCS (68. 12-13) Saudāsa is mentioned in place of Labdhisāra. He wanted to kill the python who was devouring Anargasarā, but she stopped him from committing 'hiṁsā'. Then he reported the matter to her father. The second story is dropped from the PCS. The RPS (ch. 24) adds that it was the foster mother of Višalyā who first came to know of the effect of the bath-water of Višalyā, on seeing that a diseased dog got cured with that water. Here Bharata and Dronamegha both enquired from muni Sarvahita and in the second story the Pavanāsura is mentioned as Mahişăsura. The TSP does not give a separate story. It takes up it with the previous birth-story of Rāma.
44. The story of Arida mana Bhamandala related this story to Vibhīşaņa to assuage the latter's sorrow on the death of Rāvana in the battle field (74. 31-40). It illustrates how the living beings on account of delusion get too much attached to the environment they live in, however nasty it may be.
When king Aridamana, the son of Lakşamidhara of Aksapura after vanquishing his foes returned home, he found that his wife was jubilant in advance and the city was gay with decorations. On enquiry he learned that a monk had told her of his victory in advance. Aridamana verified it from the monk who had perceived it by the power of his clairvoyance. On further enquiry the monk prophesied that he (Aridamana) would die after seven days and would be reborn as a worm in his own lavatory. Aridamana went home and asked his son Pritinkara to destroy the worm when it was seen there. The king died and was reborn as a worm. When Prītinkara tried to destroy it, he found that it was running to the interior of the lavatory. On further enquiry the same monk told Pritinkara that one develops great attachment to the environment or the place where one is born.
The PCR (77.57-70) adds that Prītinkara thereafter became a monk. The RPS (p. 160) mentions that Aridambha (Aridamana) was reborn as a boar and it fled away on seeing Prūtinkara.
45. The previous births of Indrajit and Ghanavāhapa
or the story of Prathama and Paścima :
After the death of Rāvana, Muni Aprameyabala arrived in Laika. Indrajit and Ghanavāhana enquired about their own previous births from him. Then the Muni narrated the story (75. 60-75) to illustrate the results of penances.

Page #208

INTERVENING STORIES
179
Two brothers Prathama and Paścima, inhabitants of Kośāmbi bacame monks after listening to a religious discourse from Muni Bhavadatta. Once Paścima, on seeing the splendour of king Nandi, resolved to become his son in the next life. Accordingly he was reborn as Rativardhana, the son of that king and his queen Induvadanā, Prathama who had become a celestial being once narrated to Rativardhana, the latter's previous birth. On being enlightened Rativardhana became a monk and after his death he was reborn as a Vaimānikadeva. Then both the brothers were reborn as brother kings in Vibuddhanagara in the Vijayadeśa. After observing penances, they passing through the life of celestial beings, were reborn as Indrajit and Ghanavāhana respectively who were possessed of supernatural powers, strength and handsomeness. Induvadană was reborn as Mandodarī.
The PCR (78.63-80) mentions Nandi as a śreșthin. The RPS (p. 161) calls Prathama as Pūrva and Bhavadatta as Sridhara. It was Purva who resolved. Nandi is mentioned as Sukradyuti, Induvadanā as Nandădevi and Vibuddhanagara as Vijayapura. The TSP (IV. p. 298) follows the PCV.
Mayopakhyana 46-50. Following the re-union of Rāma with Sitā at Lanka, Gautama refers to the ascetic career of Maya. At that time on some enquiries from Sreņika, Gautama narrates the story of Maya. This story is a mess of corelated five stories. The first story of Agnila and Kararuha illustrates the consequences of unfaithfulness of a woman. The second story of Mitrayaśā and Srivardhita explains the good results of a woman having virtue. It is in this story that Maya appears. The third, the fourth and the fifth story which are the previous birth stories of the characters of the second story are narrated by Muni Maya. They illustrate the fruits of observing, vows, the consequences of uttering abusive words and the result of behaving cruelly with the animals respectively (77.67-117).
46. Agnila and Kararuha;
A certain brahmin fled away along with his wife, Agnila from his village Dhānyagrāma when an epidemic broke out in the
1. These stories hang loosely without properly explaining the points raised
by Srenika.

Page #209

180
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN village. Agnila was stubborn and haughty, hence she was abandoned in a jungle by that brahmin. Per chance Kararuha, the king of Puşpāvatīrṇanagara courted her and made her his queen. Proud of the king's favour for her, she once kicked the head of the king. The latter enquired of his counsellors as to what punishment should be given to a person who hurls his leg at the head of a king. All were of the opinion that the person should be made bereft of his leg or sent to gallows. But Hemanka who apprehended the incident told that the leg of that person should be worshipped. He further requested the king to excuse his wife. By this answer the king got pleased and he favoured Hemanka with valuable presents (77.73-80).
The PCR (80.159-167) mentions Nodana as the name of the husband of Agni (Agnila). The RPS (p. 161) which narrates the story at randam without connecting it with the preceding narrative mentions that Nodana died in the jungle leaving behind his wife and daughter, named Vahni. In due course Vahni was married to Puşpa, the king of Pataliputra.
47. Mitrayaśā and Srivardhita :
Mitrayaśā, a widowed wife of Bhargava told of Hemanka's uprise to his son, Śrīvardhita. She further praised her deceased husband's prosperity and learning before him. Being inspired by his mother Śrīvardhita went to Vyāghrapura and learned there various arts and sciences under a teacher. In due course of time Śrīvardhita absconded with Sundarā, the princess of that town. He was chased by Simhendu, the son of king Sukānta but the latter was subdued by the former. Śrīvardhita duly returned to his own town and exhibited his achievements in the presence of king Kararuha. The king got pleased with Śrīvardhita and made him the king of Podananagara. It so happened that after the death of Sukānta, some enemies troubled Simhendu hence he absconded along with his wife to take refuge under his sister, Sundarā. On the way he accompanied the betel-leaf-merchants. Suddenly being frightened by the thieves he fled away and unfortunately he was bitten by a snake. Then his wife carried him to Muni Maya who was sojourning outside Podanapura. She first touched the feet of the monk and then rubbed with her hands the body of her husband. By this process her husband got cured. Next morning Vinayadatta, a lay-votary informed Srīvardhita of the arrival of Simhendu and his wife. Śrīvardhita then prepared himself for a fight but on being pacified by his wife, he went to pay homage to the monk and received his brother-in-law with pleasure (77. 81-98).

Page #210

INTERVENING STORIES
181
The PCR (80. 168-186) mentions Sundara as Sīlā. It is said that Simhendu and his wife while fleeing away from their town had to carry the load of the betel-leaf-merchants. Thereafter when he was left alone during the night, he took shelter in some thickets and there he was bitten by a snake. The RPS (p. 162) mentions Amogha instead of Bhargava and follows the PCR.
48. The previous birth of Srivardhita or the story of king
Sumāla:
Śrīvardhita thereafter enquired of the monk about his own and his relatives' previous births. Then the monk narrated the stories as follows:
King Sumala of Sobhapura once went to pay homage to Muni Bhadracārya. There he saw a woman suffering from leprosy and her body emitting very fitihy smell. The king suddenly retraced to his home while that woman accepted vows under that monk. After her death she became a celestial being and then was reborn as Sundară, the wife of Śrīvardhita. King Sumala annointed his son and kept a few villages for himself. He followed "Śravakadharma'. Therefore, he was reborn as a celestial being and then as Śrīvardhita (77.99-105).
In the PCR (80. 189-195) Sumala is named as Amala. He is said to have returned to his house because he could not bear the bad smell coming out from the body of that woman suffering from leprosy. The RPS (p. 162) mentions that the woman suffering from leprosy was the wife of king Amala. She was exiled by the king.
49. The previous birth of Mitrayaśā or The story of a hungry
traveller:
certain village,
burnt to ashes. All the village
A certain traveller, on not obtaining food in a expressed in anger that the whole village should get By chance the village caught fire and got destroyed. people threw away that man into the burning flames of the fire. After his death, he was reborn as a cook of a king, thereafter as a hellish being and again as Mitrayasa, the mother of Śrīvardhita (77.106-110).
The PCR (80.196-199) and the RPS (p. 162) contain the same
account.

Page #211

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
50. The previous births of Simhendu and Rativardhanā or The story of Gohānika and Bhujapatrā:
182
Govanih (Gohanio) and his wife Bhujapatra of Padmanagara after their death were reborn as Simhendu and Rativardhanā respectively, i. e. Śrīvardhita's brother-in-law and the latter's wife1 (77.111-112) respectively.
The PCR (80.200-201) mentions that on account of previously torturing the donkeys etc. by heavily loading them, both were forced to bear the same drudgery of carrying the load at the time of fleeing away from Vyaghrapura. The RPS (p. 262) follows the PCR.
51. The previous births of Bharata and Tribhuvanālaṁkāra Elephant or The story of Suryodaya (Ramana) and Candrodaya (Vinoda):
Following the agitation and thereafter the automatic pacification of Tribhuvanalankara elephant, Lakṣmaṇa enquired of Muni Deśabhüşana about the cause of the disturbance of the elephant. Then the muni told that the elephant got pacified on remembering his previous life at the sight of Bharata who was associated with the elephant in his previous birth (82.17-121). The story is narrated elucidating the cousequences of leading a wicked and deceitful life,
Candrodaya and Suryodaya, the sons of Prahladana by Suprabha gave up the discipleship of Lord Rṣabha, and became the disciples of mendicant Marīci who himself was formely a disciple of Rṣabha. Candrodaya, after his death became king Kulankara of Nagapura in the family of Harimati and Prahladana while Suryodaya was reborn as Kulankara's Purohita, named Śrutirata in the family of Viśvabhuti and Agnikunda. Kulaňkara once on his way to pay homage to a Tāpasa came to see that a snake which was his own grandfather in some previous birth as forecasted by Muni Abhinandana, was hiding inside a hollow log of wood which was being burnt by that Tapasa. At this sight Kulankara wanted to become a monk but Śrutirata prevented him from giving up his hereditary Vedic faith. Śrīdāmā, the wife of Kulankara who was illicitly attached to that Purohita finding her husband not renouncing the world, poisoned Kulankara to death with the help of the Purohita. Kulaňkara's soul transmigrating through the lives of a rabbit, a peacock, a snake, and an osprey was reborn as a frog.
1. The PCV is not clear. See the PCR.

Page #212

INTERVENING STORIES
183
Śrutirata having been reborn as an elephant trampled down the frog to death. The frog was reborn as a fish and then was reborn as a cock for three successive times. The cock was, all the three times, killed by a cat. The cat was nobody else but the elephant who got reborn as a cat for the same number of times. Then the cat and the cock were reborn as a fish and a crocodile respectively. Both of them were slaughtered by a fisherman and were reborn as two brothers Ramana and Vinoda, in the farnily of a Brahmin at Rājagļha Ramana once while returning home from his Vedic teacher stayed in a Yakşagsha. Sākhā, the wife of Vinoda entered that house to meet her paramour, Asokadatta, there as decided before. Unfortunately Ramana was caught with the suspicion of having illicit connection with her. He was seized by the policemen. Vinoda killed Ramana in a hurry without knowing the truth because it all happened in the pitch-dark night. Both the brothers then passing through the lives of he-buffaloes, bears, hunters and antelopes successively werereborn as two stags. King Svayambhū took them to his house. There they felt delighted on seeing a monk who was being offered alms by the king. After their death they became celestial beings and then passing through various subhuman existences, Vinoda becarne a very rich merchant namely, Dhanada in Kampilyapura and Ramaņa became his son, namely, Bhūşana. Bhūṣaṇa once proceeding to pay homage to the Jinas was bitten by a snake and was reborn first in the Mahendravimana and thereafter as Jagadyuti, the son of Madhavi and Prakāśayaśas of Candrādityapura in the Puşkaradvīpa. From there he was reborn In Devakuru and then in the iśāna Kalpa. Descending from there he was born as Vibhu of Dhārini and Cakravartin Acala of Ratnapura in the Aparavideha. Knowing his inclination towords asceticism his father forcibly wedded him to many beautiful girls, but he kept himself engaged in observing penances and after his death he was reborn in the Bramhottara Kalpa. Dhanada on the other hand after transmigrating through various births became Brahmin Mşdumati, the son of Sakunāgnimukha and Savitrī at Podanapura. On account of his vagabond nature he was expelled from the house. In due course he became a famous dice-player and master of various arts. He kept two courtezans, became very rich and ameliorated the miserable conditions of his parents. Once while attempting to commit burglary in the palace, he overheard king Nandivardhana (Srivardhana) of Sasankanagara praising before his queen the Jina-religion and he desired to become a monk. Being thus enlightened Mşdumati renounced the world and wandering from place to place, he reached a hill where lived a very famous monk namely Gunanidhi who was greatly revered

Page #213

184
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
by the local people. Gunanidhi left that place. The people then took Mşdumati as Gunanidhi and praised him exceedingly. But Mşdumati did never try to unfold the truth and stayed there practising deceit. After his death he also ascended to the Brahmottara Kalpa. From there Mşdumati was reborn as an elephant on account of his ‘māyā' while the other celestial being was reborn as Bharata, i. e. Candrodaya or Vinoda became elephant while Sūrodaya or Ramaņa was reborn as Bharata,
The PCR (85.28-173) names Harimati as Haripati and his wife Prahladanā as Manolutā. Here Kulaikara and Srutirata both are killed by Śrīdāmā and both are mentioned to have trasmigrated together through the lives of rabbits, frogs, rats, (the latter two births being additions to those of the PCV) peacocks, snakes and stags (instead of the osprey of the PCV) and thereafter they were reborn as a frog and an elephant respectively. Here the frog regained life after the rainy season and then was reborn as a cock. The cock is reborn as a fish and the cat as a crocodile. It mentions the names of the parents of Vinoda and Ramana. Sakha is here named as Samidhā. Vinoda is reborn as a he-buffalo while Ramana as a bear (and not both as buffaloes) and thereafter as bears. After being born as hunters they are reborn as stags for one time only. Vibhu of the PCV is named as Abhirāma. Thereafter the story is identical with that of the PCV. In the PCR Candrodaya is reborn first as Ramana and thereafter as Bharata while Sūryodaya as Vinoda and then as elephant,
The PCS (79.13.9) merely says that the previous births of Bharata and the elephants were narrated to Rāma, but no details are given.
The TSP (IV. p. 304) does not refer to the account of Marici. It mentions Candrodaya and Sūryodaya as the sons of two different kings, Prahlādana and Suprabha. It gives the name of the mother of Kulankara as Candralekhā. The grandfather of Kulankara is named Kşemalikara. The intervening rebirths of Kulankara and Srutirati up to their being reborn as Ramana and Vinoda are dropped. (Here it follows the PCR). It mentions that Sakhā had addressed Ramaņa considering him to be
1. The PCR has corrected the mistake of the PCV because Suryodaya should
remain, throughout his various rebirths, wicked and deceitful to acquire the Karma of getting reborn as an animal. This point is missed in the PCV at the time of describing the rebirths of a cock and a cat.

Page #214

INTERVENING STORIES
185 (Asoka) Datta. Vinoda who was following Śakhā observed the incident and killed Vinoda. Here Vinoda is also killed by Śākhā. Thereafter their rebirths are not mentioned up to the stage they become Dhana and Bhūşaņa. It mentions Mrdumati as a son of Agnimukha and Śakunā. It refers to only one courtezan of MỊdumati. It has taken the theme both from the PCV and the PCR.
The RPS (p. 1678 ) does not refer to Marici's account. It mentions Suprabha as Supraja, and Surya and Candra as his sons. Harimati is mentioned as Simbapati and his wife as Manolutā ( PCR). Then it follows the PCR. But it shows acquaintance with the PCV when it mentions that Kulaikara was reborn as a crocodile and then as Vinoda. It mentions that Vinoda and Ramaņa were reborn as two Bhillas before their being born as stags. It does not mention their rebirth as hunters, but mentions that the stags were frightened by some hunters and therefore, they were seperated from the rest of the flock. It mentions only one courtezan of Mşdumati just like the TSP. At one place (p.168) it mentions that Purohita śrutarati, Brāhmaṇa Vino da, and merchant Dhanada were the different lives of the same person (soul of elephant). It goes against the story itself narrated in it, which mentions that Kulaikara was reborn as Vinoda.
52. The previous births of Satrughna and Kștāntavadana or
The story of Acala and Arka : On being requested by Śreņika, following the narration of the calamitous epidemic in Mathurā, Gautama narrated this story to explain the cause of Satrughna's persistent demand from Rāma for the kingdom of Mathură (88.1-43). It illustrates the results of too much attachment to a particular thing.
Cruel Yamunādeva of Mathurā transmigrating through the lives of a boar, a crow, a he-buffalo, a worm (jalavāha), a wild-buffalo (gavalo) and then six times a buffalo became a poor brahmin named Kuliśadhara. He was devoted to the service of the monks and was handsome to look at. When Asaiikita, the king of Mathurā was away from the city, his wife Lalitā being enamoured of Kuliśadhara called him inside the harem to dally with him and made him sit very close to her. Incidentally the king returned and saw him there. The queen in an effort to escape the accusation betrayed that brahmin. The king then ordered his servants to mutilate his limbs. By chance a monk saved his life by initiating him into the ascetic order. Passing through the life of a celestial being after his death, he was reborn as Acala of Kanakäbhā, the second wife of king Candrabhadra

Page #215

186
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
of Mathura. On being oppressed by his three stepbrothers born of Vara, the first wife of Candrabhadra, Acala fled away. While traversing the Tilaka forest a thorn pierced into his foot. Anka who was living there on the profession of gathering wood helped Acala by extracting the thorn from his foot. Then Acala requested Anka to go and meet a person named Acala if he ever heard of a person bearing that name. Acala then proceeded to Kośambi. There he pleased king Indradatta and Viśikhācārya with performing some feats in archery. The king married his daughter, Mitradatta to him and favoured him with the offers of a territory. He came to be known as a famous teacher of archery. After conquering Anga etc. he attacked Mathura. Candrabhadra then received him with honour and made him the king of Mathura. Once Anka was noticed there by Acala. The former was immediately called for by the latter and was made the king of his own birth place, Kośambi. In due course both of them became monks and after passing through the celestial abodes, they were reborn as Śatrughna and Kṛtāntavadana.
The PCR (ch. 91) mentions one more rebirth of Yamunadeva as a goat and Kuliśadhara is called Kulandhara. Candraprabha's first wife is named as Dhara who is said to have eight sons. It was Apa, the son of Kampa and Angika, who helped Acala in the forest. Apa was on account of his immodesty, expelled from his house by his father. The TSP (IV. p. 309f) commences the story from Brāhmaṇa Kulandhara who is called Śrīdhara. It mentions eight stepbrothers of Acala. Acala demonstrated his skill in archery at Kosambi before king Indradatta and his teacher Simha. Acala imprisoned his stepbrothers when he attacked Mathura. The RPS (p. 171) mentions that an infant elephant transmigrating through the life of a man of lower and poor family was reborn as Kulandhara. King Asankita is named as Candramukha. Then it follows the PCR. Further it mentions that Acala had helped king Indradatta in making him immune from the effect of poison. Mitradatta is called Indradattă.
53- The story of Muni Sakalabhūṣaṇa and Kiraṇamaṇḍalā:
Following the preparation of a fire-pit for the ordeal of Sita, it is narrated that Muni Sakalabhuṣaṇa who was sojourning in one of the gardens of Ayodhya, was disturbed by Rākṣasi Vidyutvadanā to obstruct him from attaining Kevala. The following story explains the cause of that disturbance explaining the consequences of harbouring enmity. (101.54-69).

Page #216

INTERVENING STORIES
187
King Sakalabhūsana, the son of Sri and Vidyadhara-king Simhavikrama of Guñjavidhānanagara, had Kiranamandalā as his chief queen among his eight hundred wives. She had illicit relations with Hemasiṁ ha. First of all she was warned but next time she was expelled from the territory by the king. Thereafter the king (Sakalabhūşana) became a monk. That queen after her death became Vidyunmukhí, a Rākşasi, She assuming various forms such as those of an elephant, the fire and the thorny-path, tried to trouble the muni but in vain. By her mainpulations she charged him with theft, dacoity etc. She further created many hobgoblins, and then beautiful women to distract the muni but he did not swerve at all and in due course he attained Kevala.
The PCR (104.102-129) and the RPS (p. 184) contain the same story while the TSP (IV. p. 332) mentions Jayabhūşana in place of Sakalabhūsana as the son of Harivikrama.
54. The previous births of Rāma, Sitā, Lakşmapa, Rāvana,
Sugriva etc. or The story of Dhanadatta, Gunamati Vasudatta, Śrikānta, Vrșa dhadhvja etc :
Following the fire ordeal of Sītā, her intiation and the delivering of a religious discourse by Kevalin Sakalabhūşaņa to Rāma, Vibhisana enquired as to why Rāma attained such a 'Māhātmya' great prowess, why Sītā was kidnapped by Rāvana, why Rāma was deluded, why Rāvana was attracted to Sītā and why Rāvana was killed by Lakşmana? The Kevalin narrated the following story (103.1-123) (136-152) elucidating the results of forming 'nidāna' and observing penances and to show the consequences of committing murder, harbouring enmity, censuring monks and to exemplify the fruits of affection, love and confession
Vanik Sagaradatta of Ksemapura had begot on his wife Ratnaprabha a son, Gunadhara and a daughter, Gunamati. He betrothed Guņamatí to Dhanadatta who was the son of Nayadatta and Sunandā. But Ratnaprabhā being allured by the offer of some wealth betrothed Guņamati secretly to a śreşthin Śrīkānta. Brahmin (Jannavakka) Yājñavalkya broke this news to his friend Vasudatta, the younger brother of Dhanadatta. Vasudatta at once went out to kill Srikānta and in the following encounter both of them were killed by each other. They were reborn as antelopes in the Vindhya hills and Gunamati was also reborn as a doe at the same place. Both the antelopes killed each other for that doe and then wandered through the existences of boars, elephants, he-buffaloes, oxen, monkeys, stags,

Page #217

188
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Rurus (a species of deer) and many other existences of earth and water beings. Dhanadatta who had left his country on being afflicted with the sorrow of the death of his brother Vasudatta, met a monk and became a lay-devotee. After his death he became a celestial being and from there he descended as Padmaruci being the son of Śreshin Meru and Dhāriņi of Mahāpura. Once an old and deseased bull got englightened on hearing the Namaskāra formula from Padmaruci. The bull then was reborn as Vrsabhadhvaja, being the son of Śrīkāntā and king Chatrachāyā of Mahāpura. He once remembering his previous birth got constructed a Jina-temple on the spot where he had died as a bull and decorated it with a painting depicting the incident of his enlightenment. Padmaruci on observing it began to pause over it. He was reported to Vịşabhadhvaja. Then the latter bestowed the former with prowess and prosperity. Both of them became lay-devotees and were reborn as celestial beings in Išāna Kalpa. From there Padmaruci became Nayanānanda. After renouncing the world he became a celestial being in the Mahendra Kalpa. From there he was reborn as Śrīcanda. After having renounced the world he performed austerities. He was reborn as the Indra of Brahmaloka. Sreşthin Srikānta was reborn as Svayambhú (Sambhū), being the son of Vajrakañcu and Hemavati of Mrņālakunda (nagara). Vasudatta was reborn as Srībhūti being the Purohita of Svayambhū. Gunamatī after transmigrating through various births was reborn as she-elephant and then as Vegavatī, being the daughter of the Purohita. Once she laughed at a monk and being reproached by her father she became a lay-devotee. On account of her beauty she was demanded by Svayambhū and various other kings in marriage. But Sribhūti rejected their demands, because he did not like to marry his daughter to a person who was wrong faithed. Then Svayambhū reverted to the use of force. He killed her father and raped her. Vegavati cursed Svayambhū to the effect that she would be the cause of his death in future. Thereafter she became nun and after performing severe penances she ascended to heaven. Svayambhū transmigrating through hell and other subhuman existences was reborn as Vipra Prabhāsakunda. He became a monk, observed austerities and resolved on seeing the prosperity of a Vidyadhara king Kanakaprabha, to become a Khecara lord. He ascended to Sanatkumāra heaven and from there he was reborn as Rāvaņa. Dhanadatta (Indra), Vasudatta (Purohita Śrībhūti), Gunadhara (the brother of Gunamatī), Yajñavalkya and Vrşabhadhvaja were reborn as Rāma, Lakşmaņa, Bhāmandala. Vibhīşaņa and Sugrīva respectively. Vegavati was coveted by Svayambhū hence she as Sītā was kidnapped by the latter

Page #218

INTERVENING STORIES
189
as Rāvana. Śrībhūti (Purohita) who was killed by Svayambhū was reborn as a celestial being and from there as Khecara Punarvasu? who died with a resolve to get a certain girl.2 Svayambhū was the enemy of Śrībhūti, hence the latter as Lakşmaņa killed Rāvana. Vegavati had once falsely blamed Muni Sudarśana of keeping company with a woman, but ultimately she had to admit her fault to free the monk from the false charges. Therefore, she as Sítā was first censured and then she was proved to be pure and faultless on account of her confession.
The PCR (106. 10-184, 207-231) mentions Ksemapura as Kșetranagara, Yajñavalkya as Yajňavali. While describing the rebirths of Vasudatta and Śrīkänta it refers to their two more rebirths viz., as leopards and wolves in place of deer. Gunamati is mentioned as Gunavati, Vajrakañcu, Svayambhū and Vegavati are called Vajrakambu, Sambhū and Vedavati respectively. It mentions that the woman about whom Vedavatī spread false news was really the sister of Muni Sudarśana. She was being instructed in the religion by the muni and Vedavati took her to have been illicitly associated with the monk. The PCS (84. 2-22) agrees with the PCR, but cuts short the story by dropping some rebirths viz. Padmaruci as Nayanānanda and a god, Sricandra as Indra and Śrībhūti as Prabhāsakunda. It does not refer to some animal-births of the characters.
The RPS (ch. 31) follows the PCR it mentions the name of the mother of Vrsabhad hvaja as Sridattā. Here Vedavati resolved to be reborn as Sambhu's daughter to take revenge upon him. It calls Sudarśana of the PCR as a nun. The TSP (IV p. 336) mentions Gunamati as Gunavati. It does not mention various animal-rebirths of Vasudatta and Śrīkānta. It gives here the story of Anarigasundari (Višalya) and Punarvasu (Śrībhūti Laksmana).3 Gunavati's brother, Guņadhara is said to have been reborn as Kundalamandita4 and thereafter as Bhãmandala.
The Uttarapuräņa and the Mahapurāņa relate different stories about the previous births of Rāma, Lakşmaņa, Sítā and Rāvana as follows :
Rāma and Lakşmaņa :-Prajapati, the king of Ratnapura had begot on his wife Guņakāntă a son, Candracūla. He and his friend Vijaya, the son of a minister were notorious. Once when
1. See Višalya's rebirth-story. 2. Ibid, Anangasarā. 3. See the story of the previous birth of Visalyā. 4. See the story of the previous births of Kundalamandita.

Page #219

190
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Kuberadattā, the daughter of merchant, Kubera was being betrothed to Sridatta, the son of Vaisravana and Goutamā, Candracula along with Vijaya made an attempt to kidnap her. The king, on being reported by Kubera, ordered his guards to punish both of the culprits to death. The chief minister in tervened and took them to the Vanagiri. There he met Muni Mahābala who predicted that the culprits would be reborn as Balabhadra and Nārāyana. The minister then saved their lives by initiating them into the ascetic order. Once Muni Candracūla on seeing the prowess of Narayana Puruşottama resolved to have the same prowess. After their death Vijaya and Candracula were reborn as Suvarnacula and Manicula in the Sanatkumāra heaven. From there they descended and were reborn as Rāma and Lakşmaņa respectively (UP, 67.89.147). The MP (69.4-12) mentions that Srīdatta was the son of Gautama and Vaiśravaņā. Kuberadattā is said to have been kidnapped by Candracūla.
Sita's previous birth :-The story of Sita's previous birth is narrated separately. Princess Manimati, the daughter of king Amitavega of Alakāpuri was performing penanceson the Vijayārdha mountain. Rāvana reached there and tried to seize her Vidyas (supernatural powers). She resolved to be reborn as the daughter of Rāvana and to become the cause of his death in future (UP, 68.13-17). Therefore she was reborn as the daughter of Mandodari, The MP (70.6) agrees with it.
Rāvana's previous birth :-King Naradeva of Nāgapura once met Ganadhara Ananta and got initiated under him. On seeing the prowess of Capalavega, a Vidyādhara king, he resolved to enjoy the same prowess. After his death he was reborn in heaven and from there he descended as Daśānana being the son of Pulastya and Meghaśrī of Lanka (UP, 68.1-12). The MP (70.2) agrees with it.
The previous birth of Sita in the VR:-The Valmiki Ramāyana (7.17) states that Vedavati was the daughter of Brahmarşi Kusadhvaja, the son of Bphaspati. She was demanded in marriage by the Devas, Gandharvas, Yakşas, Rākşasas and the Pannagas, but her father refused their proposal because he wanted to marry her to Vişnu. Sambha, the lord of the Daityas got enraged by this refusal and he killed her father. Her mother also died along with her father. Then Vedavati commenced to observe

Page #220

INTERVENING STORIES
191
penances for accomplishing the desire of her father, Once Rāvana came there and wanted marry her. Vedavati narrated her story and expressed her unwillingness. Rāvana could not control his carnal desire, hence he forcibly seized her braid. She at once cut off her braid and entered the fire cursing him that she would be reborn as ‘ayonija’, particularly to bring about his end.
The TR (Bala, 122-139) contains stoires to explain the cause of incarnation of Rāma and Rāvana. They are based on the Brahmanical Purānas.
(i) It mentions that Vişņu was born as a human being on account of the curse of Jalandhara's wife whom he had deviated from the path of virtue. Jalandhara was reborn as Rāvaņa.
(ii) Nárada had cursed Hari and the Gaņas of Siva on the occasion of the 'svayamvara' of Viśvamohini, hence Hari became a human being and the Gaņas as Raksasa Rāvana and Kumbhakarna.
(iii) It also narrates the story of Pratāpabhānu who had fed the brahmins upon animal-flesh. He was cursed by them, so he was reborn as Rāvana, his brother as Kumbhakarņa and his minister as Vibhīşana (1.153-176).
55. The previous birth of Vali or The story of Maghadatta :
Following the account of the previous births of Rāma etc. Muni Sakalabhūşana narrated this story on enquiry from Vibhīşana (103. 129-131) to illustrate the fruits of penances.
After having transmigrated through various existences a certain living being was reborn as a deer in the Dandakāraṇya. On hearing the religious words from a monk, it was reborn in the Eravatadeśa as Maghadatta, a rich son of Vihita and Śrīmati. On account of his devotion to the Jinas and observing vows, he became a celestial beir g and then was reborn as Suprabha, the son of queen Ratnāvali and king Kantasoka of Mattakokilarava situated near Vijayāvats in the Purvavideha. He renounced the world, performod penances and after his death became a celestial being and then was reborn as Vali, the son of Adityaraja.
The PCR (106.185-197) mentions Vịndāraṇyasthala in place of Dandakāranya, sivamati for Śrīmati, Meghadatta for Maghadatta and Ratnakini for Ratnavati. The PCS (84.22-23) and the RPS (p. 190) follow the PCR.

Page #221

192
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
56. The previous births of Layana, Ankusa and Siddhārtha or
The story of Priyankara, Hitankara and Sudarśană :
Following the account of the previous births of Rāma, Sītā and Vali, Muni Sakalabhūşaņa narrated this story in reply of the further inquiry made by Vibhişaņa (104.1-34) to illustrate the fruits of having affection for others and the results of offering gifts to the monks.
Two brahmin Vasunanda and Sunanda, the sons of Vamadeva of Syāmalinagara on account of offering gifts to a certain monk were reborn in the Uttarakuru then as celestial beings in the Ibana Kalpa and then as Priyalikara and Hita ikara, being the sons of Rativardhana and queen Sudarśanā at Kākandipura. Rativardhana was approached by Vijayāvali, the wife of his minister Sarvagupta to enjoy with her, but the king refused to transgress the laws of moral condnct. Sarvagupta suspecting her wife's infidelity set fire to the palace of Rativardhana, but the latter along with his wife and sons escaped the consequences by stealthily disappearing from the palace. He went to Banaras where Kaśyapa reigned. Sarvagupta occupied the whole territory of Rativardhana and attacked Kaśyapa. He wanted to bring the latter under his suzerainty. Rativardhana and Käspaya having allied together subdued Sarvagupta and made him flee away into a forest. Rativardhana occupied his ancestral territory and in due course he became a monk. Vijayāvali who had been already divorced by Sarvagupta became a Raksasī and disturbed Muni Rativardhana, but the monk remained calm and absorbed in meditation and he attained Kevala. Priyankara and Hitankara after having renounced the world were reborn in the Graiveyaka Vimāna and descending from there they were reborn as Lavana and Ankusa. Sudarśanā, the wife of Rativardhana after passing through various existences was reborn as Siddhārtha, the teacher of Lavana and Arkusa. Siddhārtha then made them proficient in various arts on account of his previous affection for them.
The PCR (108. 1-52) mentions Vamadeva as Dāmadeva. The PCS (85. 1-2) drops the story of Vijayāvali and Sarvagupta and does not narrate the rebirth of Sudarśanā. It mentions Sudeva for Sunanda, Kākandipura for Syāmalīnagara and names the wife of Vāmadeva as Syāmali. In other details it agrees with the PCV. The RPS (p. 191) mentions Vāmadeva. The TSP (IV. 340) follows the PCV, but does not give the episodes of Sarvagupta and Rativardhana and the obstruction caused by the Rākşasī (Vijayāvali) to muni Rativardhana.

Page #222

INTERVENING STORIES
193
57. The previous births of Madhu and Kaitabha or the story of
Sikhibhuti and Väyubhati:
Having completed the preceding story, Gautama refers to Sīta's rebirth as Prati-Indra in the Acyuta Vimāna. Then Śreņika enquired if any one else had enjoyed that high position. Gautama narrates the story of Madhu and Kaitabha who had attained the same position and were reborn as Samba and Pradyumna, the sons of Kșşpa (105.17-114). The story illustrates the fruits of observing severe penances.
Two brothers Sikhibhūti and Vāyubuti who were the sons of brahmin Somadeva and Agnilā of Saligrāma in the Magadha country, professed Vedic religion and boasted of their learning. They approached Muni Nandivardhana and challenged him to a debate. The monk asked them if they knew anything about their own past births. At this they were taken aback. Then the monk told them that they were jackals in their previous births and used to take flesh. He narrated their previous birth story as follows :
Once (pāmaraka) a farmer of Vanasthaligrāma left his implements behind in the farm. Two jackals devoured them and died there. They were reborn as the sons of Somadeva i.e. Śikhibhūti and Vayubhūti The farmer was reborn as the son of his own daughter-in-law. On account of perceiving his previous birth, the boy was observing silence because of his embarrassment in calling his son as his father. That boy was called for on the spot and the two Brahmins got convinced of the truth. Thereafter the people started ridiculing and denouncing the Brahmin-brothers and extolled the Sramana monk. At this humiliation they planned a plot and proceeded to the cemetery ground to kill the monk. But some Yakşa caught hold of them. At the request of Somadeva they were released. Then they gave up the Vedic faith and accepted the Jain a layman's vows and after their death they were reborn as celestial beings. Thereafter they were born as Nandana and Natānanda, being the sons of Dhāriņi and merchant, Samudradatta at Saketa and then on account of following the 'sāgāradharma' they became celestial beings and from there they were reborn as Madhu and Kai tabha, being the sons of Hemanabha and Amaravati of Vinītāpurī. In due course they succeeded the throne. Vírasena of Vadanagara requisitioned the help of Madhu to ward off the atrocities of a hilly chief, Bhima. When Madhu went there to subdue Bhima, he was enamoured of the beauty of Candrābhā, the wife of Vīrasena. He returned to Sāketa and sent for Vírasena. When Vīrasena went there his wife was kidnapped and put into his harem hy Madhu. She was
13

Page #223

194
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
made the chief queen. Distressed Vírasena became a monk and was reborn as a celestial being. Once the case of a 'paradărika' or adultery was instituted in the court. Madhu sought advice of Candrābhā. She said that the adulterer should be worshipped. It was a slur on the character of the king himself. The king realised his sin and renounced the world along with his brother, Kaitabha. Candrābhā also accepted nunhood. After performing severe penances Madhu and Kaitabha ascended to the Acyuta Kalpa and became Indra and Prati-Indra respectively. Candrabha also became a goddess.
The PCR (109.35-173) and the RPS (p. 192f) mention the name of the sons of Samudra and Dhāriņi of Ayodhyā (Sak eta) as Purnabhadra and Kañcanabhadra ( 109-130 ). They further mention Nyagrodhanagara for Vadanagara. The Vasudevahindi (I. pp. 85-91) mentions them in their previous births as jackals; as Agnibhūti and Vayubhūti; as celestial beings; as sons of Arhaddása, a merchant of Gajapura and Puşpaśrī named as Pūrņabhadra and Manibhadra; and then as Madhu and Kaitabha being the sons of king Visvasena and Surupā of Gajapura. The king of Vadapura is named as Kanakaratha. Madhu and Kaițabha are said to have become Indras in the Mahāśukra Vimāna. The story agrees with that of the PCV. The HVP of Jinasena (ch. 43.99-218) contains this story which agrees with that of the PCR and mentions Purnabhadra and Manibhadra as the sons of Samudradatta and Dhāriņi of Ayodhyā. The wife of Hemanābha is mentioned to be Dharavati. After descending from Āranācyuta Kalpa, Madhu and Kaitabha were reborn as Pradyumna und Samba, being the sons of Kșşņa begot on Rukmiņi and Jámbavati respectively,
In the Uttarapurāņa of Guņabhadra (72. 1-48) their previous births in the form of jackals are not found. Agnibhūti and Vāyubhūti were defeated by a monk in a theological dispute. Pürņabhadra and Mapibhadra's parents are mentioned as merchant Arhadāsa and Vapraśrī of Ayodhya in place of Samudradatta and Dhāriņī of the PCV. Madhu and Kridava are the sons of king Arhadāsa and Kāśyapă of Hastinapura. When Madhu was enthroned, lord Kanakaratha of Amalakakanthanagara along with his wife Kanakamāla visited Madhu. At that time Kanakamala was kidnapped by Madhu On having once listened to a religious discourse Madhu reproached his own behaviour and repenting over his own misdeeds became a monk along with Kridava. Both were reborn as Indras of Mahāśukra. Further they were reborn as Pradyumna and Śāmbhava, sons of Rukmiņi and Jambavati respectively. The MP (91. 1-6) agrees with the UP. It names Amalakakanthanagara (92. 5. 8-9) of the UP as Aparakaṁpapura or Amarakalpapura (91. 6. 2).

Page #224

· 195
INTERVENING STORIES
In the Mahabharata (12. 347) Madhu and Kaitabha are said to be two Mahāsuras. They steal away the Vedas from Brahmā. Brahmā requests Hari (Bhagvan) to recover them. Hari becomes Hayagriva (horse-headed) and goes to the Rasātala. He starts singing. Hearing the sweet voice those Asuras go there. In the meanwhile Hari removes the Vedas and restores them to Brahma. The Mahāsuras attack Hari. Hari kills them. According to the Padmapurana (5. 37) and Harivamsapurana (3. 13) these Mahāsuras are said to be the embodiments of Tamasa and Rajasa. They challenge Brahma who is engaged in creation of Śrsti by the help of Satva. Brahma explains the reality and sends them to Hari. There they request that when they are killed, they should be reborn as his (Hari's) sons. Hari accepts their request and kills them. In the Bhagavatapurana (10. 55), Pradyumna is called as an incarnation of Kamadeva who was previously burnt by Rudra. Pradyumna is kidnapped in his childhood by Asura Sambara and the latter is slain by the former. Here Pradyumna and Sambara are not brothers and they are also not related to Madhu and Kaiṭabha. Thus these are iudependent stories.
B-Stories of General Prudence
58. Yakṣadatta and Mitramati:
While reminding Sugrīva of his duty and cautioning him to become alert on his work of tracing out Sīta, Lakṣmaṇa refers to the intance of the assistance rendered by a Yogin to Yakṣadatta. Hearing this Śrenika requested Gautama to narrate the story of Yakṣadatta. Then Gautama related the story (48. 12-32) illustrating as to how a timely and selfless help can avert indecent act and can bring about the union of the separated persons.
Yakṣadatta, the son of king Yakṣasena of Krauñcapura (Kuñcapura) and queen Rajila (Railla), was enamoured of a certain lady. Once while proceeding to meet her he was prevented by a monk and told that she was his own mother. The monk further narrated that Bandhudatta, the merchant son of Kanaka and Dhanya of Mṛttikāvatī married Mitramati. Once Bandhudatta was away from the city on some trade voyage. His father became suspicious of the pregnancy of Mitramati and exiled her. In course of time she gave birth to a son and moved away to clean her body leaving the child behind. Unfortunately the child was stolen away with the blanket covered round him by a dog and taken away to the king of that city. The child was duly brought up by the king. On the other hand Mitramati was given shelter by some worshipper of deities (devārcika).

Page #225

196
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
She lived along with him as his sister. The monk further revealed that the child was no body else but Yakşadatta himself. Yakşadatta went to the king and after making an enquiry about his birth got re-united with his real parents.
The PCR (46.34-60) and the RPS (ch. 22) agree with it.
59. Vinayadatta and a man mad after a Peacock:
Jambavat narrated this story to make Rama drop the idea of recovering Sita. He requested him not to become mad after Sita when so many Khecara girls were put at his disposal to make him happy (48.63-76). It illustrates the futility of demanding a thing which is lost beyond recovery.
Brahmin Vilasabhūti of Vennātaţa (Veņņāyada) had illegitimate connections with his friend Vinayadatta's wife. Once on being advised by her, Vilasabhūti took Vinayadatta to a forest. The former tied the latter there to a tree and enjoyed with the latter's wife. After some time a wayfarer released Vinayadatta and accompanied him to his house. The brahmin fled away from there. By chance the peacock of the wayfarer was stolen by the prince. That wayfarer was offered in exchange another peacock, jewels and gold by Vinayadatta but the former insisted upon getting the same peacock in exchange of the help he had rendered to him. Jāmbavat further explained how foolish it was on the part of the wayfarer that he demanded a thing which was beyond recovery.
The PCR (48. 137-156) and the RPS (ch. 22) contain the same story.
60. Atmaśreyas and the Mystic ring : Lakşmaņa narrated this story in reply of the preceding story to clear of Jambūnada's (Jámbavat) apprehensions and to convince and encourage the Khecara soldiers to fight and recover Sītā (48.77-96). It illustrates that the brave deserves the fair.
Ātmaśreyas (Appaseo) on account of his previous subha' karmas enjoyed his life without doing any labour while his two elder brothers worked hard. At this extravagancy of Ātmaśreyas, his parents banished him from home. On his way as he was contemplating to commit suicide, he met an exiled prince namely, Bhānu who had obtained from his preceptor at Kusumapura a mystic ring which could cure diseases and could destroy calamities. According to a prophocy Bhānu was going to re-acquire his kingdom,

Page #226

INTERVENING STORIES
197
hence he gave away the ring to Atmaśreyas. The latter returned to his home town. There he cured, with the help of the ring, the queen who was bitten by a snake. Being pleased with this performance the king of that place favoured him with great presents. Once he put the ring under a tree and went away to take his bath in a lake. A lizard (gohero-godhero) removed that ring and after entering into the 'bila' (hollow) made great noise. The people got frightened at this noise, but Atmareyas uprooted the tree, killed that lizard and ultimately recovered the ring. Thus his reckless courage triumphed. Rāma, Rāvana and Sīta are compared with Atmasreyas, the lizard and the mystic ring respectvely.
The PCR (48.157-182) mentions no other brother of Atmaśreyas. Bhanu is called Subhānu, the prince of Pṛthusthāna. Kurmapura is mentioned instead of Kusumapura while Kusumapura is said to have been the town of Atmaśreyas. The ring is mentioned to be It mentions many made of iron. The RPS (ch. 20) follows the PCR. brothers of Atmaśreyas.
61. Giribhuti and Gobhūti:
(1) When Vibhīṣaṇa seeks refuge under Rāma, Matisāgara, one of the counsellors of Rāma apprehends some intrigue. But another counsellor Matisamudra pleads for Vibhişana and narrates two stories to ward off the suspicion about Vibhiṣaņa (55.34-44). They illustrate that avarice can create enmity even between brothers or sons and mother.
Two Brahmin brothers, Giribhuti and Gobhūti were once favoured with some secret presents offered by Mati, the wife of king Suryadeva. Neither of the brothers knew the contents of each others' gifts. Giribhuti became suspicious as well as greedy so he turned out to be an enemy of his brother, Gobhūti.
The PCR (55.57-59) mentions that Gobhūti killed his brother on account of avarice.
62.
Ahideva and Mahideva.
(2) Ahideva and Mahideva, the sons of merchant Mahāghana and Kuruvinda, after the death of their father left Kosambi on mission. In due course they returned with a costly gem. Their mother who was greedy wanted to kill them to get possession of the gem. When both the brothers knew about it, they threw away the into the river Yamuna. A fisherman, by chance. found it in the
gem
a

Page #227

198
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
river and returned it to them. The two brothers crushed it to pieces to bring an end to the cause of evil and enmity and they renounced the world.
The PCR (55.60-68) mentions the river by the name of Kalindi.
The RPS (ch 23) has mixed up both the stories into one story taking the names of the characters from the first story and the theme from the second story.
63. The battle between the sons of king Śrișeņa.
The battle is merely referred to by a counsellor when king Mahendra disicusses with his counsellors regarding the marriage negotiations of his daughter, Añjana (15.19). The battle referred to illustrates that a father should be very cautious in selecting the life partner of his daughter. No other details about it are given in the PCV. This story is traced in the Vasudevahindi (I.p. 320f). It is as follows.
King Srişeņa of Ratnapura had two wives, Abhinandiya and Simhanandiyā. Abhinandiyā had two sons, Indusena and Bindusena. In due course king Bala of Kausāmbi married his daughter Srikāntā born of Śrimatí to Indusena. On the occasion of biding farewell and sending his daughter to her father-in-law's house, king Bala favoured his son-in-law with a courtezan Anantamatī. She duly departed for Ratnapura along with Śrīkāntā. That 'gapikā' was very beautiful, hence a fierce battle ensued between Indusena and Bindusena for her. King Śrīşeņa tried to stop the battle by various ways but in vain. He could not tolerate this sort of family-feud, hence he along with his wives committed suicide to bring an end to his grief.

Page #228

CHAPTER V
ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VAMŚAS
The PCV after narrating the biography of Lord Rşabha and the origin of the 'Brāhmaṇas' deals with the origin of various Vamsas and their genealogical lists. In the following lines an attempt has been made to see how far it stands in agreement or at variation with the Brahmanical tradition
The fifth chapter of the PCV refers to four great Varšas (cattāri mahāvarsā 5.1), viz. Ikkhāga (Ikşvāku), Soma, Vijjahara (Vidyadhara) and Hari. The origin of the first three is given in the same chapter while that of the fourth one is dealt with in the twenty-first chapter just hefore narrating the life of Munisuvratanātha. Two more VamsasRākşasa and Vānara are treated of in the fifth and the sixth chapter while narrating the life of Rāvana.
It is mentioned in the PCV that the (5.3-9) Ikşvāku, the Soma (5.10-11) and the Vidyadhara (3.144-161) Vamśas originated during the congregation of Lord Rşabha, the first Tirthankara. The Rākşasa Vamsa (5.77, 122,251) came into vogue during the era of Lord Ajita, the second Tirthankara. The Hari Vamsa (21.2-10) came into existence during the Tirtha of Sitala, the tenth Tirthakara and the Vānara Varša (6.90) was established during the period intervening Sreyarsa and Vasupujya, the eleventh and the twelfth Tirthaikaras respectively.
1. Ikşvāku Varśa :
According to the PCV the Ikşvāku Varsa originated with Ādityayasa (Āiccajasāisambhavo varso 5.9), the first son of Cakravartin Bharata and grandson of the first Tirthaikara, Rşabha.
The PCR agrees with the PCV and calls it as Aditya Vamsa also (5.2-10). The HVPJ also agrees with it (13.1-12). Hemacandra mentions Rşabha as belonging to the Ikşvāku line (TSP, vol. IV, page 182). According to the PHV (p. 161) Rşabha's Vaisa was named Ikşavāku because he desired to take sugar-cane (ikkhu)

Page #229

200
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
from Indra who had gone to Nábhi when Rşabha was one year old". The AP (19.264) states that Rşabhawas the first person who taught his subjects how to collect the juice of sugar-cane (ikṣu) hence he was named as Ikşvāku. According to the MP, Rşabha's Vamsa was called Ikşvāku because he was the first person who quenched the thirst and the hunger of the people with the juice of sugar-cane. The RPS has combined together the traditions of the AP, the TSP and the PCR. In the beginning (p.4) it mentions Rşabha to have established himself as the king of the Ikşvāku line and to have made others as the kings of the Ugra, Kuru, Nátha and the Hari Vamsas. Then he (p. 8) follows Ravişeņa and mentions that the Ikşvāku, Soma, Hari and the Vidyādhara Vambas came into existence after the death of Rşabha.
Vimalasūri, Ravişeņa. Jinasena and Somasena commence the list from Bharata and stop at Mrgānka. They state that after a long period of time during the congregation of twentieth Tirthalikara (Munisuvratanātha), Vijaya became the king of Sāketapura in the Ikşvāku line (PCV, 21.41; PCR, 21.56 & 73; RPS, 13.p. 81). From Vijaya onwards, they except Jinasena resume the list of further descendants. Hemacandra omits the preceding list and starts from Vijaya only. His list also is given below.
So far as the Brahmanical sources are concerned, the Valmiki Rāmāyana and the Bhagavatapuräna contain a complete genealogy of the Iksvāku Vamsa. But all the names supplied by these two works are not essentially the same in sequence and much less in number. The VR (1.70;2.110) mentions Ikşvāku as the progenitor of this lineage (1.70.21). He is said to be a grandson of Vivasvat (the sun). After him the lineage came to be known as the Solar-race as the Puranic tradition records. According to the VR, Ikşvāku is the fifth descendant in the line of Brahmā. The Puranas (Bhagavata purāna, 9.1.11-12; Matsyapurana, 11.1-2) also corroborate this account.
Genealogy of Ikşvāku Vamsa:- The following is the genealogical list of Ikşvāku kings as referred to in various Jaina & Brahmanical works :
1. See Sukhabodhika Tikā on Kalpasūtra, p. 144. 2. He is said to have established the Hari, Natha, Ugra and the Kuru Vamsas
also. Puşpadanta agrees with it in his Mūhāpurāna.

Page #230

JAINA WORKS
PCV, 5
PCR, 5
HVP, 13.7-11
RPS, 2
1. Usaha 2. Bharaha 3. Āiccajasa 4. Sīhajasa 5. Balabhadda 6. Vasubalamahābala
Rsabha Bharata Ādityayasas Sitayasas Balārika Subala Mahābala Atibala Amsta Subhadra Sāgara Bhadra Ravitejas Sasi Prabhūtatejas Tejasvin Tapana Pratāpavat
7. Amiyabala 8. Subhadda 9. Sãyarabhadda
Rşabha Bharata Ādityayasas Smitayasas Bala Subala Mahābala Atibala Amộatabala Subhadra Sāgara Bhadra Ravitejas Śaśi Prabhūtatejas Tejasvin Tapana Pratāpavat
Rşabha Bharata Arkakīrti Sitakīrti Balātika Subala Mahābala Atibala Amsta Subhadra Sāgarabhadra
ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VAMSAS
10. Ravitea 11. Sasipahapabhūyatea
Sūryakānta Śaśikānta
12. Teyassi 13. Tāvana 14. Payāvi
15. Aiviria 16. Mahaviria 17. Uiyaparakkama
A tivīrya Suvīrya Uditaparakrama
Ativirya Suvīrya Udita parakrama
Pavanavīrya Ativīrya Suvīrya Udita parakrama
201

Page #231

PCV, 5
Mahindavikkama
18.
19.
Sūra
20. Indajuinņa
21.
Mahāindai
22.
23.
24.
Pabhu
Vibhu
Aridamaņa
25. Vasahakeu
26. Garuḍanka 27. Miyanka
(and others)
PCV, 21-22
28. Vijaa
29. Purandara
30.
Kittidhara
31. Sukosala
32. Hirannagabbha
33. Naghusa
34. Sodāsa
35. Siharaha 36.
Bambharaha
PCR, 5
Mahendravikrama
Sürya
Indradyumna Mahendrajit
Prabhu
Vibhu
Avidhvamsa? (Aridhvamsa)
Vitabhi
Vṛṣabhadhvaja
Garuḍānka Mrgānka
(and others)
PCR, 21-22
Vijaya
Surendramanyu
Purandara
Kirtidhara
Sukośala
Hiranyagarbha Naghuşa
Saudāsa
Simharatha
Brahmaratha
HVP, 13.7-11
Mahendravikrama
Sürya
Indradyumna Mahendrajit
Prabhu
Vibhu
Vṛṣabhadhvaja
Garuḍānka Mrgānka
(and others)
Avidhvamsa? (Aridhvamsa) Aridamana
Vitabhi
TSP, IV p. 182-189
Vijaya
...
Purandara
Kirtidhara Sukośala
Hiranyagarbha
Naghuşa
Saudāsa
RPS, 2
Mahendravikrama Suryavikrama Indradyumna Mahendrajit
Simharatha
Brahmaratha
Prabhu
Vibhu
Vṛṣabhadhvaja
Garuḍānka
Mrgānka (and others)
RPS, 13
Vijaya Śakramanyu
Purandara
Kirtidhara
Sukośala
Hiranyaruci Naghuşa
Saudāsa
Simharatha
Brahmaratha
202
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM

Page #232

PCR, 21-22 Caturvaktra Hemaratha
TPS, IV. p. 182-189 Caturmukha Hemaratha
RPS, 13 Caturvaktra Hemaratha
PCV, 21-22 37. Caummuha 38. Hemaraha 39. Jasaraha 40. Paumaraha 41. Mayaraha
Sataratha Udayapşthu
Sataratha Pșthu Aja Payoratha Indraratha
Sataratha Udayapşthu Aja Payoratha Indraratha
Vāriratha
Dinănātharatha Mándhāts
Induratha Adityaratha Māndhāts
Suryaratha Mándhāts
42. Sasiraha 43. Raviraha 44. Mandhaa 45. Udayaraha 46. Naravasaha 47. Vīrasusena 48. Padivayana 49. Kamalabandhu 50. Ravisattu 51. Vasantatilaa 52. Kuberadatta 53. Kunthu 54. Saraha 55. Viraha
ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VAMSAS
Virasena Pratimanyu Kamalabandhu Ravimanyu Vasantatilaka Kuberadatta Kunthubhakti Sarabharatha Dviradaratha
Virasena Pratimanyu Pratibandhu Ravimanyu Vasautatilaka Kuberadatta Kunthu Sarabha Dvirada
Virasena Pratimanyu Kamalabandhu Ravimanyu Vasantatilaka Kuberadatta Kunthabhakta Sarabharatha Dviradaratha
203

Page #233

PCV, 21-22
56. Rahanigghosa
57. Mayaridamaņa 58.
Hirappanābha 59. Puñjatthala
60. Kakuha
61. Raghusa
62. Aparaņņa
63.
Dasaraha
64. Rāma
(Pauma)
VR, 1. 70 & 2. 110
Brahma
Marici
Kasyapa
Vivasvat
Manu
Ikṣvāku
1.
2. Kukşi
3. Vikuksi
4. Bāņa
5. Anaranya
6.
Prthu
PCR, 21-22
Mrgeśadamana Hiranyakasipu
Punjasthala Kakutstha
Raghu
Anaranya Dasaratha
Rama
(Padma)
Bhag. Pu, 9. 1-10
Svayambhu
Marīci
Kasyapa
Vivasvat
TSP, IV. p. 182-189
Simhadamana Hiranyakasipu
Manu
Ikṣvāku
Vikuksi
Purañjāya or Kakutstha
Anena
Prthu
Viśvarandhi
Puñjasthala Kakutstha
Raghu
Anaranya Dasaratha
BRAHMAN1CAL WORKS
Rāma (Padma)
VR, 1.70 & 2.110
7.
Trisanku
8.
9. Yuvanāśva
Dhundhumara
10. Mandhātṛ 11. Susandhi
12.
Dhruvasandhi
13.
Bharata
14.
Asita
15. Sagara
16. Asamañjaśa
RPS, 13
Simhadamana Hiranyakasipu Puñjasthala
Kakutstha
Raghu Anaranya
Dasaratha
Rama (Padma)
Bhag. Pu, 9. 1-10
Candra
Yuvanāśva I
Sabasta (Śrāvasta) Bṛhadaśva Kuvalayāśva or Dhundhumara
Drdhāśva
Haryaśva I
Nikumbha
Barhaṇāśva
Kṛśāśva
204
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM

Page #234

VR, 1.70 & 2.110
38.
VR, 1.70 & 2.110 17. Amśūmat 18. Dilipa 19. Bhagiratha
39.
45.
46. 47.
or
20. Kakutstha 21. Raghu 22. Kalmāşapada or Saudāsa 23. Sankhana 24. Sudarśana 25. Agnivarna 26. Śrīghraga 27. Maru 28. Prasuśruka 29. Ambarisa 30. Nahuşa 31. Yayāti 32. Nabhāga 33. Aja 34. Daśaratha 35. Rama
Bhāg, Pu, 9.1-10 Senajit Yuvanaśva II Trasaddasyu I or Mandhata Purukutsa Trasaddasyu II Anaranya Haryaśva II Aruna Tribandhana Satyavrata Hariscandra Rohita Harita Campa Sudeva Vijaya Bharuka Vřka Bahuka Sagara Asamañjasa
Bhāg, Pu, 9.1-10 Amsūmat Dilīpa I Bhagiratha Śruta Nabha Sindhudvīpa Ayutāyu Rtuparna Sarvakāma Sudāsa or Mitrasaha Kalmās (anghri) apāda Asmaka Mülaka Dasaratha I Edavida (Ailivila) Visvasaha (Dilīpa II) Khatvānga Dirghabāhu? Raghu Aja Dasaratha Rama
ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VANSAS
50.
51.
55.
56.
57.
58.
37.
1, Khatvānga as Dilipa (Puranic Chronology, p. 349-D. R. Mankad). 2. Ibid, p. 330; Dirghabahu is taken as an adjective of Raghu (sce Harivansa purāna 15.25).
205

Page #235

206
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
The following is a consolidated picture of relative positions of those kings who are identical in the PCV, the VR and the Puráņas :
PCV
VR
Purānas
2. Bharaha
13. Bharata 28. Vijaya,
32. Vijaya 33. Naghusa
30. Nahusa 34. Sodása
22. Saudāsa
47. Sudāsa. 44. Mandhata
10. Mándhala
19. Māndhata. 60. Kakuha 20. Kakutstha.
3. Kakutstha. 61. Raghusa 21. Raghu.
55. Raghu. 62. Anaranna
5. Anaranya.
22. Anaranya. 63. Dasaraha
34. Dasaratha.
57. Dasaratha. 64. Răma 35. Rāma.
58 Rāma. A comparison of the genealogical lists as found in the PCV and the VR shows that in all eight persens-Bharata, Naghusa, Saudāsa. Mandhăts, Kakutstha, Raghu, Anaranya and Dasaratha are common though their places in the line differ. While there are only seven persons in the PCV, who find mention in the Puranic list also. They are Vijaya, Saudāsa, Māndhāts Kakutstha, Raghu, Anaranya and Dasaratha. Hiranyanābha of the PCV is found in the Raghuvamsa (18 25) and the Purāņas (Bhāg, 9.12 3). But he is mentioned to have been born after some generations in the line of Rāma and not as an ancestor of Rāma as found in the PCV. The relative places of these seven kings mentioned in the PCV differ from those of the Puranic list also. There are only six kings who are common to all the three lists. They are Saudása, Māndhāts, Kakutstha, Raghu, Anaranya and Daśaratha.
According to the PCV, Kakutstha appears some generations after Māndhātr. This sequence agrees with the VR though the exact place in the line does not agree. In the Puranic list Mandhāta is mentioned some generations after Kakutstha. The PCV and the VR refer to Raghu as the son of Kakutstha but in the Puranic list Raghu is a descendant of Kakutstha after many generations. If we start from Vijaya then the place of Rama as found in the PCV comes to be thirty-seventh which is nearer to the VR, but the total number of descendants from Rşabha to Rāma as found in the PCV are 64. In the Puranic list the number is 58 from Ikşvāku to Rama, In this respect the PCV's list is nearer to that of the Puranic one. Moreover Vijaya is mentioned in the Puranic list, his place being thirty-second and mark, how close it is to his place in the PCV

Page #236

ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VAMSAS
207
which is 28th. On the whole Nos. 44,60.61 and 62 of the PCV can be compared in the same order with No. 19 of the Puranas, 20 & 21 of the VR and again 22 of the Purāņas as given in the above consolidated list.
Now we compare the list of the PCV with the lists of other Jaina works so as to find out how far they are identical. In all there are 27 kings from Rṣabha to Mṛgaika in the PCV. Vasubalamahābala should be taken as two persons then the total number comes to 27+1=28. The PCR mentions 32 kings and the HVPS agrees with the PCR. Out of them Prabhūtatejas and Vitabhi should be taken as adjectives, and 'Sagara' and 'Bhadra' should be taken as the parts of one name as Sagarabhadra. Thus the total number comes to 32-230. Out of them 27 names agree with those of the PCV. Sitayaśas of the PCR is mentioned as Sihajasa in the PCV and as Smitayaśas in the HVPJ. Atibala is the only name in the PCR which does not find mention in the PCV. If Atibala and Amṛta of the PCR are taken together as one person i. e. Atibala-amṛta then the person becomes identical with Amiyabala of the PCV. Thus the PCR agrees with the PCV. Bh. Somasena agrees with the PCR except that he mentions Pavanavīrya additionally and does not refer to Tejasvin, Tapana and Pratapavat. The name of Amṛtabala (9) in the HVPJ indicates the influence of the PCV on the HVPJ.
Now we take up the ancestors of Rama from Vijaya to Dasaratha. Commencing from Vijaya, Rama's place is 37th, 36th, 34th and 36th, in the PCV, PCS, TSP and RPS respectively. Naravasaha (46) of the PCV may be dropped as an adjective. In all 29 names of the PCV (excluding nos. 39, 40, 41, 42, 45, 46, 55 & 56) agree with those of the PCR and the TSP. In the latter work No. 49 does not agree but that loss is replaced by No. 42-Induratha who, is just identical with Saśiratha of the PCV. In all 33 names of the TSP are identical with those of
the PCR. The additional four kings, viz. Sataratha, Udayapṛthu, Vārinātha and Dvirada are taken by the TSP from the PCR because they are not mentioned in the PCV. So it may be concluded that Hemacandra has followed both the PCV and the PCR while it is quite apparent that Bh. Somasena completely agrees with Ravişeņa and he is influenced by Hemacandra's TSP (See Udayapṛthu between Nos. 41, 42 and 57 also) as well as the PCV (See No. 9 & 24). The PCR additionally mentions Aja and Pṛthu who find place in the Brahmanical tradition.

Page #237

208
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
(2) Soma Vamsa
About its origin it is said in the PCV that it came to be known as Soma Vamsa after the name of Somaprabha who was the son of Bahubali. Bahubali was the son of Rşabha and the younger brother of Bharata (5.10). The VH (p. 164) mentions Somaprabha in the same relation. The PCR (5.11), the RPS (p. 8) and the HVP) (13.16) agree with the PCV. It is called Sasi Varsa also (PCV, 5.13).
According to the Brahmanical tradition Candramas, the grandson of Brahma and son of Atri (a Prajāpati) once kidnapped Tárā, the wife of Bịhaspati, the Preceptor of the Devas and begot a son on her. Then there issued a battle between the two parties, one assisted by the Asuras and the other by the Devas. Brahmā intervened and stopped the battle and restored Tara to Bịhaspati. Her son begot by Candramas was named Budha. Then from his (Budha) procreator's (Candramas) name the line came to be known as Soma or Candra Vaṁşa (Vişnupurana, 4.6.5f; Bhagavatpurana, 9.14.1-14). Thus according to both the traditions, Soma Vamsa originates with the grandson of the first Yuga-puruşa (the first Tirthalikara in the case of the Jaina tradition and the creator, Brahmă in the case of the Brahmanical tradition).
The details of its genealogy are lacking in the PCV.
(3) Vidyadhara Vamsa According to the PCV, Rşabha after distributing his kingdom among his sons, becomes a monk. Nami and Vinami approach him for their share in the kingdom. At that time Dharaṇendra, the lord of the Nāgas (Nāgarāya) establishes Nami and Vinami as the first kings of the southern and the northern parts of the Vijayārdha mouniain, Rathanūpuracakravālapura and Gaganavallabhapura being their respective capitals (3. 144-152). On the same occasion Dharanendra confers on them many Vidyās (superhuman powers or lores). On accoont of their hold on those Vidyas they are known as Vidyadharas (Vijjaharāna vijjāe 6. 88). They are also called Khecaras (5. 257) because they fared in the sky by the power of their Vidyās.
The Vasudevahindi agrees with the PCV and further tells us that Nami and Vinami were (sambandhikumāras) some relatives of Rşabha. It also mentions that the Vidyās conferred on them were helpful in soaring them in the sky (gaganagamaņa joggão vijjão p. 163). The PCR agrees with the PCV. It adds that Dharanendra assumed the form of the Jina (Rşabha) and then favoured them with kingdoms and Vidyas (3. 308). The HVPJ also mentions that Nami and Vinami

Page #238

ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VANSAS
209
established Vidyadharavaṁsa (9. 128-134). Svayambhu mentions Nami and Vinami as the sons of Kaccha and Mahākaccha (PCS, 2. 13. 7). Hemacandra agrees with Svayambhu in this respect (TSP, I. p. 170f). The RPS also refers to Nami as the first lord of the Vidyādhara Vamsa. It further mentions that Kaccha and Mahākaccha were father-in-laws of Rşabha (p. 4). Thus Nami and Vinami become the brother-in-laws of Rşabha. But the Sukhabodhikā Tika (p. 148) on the Kalpasūtra informs us that Kaccha and Mahākaccha had filial (putratayā) relation with Rşabha.
In the VR there is no information about the origin and the genealogy of the Vidyadharas. However there are stray references to them. They are mentioned as superhuman beings along with the Nāgas, Gandharvas. Kinnaras, Devas, Asuras, Yakșas, Rākṣasas, Uragas, Siddhas, Patatris, Dānavas, Bhujangas, Pannagas, Rkşas and the Cāraņas at different places. 1
A comparison of the genealogical tables given below shows that they are generally identical except that Ravişena has made alteration in some of the names of the PCV and added some new kings. Similarly Somasena has also altered some of the names of the PCR. He has added only one name more to the list of the PCR, i. e. Vajrajangha between the fifth and the sixth king. However he has closed the list at Mrgavarman whose place is fortieth in his own list.
The PCV has given the names of 66 descendants while the PCR mentions 73. The name of Vaidyuta between 28th and 29th names of the PCV is additional in the PCR. Further the PCR gives eight more names between Ayudha and Raktoştha, i. e. 48th and 49th of the PCV. Thus his total number comes to 66+9=75. But it has not mentioned Naravarindu (57) and Caucūda (61) of the PCV. Hence according to the PCR the total number is 75 - 2=73.
The names Vajradhara and Vajrasundara i. e. 15th and 19th in the RPS are identical with those of the PCV and not with those of the PCR which names them as Vajrabhịt and Vajrasamjñaka respectively. Further Vajrapāņi follows Vajrāsya in the PCV and the RPS; and unlike the PCR, it shows the direct influence of the PCV or through the HVPJ on the RPS. The name of Vajrasundara (18) and the place of Vajrapāņi (20) in the HVPJ indicate that Jinasenasūri seems to have consulted the PCV.
A comparative genealogy of the Vidyādhara king as found in the various Jaina works may be arranged in three groups as follows: kings referred to in the (A) PCV, PCR, HVP and RPS, (B) PCV, PCR and RPS; and (C) PCV and PCR.
1. VR, 1.17; 4.67.45 ; 5.51.40; 6. 61.10 ; 7. 26.8.
14

Page #239

(A)
PCV, 5. 14-46
PCR, 5. 16-54
HVP, 13. 20-24
RPS, P. 8 & 13
210
1. Nami (3. 152). 2. Rayanamali 3. Rayapavajja 4. Rayanaraha 5. Rayapacitta
Nami Ratnamālin Ratnavajra Ratnaratha Ratnacitra
Nami Ratnamalin Ratnavajra Ratnaratha Ratnacihna
6. Candaraha 7. Vajja (Sangh) jangha 8. Sena 9. Vajjadatta 10. Vajjaddhaa 11. Vajjāuha 12. Vajja 13. Suvajja 14. Vajjandhara 15. Vajjābha 16. Vajrabahu 17. Vajjaika 18. Vajjasundara 19. Vajjāsa 20. Vajjapāņi 21. Vajjasujanhu 22. Vajja 23. Vijjumuha
Candraratha Vajrasangha Vajrasena Vajradaństra Vajradhvaja Vajrāyudha Vajra Suvajra Vajrabhịt Vajrabha Vajrabahu Vajrauka Vajrasamjñanka Vajrāsya Vajrajātu . Vajrapāņi Vajravat Vidyunmukha
Candraratha Vajrajargha Vajrasena Vajradamstra Vajradhvaja Vajrayudha Vajra Suvajra Vajrabhịt Vajrābha Vajrabahu Vajraika Vajrasundara Vajrāsya Vajrapẫni Vajrabhānu Vajravat Vidyunmukha
Nami Ratnamalin Ratnavajra Maniratha Ratnacitra Vajrajanagha Candraratha Vajrasangha Vajrasena Vajradaństra Vajradhvaja Vajrāyudha Vajra Suvajra Vajradhara Vajrabha Vajrabahu Vajraika Vajrasundara Vajrasya Vajrapāņi Vajrabhāna Vajravat Vidyunmukha
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN

Page #240

PCV, 5.14-46
RPS. p. 8 & 13
24. Suvayana 25. Vijjudatta 26. Vijju 27. Vijjutea 28. Tadivea
PCR, 5.16-54 Suvakra Vidyutdaṁșțra Vidyudvat Vidyudabha Vidyudvega Vaidyuta Vidyuddamstra (Vidyuddědha) Dşdharatha
HVP, 13.20-24 Suvakra Vidyuddamstra Vidyudvat Vidyudābha Vidyudvega Vaidyuta (And others)
Suvakra Vidyuddamstra
Vidyudvat Vidyudābha Vidyudvega Vaidyuta Vidyuddşdha
29. Vijjudādha
30. Dadharaha
Dşdharatha
ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VANśAS
PCR, 5.16-54
RPS, 1.8
(B) PCV, 5.14-46 31. Āsadhamma 32. Assayara 33. Asaddhaa 34. Paumaniha 35. Paumamāli 36. Paumaraha 37. Sihavāha 38. Mayadhamma
Ašvadharma Aśvāyu Aśvadhvaja Padmanabha Padmamalin Padmaratha Simhayāna Mrgavarman (Msgadharma ?) Meghásra
Rathāśva Ayudhavāhana Aśvadhvaja Padmaprabha Padmamālin Padmaratha Simhayāna Mrgavarman
39. Mehasīha
(And others)
211

Page #241

(C) PCV, 5. 14-46
40. Sambhua 41. Sihaddhaa
42. Sasanka
43. Candaňka
44.
45. Indaraha
46. Candaraha
47.
48. Auha
Candasîhara
Sasankadhamma
49. Rattaṭṭha
(Rattoṭṭha ?)
PCR 5. 16-54
Simhasaprabhu
Simhaketu
Śaśānkāsya
Candrahva
Candrasekhara
Indraratha
Candraratha
Cakradharma
Ayudha.
Cakradhvaja
Manigrīva
Manyanka
Manibhasura
Manisyandana
Manyasya
Bimboṣtha
Lavitadhara
Raktoṣṭha
PCV, 5.14-46
50. Haricanda
51. Puracanda
52.
53. Valinda
54. Candacūḍa
55. Gayapindu
56. Durāņaņa
57. Naravarindu
58. Egacuda
59. Docuḍa
60. Ticūda
61. Caucuḍa
62. Vajjacūḍa
63. Bahucuda
64. Sihacuda
65. Jalanajaḍi
66. Akkatea
Puppacanda
(And others)
PCR, 5.16-54
Haricandra
Pumścandra
Pūrṇacandrama
Balendu
Candramaścūda
Vyomendu
Uḍupātana
Ekacuda
Dvicūḍa
Tricuḍa
...
Vajracuda
Bhuricüda
Arkacūḍaka
Vahnijaţin
Vahnitejas
(And others)
212
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM

Page #242

ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OE VARIOUS VANSAS
213
4. Raksasa Vamsa :
According to the PCV, the Raksasa Varsa is a branch of the Vidyadhara Vamsa. It is said to have originated during the congregation of Ajitanātha, the second Tirthankara.
Sahasranayana, the prince of Gaganavallabhapura (northern Vijayārdha mountain) once attacked Meghavāhana, called Ghanavāhana also, the prince of Rathanūpura (southern Vijayārdha, mountain) on the issue of the marriage of the former's sister. Meghavahana then fled away and took shelter under Ajitanatha, the second Tírtharikara (5.64-77). On that occasion Bhima, the lord of demons (Rakkhasavaiņā Bhīmeņar 5.123-132) made Meghavahana first lord of Laukāpuri and Pāiālankärapura. Larkāpuri is said to have been situated in the valley of Trikūțaśikhara which stood in the middle of the Rakşasadvīpa. Further it is said that after the name of Rakkhasa (5.251), a desendant of Meghavāhana, his Vamsa came to be known as Rakkhasa Varsa (tassaya nāmeṇam imo, Rakkhasavamso yayammi vikkhão 5.252).
The author of the PCV remarks that originally they were Vidyadharas but as they protected the Rakkhasaddiva hence they were called Rakkhasas. They were neither the devas nor the demons (43.14). The Rakşasas are also called as Khecaras (Khayarāpam Rakkhasanāmam kayam loe 5.257) also.
The PCR completely agrees with the PCV. The PCS? mentions Toyadavāhana in place of Meghavāhana. The RPS' follows the PCR. The TSP of Hemacandra agrees with the PCV.
According to the VH (p.240), Rāvana was born in the line of Vidyādhara Sahasragriva. His brothers developed hostility with him, hence he established his kingdom in the Larkādvīpa. The UP (68.8-9) mentions Vidyādhara Sahasragrīva, a descendant of Vinami as the first lord of Larkāpura. He fled away to Larkāpura on being expelled by his nephew (brother's son) from Meghakutapura, situated on the southern Vijayārdha mountain. The MP (70.2) agrees with the UP.
According to the VR when Prajāpati created the water, he created living beings also for the protection of the water. These living
1. PCR, 5.76-93, 149-165, 378-386; 48.33. 2. PCS, 5.6-8; 6.1. 3. RPS, Ch. 3. p. 16. 4. IV. p. 107; II p.p. 18, 16.

Page #243

214
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
beings who were suffering from hunger and thirst ran to the Prajapati and asked him as to what they should do. Prajapati instructed them to protect the water. Some of them said "We protect (rakşāmah)" while the others said "We worship (Yakṣāmaḥ)”. Thus the former were called Rakşasas and the latter as Yakşas (Rakşama iti yairuktam Rakşasāste bhavantu vaḥ/Yakşāma iti yairuktam Yakşa eva bhavantu vaḥ 7.4.13).
According to the Vişnupur āņa those creatures ran towards Brahmā to devour him. At that time some of them said "Do not do like that, he should be protected". Those who told like that were called Rakşasas (Maivam bho rakṣyatāmeşa yairuktam Rākṣasāstu te -1.5.43, See Bhagavatapurūna, 3.20.21).
The VR mentions Heti and Praheti as the first lords of the Rakşasas (7.4.14). Heti's son was Vidyutkeśa. Vidyutkeśa's son was Sukeśa who was favoured with a 'Puramākasagam' or 'Khagampuram' (7.4.32) by Siva. Sukeśa is further referred to as resembling the lustre of clouds and making noise like the thundering clouds (ghanagarbhasamaprabham and ghanaśabdasamasvanḥ 7.4.23-25).
Further it is said that Sukeśa's sons namely, Malyavat, Sumālin and Malin, on account of their penance, were favoured with Laikānagarī as their permanent abode by Viśvakarman (7.6.25). Thus we find that Heti and Praheti were the first Rakşasa lords. Heti's grandson Sukeśa was favoured with a connivance to fare in the sky and his sons occupied Larkāpuri. Laikāpuri is called Khepuri (6 38.10). It indicates that the inhabitants of Laňkāpuri were the Khecaras. Compare the adjectives of Sukeśa with the name Meghavahana or Ghanavāhana of the PCV (5.77,133).
Thus according to the PCV and the VR, they came to be known as Rakşasas on account of their duty of protection. Both the works call them Khecaras and mention Latikāpuri as their first capital. But about their ancestral history, the Jaina and the Brahminical traditions differ.
The following is the genealogical list of the Raksasa kings as found in various Jaina and Brahmanical works :

Page #244

PCS, 6
RPS, 3
PCV, 5.65-270
PCR, 5.77-404 Punpaghapa (5.65) Pürnaghana (5.77) 1. Megh avāhapa (5.137) Toyadavahana (5.87)
(Ghanavāhaņa 5.77) 2. Mahārakkhasa (5.139) Mahāraksas (5.183) 3. Devarakkhasa (5.166) Devaraksas (5.361)
Pūrņacandra Meghavāhana
Meghavāhana (5.6) Toyadavāhana (Ghana vāhana 5.8) Mahāraksas Devaraksas
Mahāraksas Devarakşas Mahāraksas Rākşasa
4. Rakkhasa (sua ?)
(5.251)
Raksasa (5.378)
Raksas
...
5. Aiccagai 6. Bhimaraha 7. Püyāraha 8. Jiyabhāņu 9. Samparikitti 10. Suggiva 11. Hariggiva 12. Sirigiva 13. Sumuha 14. Suvvanta 15. Amiyavega 16. Aiccagai
Adityagati Bhimaprabha Pūjárha Jitabhāskara Samparikirti Sugrīva Harigriva
Sūryagati Bhimaprabha Pūjārha Jitasurya
Aditya Adityaraksas Bhimaprabha Pūjarha Jitabhāskara Samparikīrti Sugriva Harigrīva Śrīgriva Sumukha Suvyakta Msgavega Bhānugati
ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VANSAS
Śrigriva
Sumukha Suvyakta Amrtavega Bhānugati
Sugriva Harigriva Śrīgrīva Sumukha Suvyakta Amstavega Bhānugati Chintāgati Indra Sūra
Indra
Indra
215

Page #245

PCV, 5. 65-270
17. Indappabha
18. Indameha
19, Mayaridamana
20. Pahia
21. Indai
22
Subhāņudhamma
23. Surări
24. Tijaḍa
25. Mahana (Mohana ?)
26. Angāraa
27.
Ravi
28.
Cakkara
29. Vajjamajjha
30. Pamoya
31.
32.
33.
34. Bhima
Sihavahana
Sūra
Cauṇḍarāvaṇa
35. Bhayavāha (Ibhavaha ?)
36. Riumahaṇa
PCR, 5.77-404
Indraprabha
Megha Mrgaridamana
Pavi
Indrajit
Bhanuvarman
Bhānu
Surări
Trijata Bhima
...
Mohana
U(ddha)dvaraka
Ravi
Cakāra
Vajramadhya Pramoda
Simhavikrama
Camunda
Māraṇa
Bhişma Dvipavāha
Arimardana
PCS. 6
Indraprabha Megha
Simhavadana
Pavi
Indraviţu
Bhānudharmā
Bhānu
Surări
Trijata
Bhima
Mahābhima
Mohana
Angāraka
Ravi
Cakrāra
Vajrodara
Pramoda
Simhavikrama
Camunda
Ghataka
Bhiṣma Dvipabahu
Arimardana
RPS. 3
Megha Simhadatta
Vajradanta
Indrajit Bhanuvarman
Bhānu
Surāri
Trijatin
Bhima
...
Mohana
Uddhāraka
Ravi
Vajramadhya
Pramoda Simhavikrama.
Camunda
Māraṇa
Bhişma Dvipavāha
Arimardana
216
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM

Page #246

PCV
PCR
PCS
RPS
37. Nivvānabhattimanta 38. Uggasiri 39. Aruhabhattimanta 40. Pavanuttargai 41. Uttama 42. Anila 43. Canda 44. Laikāsoga !
Nirvāṇabhakti Ugraśrī Arhadbhakti Anuttara Gatabhūma (bhrama) Anila Canda Lankasoka
Nirvāṇabhakti Ugrasri Arhadbhakti Anuttara Gatyuttama Anila Canda Lankāsoka
...
45. Maūh
Mayūravāk 46. Mahābāhu
Mahābāhu 47. Manorama
Manoramya 48. Ravitea
Bhāskarābha 49. Mahagai
Vịhadgati 50. Mahakantajasa Vșhatkānta 51. Arisantāsa
Arisantrāsa 52. Candavayana Candrāvarta 53. Maharava
Mahārava 54. Mehajjhāņa
Meghadhvāna 55. Gahakhobha
Grahakşobha 56. Nakkhattadamana Nakşatradamana
(Crores of kings passed) (Crores of kings passed)
Mayūra Mahabahu Manorama Bhāskara Vrhadgati Vșhatkānta Arisantrāsa Candrāvarta Mahārava Meghadhvani Grahaksobha Nakşatradamana
Nirvanabhakti Ugraśrí Arhadbhakti Anuttara Gatabhūma Anila Candra Laukasoka Soka Mayūravāk Mahābāhu Manorama Suryakanta
Vșhadrati · Vșhatkānta
Aritrāsa Candrăvarta Mahārava Meghadhvána Grahaksobha Nakşatradamana (Closed here)
ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VASAS
57. Mehappabha 58. Kittīdhavala
(Closed)
Ghanaprabha Kirtidhavala (Closed)
Taraka Meghanāda Kirtidhavala (Closed)
Meghaprabha Kirtidhavala (Closed)
217

Page #247

218
TSP, IV. p. 110f
Taditkeśa
(During the tirthakāla of Munisuvratanatha, the twentieth Tirthankara). PCV, 6-8
PCR, 6-8
PCS, 6.10-5f RPS, p. 22 f Tadikesa (6.96) Vidyutkeśa or Tadikeśa
Tadikesi
Vidyutkeśa Sukesa (6.148) Sukeśa
(Identical with the PCV) Māli Sumali Mālavanta (6.220) Rayaņāsava (7.59) (Wife-Kekasi 7.22)
Malin
Sumalin
Malin
Sumalin
Malyavat
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Rāvana (Dahamuha 7.96)
Bhanukarna
(7.97)
Candanahā (7.98)
Vihisana (7.98)
Ratnaśrava (Wife-Kaikasī)
(Wife-Mandodari) (8.94)
Ravana (Daśānana) (Wife-Mandodari)
Bhānukarņa
Candranakha
Vibhīşana
Indai (8.63)
Mehavāhana (8.64)
Indrajit
Meghavāhana

Page #248

UP 68. 7-12 and MP 70. 2-4
Vasudevahindi, I.p. 240
Vinami
Bali
Sahasragrīva Śatagrīva Pañcaśatagrīva Pulastya (wife-Meghaśrī) Rāvana
Sahasragriva Pañcaśatagrīva Śatagrīva Pañcaśagrīva Vimsatigrīva
(Wives)
•
(1) (Devavarņini=Devavannani)
(3)
(2)
(4) (Puspakūță=Pupph akūdā)
laval
(Kaikayi=Kekai)
(Vakrā=Vakkayā) Vaišravana
ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VAMSAS
Soma
Yama
Varuņa
Mahodara Mahasta
Mahāpārsva
Khara
Asválika
1
Ravana (Ramana) Kumbhakarna
Vibhīşana
Trijata
śūrpanakht
219
Trisāra
Dvisara
Vidyujjihva
Kumbhīnāsă

Page #249

Malyavat
VR, 7.4
Brahma
Living Beings (Rakṣasas) (Yakṣas)
Heti & Praheti
Vidyutkeśa
Sukeşa (Wife-Devavati)
Sumalin
Daśagrīva (Wife-Mandodari)
Kaikasi (daughter) (Married to Viśravas)
Kumbhakarna
Meghanada (Indrajit)
Malin
VR, 7.2 & 9
Prajapati (Brahmā)
Pulastya
Viśravas.
(Devavarninī)-Wives-(Kaikasī)
Śurpanakhā
Vibhīṣaṇa
220
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM

Page #250

Karmapurāņa, Pūrva 19
Višravas (Wives)
Devavarṇini
Kaikasī
Kaikasi
Puspotkața
Vaka
Vaisravana
Rāvapa
Kumbhakarņa
šarpanakha
Vibhrşana
Mahodara
Prahasta
Mahāpārsva
Khara
Kumbhinasi
ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VAMSAS
Tribiras
Dūşaņa
Vidyujjihva
MB, 3.274-275
Prajāpati
Pulastya (Wife Gau)
(becomes Viśravas)
Vaisravana
(Wives)
(1) Puspotkața
(2) Málini
(3) Raka
Rumbhakarna
Vibhrapa
Dasagertva
Daśagriva
Vibhisana
Khara
Śūrpanakha

Page #251

222
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYANI
A comparison of the PCV and the VR shows that the list of the PCV is independent of that of the VR, The PCV enumerates a large number of ancestors of Rāvana while the VR only a few. Further the names are not identical except the immediate three ancestors of Rāvana i, e. Sumalin, Sukeśa and Taạitkeśa. But these three persons belong to the maternal side in the VR. Even the name of the father of Rāvana is not common in both the works.
The PCV, PCR, PCS and the RPS have given long lists of the Rākşasa kings while the TSP has not mentioned all the kings. The Vasudevahindi and the Uttarapur āra refer a few ancestors of Rāvaņa. They are not identical with those of the PCV and thus represent a different tradition. In the UP, Pulastya who finds mention in the Brahmanical tradition, is also mentioned. The PCV, PCR and the RPS discontinue their lists at two places, first at Nakşatradamana and then at Kirtidhavala, but the PCS breaks once at Kirtid havala only.
The PCV mentions in all 63 kings from Meghavāhana to Rāvana while the PCR 66 (the three more being Indra, Bhānu and Bhima) kings. The names of 56 kings are identical in the PCR and the PCV, having here and there either equivalents or some alterations in names. The remaining seven names in the PCR are different (Nos. 20, 26, 32, 35, 40, 41 & 45) from those of the PCV.
The PCS mentions in all 69 names (the three more being Aditya, Mahabala and Táraka over those of the PCR) which are indentical with those of the PCR except No. 15. The influence of the PCV is also clear on Nos. 22 & 26. The RPS mentions in all 67 kings. MahaRakşasa, Cintāgati, Sūra and Soka of the RPS do not find mention in the PCR, while Nos, 9, 17 & 28 of the PCR are not referred to in the RPS. Only Vajradanta (20) and Candra (43) are different names from those of the PCR. Then Lauka and Soka can be counted as one person Laikāśoka (45) as found in the PCV and the PCR. Indra and Sura can also be mingled into one to have its equivalent with Indraprabha of the PCV and the PCR. Thus in all there will be 65 kings only-i. e. one less than the PCR and two more than the PCV. So to say the above mentioned Jaina works are generally in agreement.
5. Vānara Vamsa: According to the PCV, Śrīkantha, a Vidyadhara prince of Meghapura developes enmity with Puşpottara, the Vidyadhara lord of Ratnapura on account of the former's refusal to marry his sister to the latter's son. Srikantha once elopes away with Padma, the daughter of Puspottara. Then Puşpottara invades Srikantha. Srikantha flees

Page #252

ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VAMSAS
223
away and takes shelter under Kirtidhavala, the lord of Lankapuri and the husband of the sister of Śrīkantha. The intervention of Kirtidhavala and Padma's willingness to marry Śrīkantha halts Puspottara from waging a battle. Thereafter Kirtidhavala prevents Śrīkantha from going back to his original country and makes him the first lord of the Vānaradvipa, Śrīkantha enjoys there the company of monkeys infesting the Vanaradvipa (6.1-59) and establishes Kişkindhipura as his capital on the Kişkindhi hill.
The PCR (6.121,123) and the RPS (ch. 4) agree with the above account but name the hill as Kisku and the capital as Kişkupura. The RPS mentions Kirtidhavala as Kirtiśubhra. The TSP (IV. p. 109) agrees with the PCV and mentions Vanaradvipa along with Barbarkula and Simhala (IV. p. 108). The PCS follows the PCR, but mentions Śrīkantha as the lord of Ratnapura (6. 1. 3) and Puspottara as the lord of Meghapura (6. 2. 3).
According to the PCV, Amaraprabha, the ninth king in the line of Śrīkaṇṭha marries Gunamatī, the princess from Trikūta (Laikā). She gets terrified when she sees the pictures of monkeys which were drawn on the floor to grace the occasion of marriage. Amaraprabha gets angry with those drawings and gives orders to execute the artists. His ministers explain to him that the monkeys are being held in great esteem and their pictures are being regarded auspicious since the time of Śrīkantha. At this explanation Amaraprabha adopts the picture of monkey as the emblem of his state and his dynasty comes to be known as the Vanara Vamsa1 (6. 69-91).
The PCR (6. 163-218), the PCS (6-8-9) and the RPS (ch. 4) contain this episode as well. It mentions that the Vanara-dynasty was established by Śrīkaṇṭha and the Vanara emblem was also adopted by him (IV. p. 109).
The VR gives quite a different account about the origin of the Vanara Vamsa. Once Brahma while performing meditation on the Meru mountain threw down some of the drops of his tears on the ground. From those drops a monkey came into being. He was named Ṛkṣarāja and was made the first lord of monkey infesting Kişkindhapurī.
At another place (1. 17) the VR mentions that Brahma enjoined upon the Devas to begot monkeys on Apsaras; Gandharvis; the Yakşa, Pannaga, Ṛkṣa and the Vidyadhara women; Kinnarīs and Vanarīs (Putranvānararupiñaḥ 1. 17. 8). Then the Devas, Rsis, Siddhas, Vidyadharas, Uragas and the Caranas produced many monkeys to help Rama, the incarnation of Visņu. Here we find that the Vidyadharas are also associated with the procreation of monkeys.
1. Taha Vāṇarāṇa-vamso vāṇaracindhena nivvadḍio-6. 88. 2. VR, 7. 1st interpolated chapter after ch. 37.

Page #253

The following is the genealogical list of the Vánara kings as found in the Jaina works: PCV, 6 PCR, 6
PGS, 12. 5f
224
RPS, 4
Sirikantha
Srikantha
1. Sirikantha
(son of Ainda,
a Vidyadhara Lord) 2. Vajjakantha 3. Indāuhappabha 4. Indamaunandana 5. Maruyakumara 6. Mandara 7. Pavaņagai 8. Ravippabha 9. Amarappabha
(wife-Gunavati) 10. Kaiddhaa 11. Rikkharaa I 12. Aibala 13. Gayaņāņanda 14. Kheyaranarinda 15. Girinanda (and others) 16. Mahoyahirava (6.93)
Śrikantha (son of Atindra) Vajrakantha Indrayudha Indramat Meru Mandara Samirapagati Raviprabha Amaraprabha (wife-Guņavati) Kapiketu Vikramasampanna Pratibala Gaganānanda Khecaránanda Girinandana (and others) Mahodadhirava
Vajrakantha Indravajra Sakramat Meru Mandira Pavanagati Raviprabha Amaraprabha
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMCARIYAN
Amarapaha
. Kaikeyana
Kapiketu
Padivala Nayanapandayara Khayarananda
Girikimveravala (?) 15. Uvahiraa
Pratibala Vimala (And others)
Mahodadhi (It follows the PCR) (It follows the PCR;
16. Kikkindha

Page #254

PGV, 6
17. Padiinda (6.152)
18. Kikkindhi (6.154)
19. Aiccaraa Rikkharaa II (8.229)
20. Vali Suggiva
Nala Nila (9.5)
Andhaka (6.186)
(wife-Tara) (10.9)
Candarassi (47.23)
15
Angada (10.10) Jayananda
Kişkindha
Suryaraja
PCR, 6
Praticandra
Candraraśmi
Anga
Rkṣaraja
Nala Nila
Sirippabhā
Vali
Sugrīva
Śrīprabha
(Ravana's wife) (Dhruva) (wife-Tara) (Ravana's wife)
Andhraka
L
Angada
PCS, 12.56
Sūraraa
Vāli
Śaśikirana
Anga
RPS, 4
It follows the PCR.
Suggīva Siripaha
Angada
ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VAMSAS
225

Page #255

226
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
VR, 1. 17. 12 VR, 1. 17. 13.
VR, 1.17.16
VR, 7.37.1 & 1.17.10
Brahma
Viśvakarman
Pāvaka
Marut
Nala
Nila
Hanumat
Rkşarāja (monkey) (in woman form)
(Indra)
(Surya)
Vali
Sugrīva
The PCV gives quite an independent list of the kings of Vānara Varśa from that of the VR which mentions only a few ancestors of Vali and Sugriva. According to the PCV, Adityarajas and Rkşarajas are brothers and Vali and Sugrīva are said to be the sons of Adityarajas (or Süryarajas). But according to the VR, Indra (the celestial lord) and Sürya (the Sun) procreate Vali and Sugrīva respectively on Rkşarajas in the female form. Thus the account of the VR is mythological while that of the PCV is devoid of mysterious elements.
The PCV, PCR and RPS disconnect their lists before Mahodadhirava, but the PCS maintains the continuity. According to the PCV there are in all 20 kings from Śrīkantha to Väli. The PCR agrees with this number and contains identical names except Nos. 5 and 11 leaving aside little alterations in some of the names. All the names in the RPS are identical with those of the PCR except Nos. 6 and 13. It omits No. 11 and disconnects at Vimala (13). The PCS contains in all 18 kings omitting Nos. 11 & 17. It does not mention the specific names of the kings from Nos. 2 to 8. The names in it are also identical with those of the PCR. Thus on the whole the four Jaina works are generally in agreement
6. Hari Vamsa
The PCV narrates that during the congregation of Sitalanātha, the tenth Tirtharkara, Sumukha, the king of Kosambi kidnapped Vanamali, the wife of a weaver, Viraka by name (Virayakuvindo) and put her into his harem. In due course both of them, being struck with the lightning, died and were reborn in the Harivamsa country (Harivāsa). Víraka was distressed by the separation from his wife. He took to asceticism under Muni Poțțilaka (21.5). After his death he was reborn as a celestial being. By the power of his

Page #256

ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VAMSAS
clairvoyance he perceived the existence of the couple in the Harivarṣa country. He kidnapped that couple and brought it to Campanagara (The couple was made the king and the queen of that city). The new king came to be known as Hariraja, because he was born in the Harivarṣa (Harivāsasamuppaņņo) and was kindnapped from there (hariūņa āņio). Thus the Hari Vamsa originated at Campanagara after the name of Hari (21-2-7). In this line was born Janaka, the father of Sita (21. 33).
227
In the RCR (21. 2), Viraka is a merchant. The cause of their death is not mentioned while the pair was reborn in Haripura of Haritakṣetra (21. 7). Then they repaired to the 'Bhogabhumi' of the southern part of the Rukmagiri. From there they were kidnapped to name of the town is the Bharata country. The not mentioned (21.2-7).
?
Vasudevahindi agrees with the PCV and further mentions that Candrakirti, the Ikṣvāku king of Campa died heirless. In his place the kidnapped person was enthroned and named as Hari (I. p. 356). His wife is named Hāriņi. According to the Harivamśapurana of Jinasenasūri (Chs. 14 & 15), Viraka is a merchant. A maid-servant (dūtī) Ātreyi is said to have been sent by king Sumukha to seduce Vanamālā. Sumukha is reborn as a son of a Khecara in Haripura situated on the Vijayardha mountain and Vanamālā as a Khecara-daughter in Meghapura. Both of them got married. They are kidnapped to Campapura. The heirless king who died in that city is called Amṛtadidhitikirti (i.e. Candrakīrti 15. 53). The kidnapped couple After him the line who succeeded the throne there gave birth to Hari. came to be known as Hari Vamsa.
The TSP (Vol.IV.p 73) has introduced a minister, Sumati by name, who through a nun named Atreyika seduced Vanamala for Sumukha. The twins born at Harivarșa are named Hari and Hāriņī. The name of the king of Campa is Candrakīrti who belonged to the Ikṣvāku line. The celestial being (Viraka) is said to have inspired the minister to make Hari as the king of Campa. Amaracandrasuri also gives the same account1. According to the RPS (p. 70) the minister of Sumukha sent Viraka to some distant country and then procured his wife It follows the PCV when it mentions that Viraka through a dūtī. became a monk under Prosthila Muni. Further it tells us that Sumukha
1. Caturvimsati Jinendra Samkṣipta Caritani, Ch. 20. 4-28.

Page #257

228
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
was reborn as Simhaketu in the house of king Prabhasjana of Hari Vamsa and queen Mstkanda hailing from Bhogapura situated in the Haripura country of the Bhāratakşetra. Vanamala was reborn as Vidyutmala being the daughter of Vajraghosa, the king of Śrlapura and his queen Subhāmā. Both of them got married. An elephant is introduced to select Simhaketu to succeed the throne of the heirless king of Campāpuri. The new king was renamed as Mārkandeya. As his father belonged to Hari Varsa hence this line was also known as Hari Varśa. It has been stated elswhere that according to the RPS, the Hari Vamsa was already established by Rşabha and the first king of this line was Harikānta of Campāpuri (p. 4). Thus Somasena has mingled the traditions of the PCV, the AP and the TSP.
According to the Adipurāna (16. 259) and Mahapurāna (5. 22. 6) Rşabhadeva had established Hari Vamsa and made Harikānta as the king of that Vamśa.
According to the Brahmanical tradition Janaka did not belong to the Hari Vaṁsa. The Puranas tell us that Śrīkşşņa was born in the Lunar dynasty (Candra Vamsa). He was known as Hari so his lineage came to be known as Hari Vamsa, There is a Purāņa which deals with the life of Srikrspa and it is named as Harivamsa þurāņa, because Hari and Śrīkļşņa are made identical. But in the Paumacariyam, the Soma (Lunar) and the Hari Vamśas are two different dynasties (5-2) without having any relation to each other.
As regards the Vamba to which Janaka belonged, the VR states that he was born in the line of Nimi (1.71), the twelfth son of Ikşvaku (7.55.4). The Purāņas also agree with this account (Vişnupurāņa, 4. 5. 1). It is said that after the name of Janaka (son of Nimi) the line came to be known as Janaka Varša in which, after many generations, was born Janaka II, the father of Sita (Vişnupuräna, 4. 5. 32).
Thus the Jaina and the Brahmanical traditions differ as regards the name of Vamsa to which Janaka belonged and also about the origin of Hari Varsa.
The following is the genealogical list of the kings of the Hari Vamsa as found in the Jaina works:

Page #258

PCV, 21.1-33
PCR, 21
TSP, IV. p. 78
RPS, p. 71 & 81
Hari Pșthvīpati Himagiri Vasugiri Giri Mitragiri (And others)
Markandeya Mahāgiri Hemagiri Vasugiri (And others)
1. Harirāyā? 2. Mahāgiri 3. Himagiri 4. Vasugiri 5. Indagiri 6. Rayanamāli 7. Sambhūta 8. Bhuyadeva 9. Mahīdhara (and others) 10. Sumittaa 11. Munisuvvaya 12. Suvvaya 13. Dakkha 14. Ilavaddhana 15. Sirivaddhapa 16. Sirivakkha 17. Sañjayanta 18. Kupima 19. Maharaha
Hari Mahāgiri Himagiri Vasugiri Indragiri Ratnamāla Sambhūta Bhūtadeva Mahīdhara(and others) Sumitra Munisuvrata Suvrata Dakşa Ilăvardhana Śrīvardhana Śrīvřkşa Sañjayanta Kunima Mabáratha Puloman (and others)
Sumitra Munisuvrata Suvrata (and others)
Sumitra Munisuvrata Vijaya Dakşa Ilāvardhana Śrīvardhana Śrīvřkşa Sañjayanta Kunima Maharatha Puloman (and others)
ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VASAS
(and others)
1. Hari of Campanagara (21.6). 2. Sumitra of Kusāgranagara (21.11).
229

Page #259

TSP, IV. p. 78
RPS, p. 71 & 81 Vásavaketu
230
PCV, 21.1-33 20. Vasavakeu? (Indakeu)
(28.15)
(wife-Ila) 21. Janaka (wife-Vaidehi)
PCR, 21 Väsavaketu (Indraketu) (wife-Vipula) Janaka (wife-Vaidehī)
Janaka
(wife-Vipula) Janaka
Sītā Bhāmandala
Identical with the PCV The following is the list of the ancestors of Janaka as found in the Brahmanical works: VR, 1.71 Vişnupurāna, 4.5
VR, 171
Vişnuburāņa, 4.5 1. Ikşvāku (7.55.4) Ikşvāku
11. Dhstimat 2. Nimi Nimi
(Sudhști)
Sudhști 3. Mithi Janaka, or
12. Dhịştaketu
Dhsstaketu Mithi or
13. Haryaśva
Haryaśva Vaideha
14. Maru
Manu (Maru) 4. Janaka I
15. Pratīndhaka
Pratika 5. Udāvasu Udāvasu
16. Kirtiratha
Kệtaratha 6. Nandivardhana Nandivardhana
17. Devamidha
Devamīdha 7. Suketu Suketu
18. Vibudha
Vibudha 8. Devarāt Devarā;
19. Mahid hraka
Mahadhști Bịhaduktha
20. Kirtirāta
Kệtarăta (Kștivāta) 9. Bhadratha (Brhadratha)?
21. Mahāroman
Mahāroman 10. Mahāvīra Mahāvīrya
22. Svarnaroman
Suvarnaroman
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Thus their capitals shifted from
place to place.
1. Väsavaketu of Mithila (21,32). 2-3. Bhagavatapurāņa.

Page #260

ORIGIN AND GENEALOGY OF VARIOUS VAMSAS
231
Vişnupurāņa, 4.5
VR, 171 23. Hrsvaroman
Hșśvaroman
24. Janaka II
Kušadhvaja Šíradhvaja Kūšadhvają
Sita
Sitā
Sita Bhanumat The VR and the Purāņas are generally in agreement as regards the names and the number of the ancestors of Janaka. Mithi and Janaka I are two persons in the VR while in the Purānas they are one and the same person. Then Janaka II, the father of Sīta is called Sīradhvaja in the Purānas.
A comparison of the account of the origin and the genealogical list of the Brahmanical tradition with that of the PCV indicates that the PCV is giving quite an independent version. The PCV mentions that Janaka belonged to Hari Vamsa while the VR states that he is a descendant of Ikşvāku.
The line of continuity breaks at two places in the PCV while in the VR it is continuous and there is not a single name preceding Janaka (the father of Sītā) which may be common to the Jaina and the Brahmanical traditions.
As regards the genealogical lists found in other Jaina works, the PCR, except one additional name of Puloman, agrees with that of the PCV. The TSP gives very few names and the names of Pșthvīpati, Giri and Mitragiri are not found in the PCV. Pșthvīpati is mentioned in the VH (p. 307). The RPS mentions the name of the first king as Mārkandeya and then follows the PCR leaving out many successors after Vasugiri and it has different name for No. 12. It is a common feature of all the Jaina lists that they are not complete and countinuous.

Page #261

CHAPTER VI
SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE
OF PAUMACARIYAN SECTION 1. SOURCES OF PAUMACARIYAŃ
A. Critical Examination of Author's Statement
Vimalasūri, the author of Paumacariyaṁ gives three statements in connection with the sources of his work. He tells us that he is narrating the traditional Padma or Rāma-story which was narrated to Ākhandalabhūti (Indrabhūti, the first Gañadhara of Lord Mahāvīra) by Lord Mahāvīra. From Indrabhūti it passed on to the posterity through his successive disciples (PCV, 1.90; 118.102). The Jaina tradition holds that the discourses and preachings of Lord Mahavira have been preserved in the Jaina Āgama (canonical) literature so we shall try to trace out the sources of the Rāma-story of Vimala in it.
He further states that his work is based on the biographies (Caritas) of Nārāyanas and Baladevas (Sirin) preserved in the Pürvagata (Puvvagae nārāyaṇasīricariyāim 118.118). Pūrvagata formed the third section of Dưstivāda, the 12th Ariga of the Jaina Āgama but it is nowhere mentioned in the Jaina scriptures that Pūrvagata which consisted of 14 Pürvas, contained any narrative material. The Nandisūtra (56) tells us that the fourth section of Drşțivāda, called Anuyoga, contained biographies of Tirtharkaras, Cakravartins, Baladevas, Vasudevas and other religious personages. Shri H. R. Kapadia (See HCLJ, p. 11) while discussing the order of the composition of 12 Angas and various sections of the Drstivāda surmises that the 14 Pārvas should also mean Drștivāda as a whole, in a broader sense. Prot. J. Charpentier (Uttarā, Int. p. 22) also holds that the Drștivāda or the Purvas is much the same thing. In that light Vimalasūri's reference to the Pūrvagata should mean the Drstivāda as a whole and the Dțstivāda, says Dr. A. N. Upadhye, contained some Kathānakas as it appears from certain references in the Niryuktis (See BỊhatkathākośa, Int. p. 31).
We should have sought for the source of Paumacariyaṁ in the relevant sections of Drștivāda, but the Jaina tradition (See HCLJ, Ch.4) holds that it was lost long ago and our author also emphasises this point (Evam paramparāe parihāņi puvvaganthaatthānam 1.11).

Page #262

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
233
J. Charpentier also upholds the Jaina tradition and concludes that the Pârvas gradually went into oblivion (See Uttară, Int. p. 24). There are references to Sīta and Tara in the tenth Anga, namely, Prašnavyākaraņasūtra (No. 16). Here we can seek for the source of the Jaina Rama-story but the above Anga is regarded as a later work because its contents do not correspond to the table of contents given in the Sthànānga and the Nandisūtra (See HIL, II. p. 452).
Vimalasūri once again states that he is narrating the story of Padma that has come down traditionally in the form of 'series of names' (nāmāvaliyanibaddhaṁ āyariyaparamparāgayaṁ 1.8). Such series of names are given in the Samavāyāngasūtra (157-158) and the Tiloyapannatti (4.421 ff). The points, bearing on the Padma-story, mentioned in the Samavāyāngasūtra (158) are as follows:
Padma and Nārāyana (Lakşmaņa) were the sons of Dasaratha born of Aparājitā and Kaikeyi respectively. They were the eighth Baladeva and Vasudeva respectively. Nārāyaṇa killed Rāvana, the eighth Prativāsudeva. Padma attained Moksa. Padma was Aparājita and Nārāyana was Punarvasu in their previous birth. At that time their preceptor was Samudra. Punarvasu observed someone's prowess and made a resolution 'nidana' at Mithiläpuri. Vimalasūri's Padma-story agrees with the above points except the following: The birth name of Laksmana's mother is Kaikeyi (different from Bharata's mother) but her popular name is Sumitrā Padma is nowhere mentioned as Aparajita in his previous births and there is no reference to Samudra as his or Punarvasu's preceptor. Punarvasu belonged to Pratişthanapura and he had resolved (made a 'nidāna') to marry a certain girl in his next birth (See Supra, Ch. 4, story Nos. 43 and 54)..
The Tiloyapar.natti (4.1411-14-38) names the eighth Baladeva as Rāma and the ninth one as Padma (i.e. the brother of Krşpa). Rāma and Lakşmaņa are said to have lived 17000 and 12000 years respectively (See PCV, 118.86; 114.27, 29). The former attained Mokşa and Ravana went to hell. The PCV agrees with the above points except that of the name of the eighth Baladeva.
Then in the Sthānăngasūtra (672) there is a list of the names of the fathers of the Baladevas and Vasudevas. There Daśaratha is mentioned as the father of eighth Baladeva and Vasudeva.
Thus we find that the facts noted in the Samavāyānga, the Sthānanga and the Tiloyapannatti are generally in agreement as far as they go in our work. Whatever variations are found, they can be explained as due to oral tradition which should have differed in its details with

Page #263

234
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
various preceptors. This fact is widely observed in the Caritas of illustrious persons of the Jaina faith, composed by various Jaina authors. The 'nāmāvalis' were the memory verses which served as an aid to teachers in their expounding the narratives handed over to the successive pupils by the oral tradition.
So far as the present evidences go Vimalasuri seems to have composed his epic on the basis of 'nāmāvalis' and the details he traditionally inherited from his preceptor.
B. Influenc of VR and PCV's Counter Influence on the VR.
1. Vimalasuri's Acquaintance with the VR:
Vimalasuri emphasises the point how he was inspired to compose Paumacariyam. His inspiration is expressed through king Śrenika. He entertains some doubts in the story popular in the 'loyasattha' i. e. lokasastra (PCV, 2.105-107). He feels that the popular Ramayana which contains many inconsistencies is composed by liars (PCV, 2.116-117). He approaches Gautama, the first Gapadhara of lord Mahāvīra and requests him to narrate the true story of Padma (PCV, 3.3). The unbelievable elements incorporated in the popular Ramayana are mentioned by the author. Thoy are (PCV, 2.105-117; 3.8-13) as follows:
A. Rama killed a golden deer. B. Rāma stealthily assassinated Vali for the cause of Sugrīva and Sutārā. C The Vanaras were monkeys. D. The monkeys built a bridge. E. The monkeys fought and killed the Rākṣasa warriors though the latter were far superior in valour. F. The celestial Indra was imprisoned and was taken over to Lanka. G. The Rakṣasas used to take flesh and wine. H. Kumbhakarna, brother of Ravana slumbered continuously for six months. He never woke before that period, even if, elephants trampled over his body or ears were filled with (boiling) oil measuring many pots or drums were beaten sounding very loudly. On being tormented by severe hunger, he used to swallow elephants, buffaloes, human beings and the Suras (Devas).
The earliest work which contains all these inconsistencies as alleged by our author, is the Valmiki Ramayana. The following portions of the VR contain the respective inconsistencies:
(A) 3.42-44 (B) 4.8-26 (C) 5.10.54; 5.33; 6.4.63-67 (D) 6.23. (E) 6.40, 43-44, 52-56, 59, 69-70, 77, 82, 93, 96-99 (F) 7.29

Page #264

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
235
30 (G) 2.116.11-12; 3.2.13-14; 3.19.19-20; 3.38.3; 5.22.9; 7.10.37 (H) 6.60.31-63; 6.61.27. Only the point No. B is at some variance. According to the VR Rāma killed Vali for restoring Sugrīva to his original political status and for recovering his wife Rumā who had been kidnapped by Vali. Afterwards Vali's wife, Tārā accepted Sugrīva as her husband. So to say, Rāma killed Vali for the cause of Sugrīva, not for that the of Tārā. Still the presence of the above mentioned topics in the VR proves that Vimalasūri was well-acquainted with the story of VR. 2. Elements of Agreement Between Valmiki Rāmāyaṇa and
Paumacariyam:
A comparative study of the PCV and the VR reveals that in its outline the Rāma-story is similar in both the works, but in details there are many differences.
The following elements of the PCV, which form the outline of the Rāma-story are in agreement with those of the VR:
Dasaratha, king of Ayodhyā had of his three queens-Aparājitā (Kausalyā), Sumitra and Kaikeyi-four sons, namely Rāma (Padma), Lakşmaņa, Bharata and Satrughna. Ráma married Sita in a 'svayamvara'. Kaikeyi on the strength of a boon installed her son Bharata on the throne of Ayodhyā as a consequence of that Rāma along with Sīta and Lakşmaņa went into exile. Bharata tried in vain to persuade Rāma to return and accept the crown of Ayodhyā. Rāma in his exile sojourned in the Dandaka forest. There the sister of Rāvana approached him with a proposal of marriage. but he rejected her offer. Then she manoeuvred to excite Rāvana to take revenge upon Rāma. Rāvana, on getting enamoured of the beauty of Sită, kidnapped her by fraud and kept her at Laikā. Vibhișana attempted in vain to get Sitā released from Rāvaņa. Rāma helped Sugrīva in recovering his wife and won him as his ally. At the instance of Sugriva, Hanumān went to Larkā and brought the news of Sita and her braid-jewel. Rāma with the help of Sugrīva and the latter's army invaded Laika. In the battle Lakşmana got wounded by the Sakti hurled by Rāvana, but he duly got cured Ultimately Rāvana was
killed in the battle. Räma, Sītā and Lakşmana returned home. On , account of public scandal Rama exiled Sitā. She gave birth to
Lava(pa) and (Au)kuša. Finally she proved her purity by undergoing an ordeal. 3. Point of Difference:
As regards the details of the Rāma-story there are numerous differences between the PCV and the VR. They have been dealt

Page #265

236
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
with systematically in the preceding chapters. Here we shall summarise them for the sake of clarity. All these differences can be arranged under four categories as follows:
(a) Points of alteration : 1. PCV_Nárada hears the prophecy made by Sagaravidhi and learns about the plot of Vibhīşana to assassinate Daśaratha for saving Rāvana who is destined to be killed at the hands of the would-be son of Dasaratha. He goes to Daśaratha and alerts him for safety. VR-Anaraṇya cursed Rāvana that he would be killed by Rama (7. 19. 30). 2. PCV-Jațāyu (a bird) is entrusted to Sītā by certain monks, for protection. VR-Jațāyu offers to help Rāma. 3. PCVSambūka, the son of Candranakhā is killed by Laksamana. VRŚambūka is a Sūdra. He is killed by Rāma because a Sūdra was not entitled to observe penances. 4. PGV-Kharadūṣaṇa is the husband of Candranakhā, the sister of Rāvana VR-Khara is brother of Surpanakha and Düşana is the chief of the army of Khara (3. 22. 7). At 3. 17. 22 both are mentioned as her brothers. 5. PCV–Virādhita, a Vidyadhara prince of Iātālaikārapura assissted Lakşmaņa in killing Kharadūşaņa and took Rāma and Lakşmaņa to a safe place. VRVirādha, a Rākṣasa who had snatched away Sītā, was killed by Rāma and Lakşmaņa. 6. PCV-Ratnajațin of Kambudvipa obstructed Ravana from kidnapping Sitā, but he was overpowered by Rāvaņa. VR-Supārsva obstructed Rāvana, but ultimately he gave the way. 7. PCV-Angada is the son of Tarā by Sugriva. VR-Angada is the son of Tarā by Vāli. 8. PCV-Sugrīva was at hostility with sham Sugriva for his wife Tarā. He was turned out of his city by his ministers (Vali had voluntarily renounced the world in favour of his brother, Sugrīva). VR-Vāli is at hostility with Asura Māyāvin for a certain woman. Vāli kidnaps Sugrīva's wife and turns him out of his city. 9. PCV-Sugriva is in search of Rāma for seeking his help. VR-Rāma is in search of Sugrīva. 10. PCV-Ratnajațin of Kambudvipa informs Sugrīva that Ravana has kidnapped Sita, VRKabandha, a Raksasa is killed by Rāma. He also advised Rāma to go to Sugriva for the recovery of Sita. Sampāti informed Hanuman of the kidnapper of Sītā. 11. PCV-Laksmana's test is taken for his fitness in killing Rāvana. VR-Rama's test is taken for his fitness in killing Vali. 12. PCV-Hanumān is sent as an envoy to reconcile with Rāvaņa. VRHanuman is sent to discover Sītā, Argada is sent to give a final warning to Rāvana. 13. PGV-Hanumān meets king Gandharva of Dadhimukha island and sends him along with his daughters to Rāma. VR—Dadhi. mukha, maternal uncle of Sugrīva and a gardner of Madhuvana fights

Page #266

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
237
with Hanumān and reports the mischief of Hanumān to Sugrīva. 14. PCV-Mandodarī requests Rāvaņa to use force on Sītā. VR-Mahāpārsva requests Rāvana to use force. 15. PCV -Hanu intervenes when Mandodarī tries to beat Sītā. VR-Dhānyamalini (at another place Mandodarī ) intervenes when Răvaņa tries to beat Sītā. 16. PCV-Celestial Garudādhipati helps Bhāmandala and Sugrīva in getting released from the snake-nooses in the battlefield. VRGaruda or Suparņa releases Rama and Lakşmaņa from the snakenooses. 17. PCV-Kumbhakarna captures Hanumān in the battle. VR-Kumbhakarņa captures Sugrīva. 18. PCV-Arigada helps Hanumān in getting released from Kumbhakarna. VR-Hanumān thinks of helping Sugrīva to get him released from the captivity of Kumbhakarņa. 19. PCV-Rāvaņa acquires Bahurūpāvidyā for becoming unconquerable. VR-Indrajit performs a sacrifice for becoming unconquerable. 20. PCV-Narada delivers the message of Aparăjita's agony and requests Rāma to return to Ayodhyā. VRDaśaratha's spirit and God Mahendra advise Rāma to return to Ayodhyā to assuage the agony of his mothers. 21. PCV-King Vajrajaligha gives shelter to abandoned Sita. VR-Muni Valmiki gives shelter to her. 22. PCV Satrughna kills Lavana, defeats Madhu and usurps his kingdom of Mathurā. VR-Satrughna kills Lavana to make the hermits immune from his atrocities. 23. PCV-Fire-ordeal of Sīta takes place after her banishment. VR-It takes place at Lanka immediately after the death of Rāvana.
The points given below are from the side stories forming an essential part of the Rāma-story.
Rāvana-Carita and Hanumat's Story:-1. PCV_The seniority of the sons of Rākşasa Sukeśa of Laikā is Malin, Sumalin, and Malyavanta. VR-The seniority is Mālyavanta, Sumalin and Malin. 2. PCV_Sundari is the wife of Sumálin. VR-She is the wife of Malyavanta. 3. PCV-Rāvana is the grandson of Sumalin. VR-He is the son of a daughter of Sumālin. 4. PCVRavana observes the splendour of Vaisravana and on being informed of the ancient glory of his own family by Kekasi, he undertakes to acquire Vidyās. VR-Kekasi observes splendour and advises Rāvana to acquire Vidyās. 5. PCV - Candranakha is abducted by Kharadūşana. Rāvana is prevented by Mandodarī from killing Kharadūşaņa. Rāvana's daughter, Manorama is married to Madhu of Mathura. VR-Kumbhīnasī, the cousin sister of Rāvana is abducted by Raksasa Madhu of Madhupura. Rāvana is prevented by Kumbhinasi from killing Madhu, Sarpanakhā is married to

Page #267

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Danavendra Vidyujjihva. 6. PCV-Vidyadhara king Indra is captured by Ravana and is set free at the request of the former's father, a monk. VR-God Indra is captured by Meghanada and is set free at the request of Prajapati. 7. PCV-Rāvaņa obtained Amoghavijayā Śakti from Dharanendra on the Kailasa mountain and he acquired Candrahasa sword prior to his marriage with Mandodari, the daughter of Maya. VR-Amoghavijaya Sakti was presented to Ravana by the father of Mandodari while Candrahasa sword by God Sankara on the Kailasa mountain. 8. PCV--Hanu in his babyhood falls down on a rock. It crumbles to pieces so he is named Śrīśaila He is named Hanu for he was brought up at Hanuruhapura. VR-When he falls down on a rock, his jaw gets broken so he is named Hanu
238
(b) Deviating Points:
1. One boon is granted to Kaikeyi (VR-Two boons). 2. Satrughna is the son of Kaikeyī (VR of Sumitra). 3. Rama's preceptor is Airakucchi (VR-Vasiṣṭha, Viśvāmitra and Sudhanvā). 4. Janaka's brother is Kanaka (VR-Kuśadhvaja). 5 Sītā is born of the womb of the wife of Janaka (VR-divine birth from land). 6. Narada's manipulation causes Vidyadhara Candragati to compel Janaka to put the bow as the test for Sita's 'svayamvara' (VR— divine origin of the bow and Janaka puts it voluntarily). 7. In the PCV Lakṣmaṇa and Satrughna do not marry any girl belonging to the great family of Janaka, 8. Bharata is at Ayodhya when Dasaratha proposes to crown Rama (VR-He is not there). 9. Kaikeyi's demand for crowning Bharata is backed by a mother's love to detain her son with her and to escape separation from her husband and son (VR-by jealousy and selfishness). 10. During his exile-journey Rama ameliorates the sufferings of various kings, devotees of Jainism (VR-The sole purpose is to annihilate the Rākṣasas who destory the Yajñas of munis). 11. Jatayu is a bird (VR-It talks like a human being). 12. Väli renounces the world (VR-Vali is at quarrel with Sugrīva). 13. Hanu is the son-in-law of Sugrīva as well as of Ravana's sister (VR-Hanu is the minister of
Sugrīva. He is in no way related to Ravana's family). 14.
Lankasundari is the daughter of the Rakṣasa-guard of the fort of Lanka (VR-She is the deity of the city itself). 15. Samudra is a king (VR-the sea itself in the form of a deity). 16. Visalya is a lady surgeon, sister of Dronamegha (VR-It is a medicinal herb growing on the Dropa mountain whose peak is brought by Hanuman). 17. Rākṣasas such as Kumbhakarna, Indrajit etc. renounce the world

Page #268

ROURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV. 239 (VR-All are killed). 18. Rāma, Laksmana, Sugriva, Hanuman etc. accept Jina-dikşā VR-All enter divinity). 19. The Raksasas and the Vănaras are some human races (VR-They are semi-divine beings, the former as demons and the latter as monkeys).
Rāvana-carita and Hanumat's story:-1. PCV—The story of Indra, his Lokapālas, killing of Mali by Indra, fleeing of Malyavanta to Pātālaikārapura etc. are realistic. (VR-All mythological). 2. PCV-Hemavati, wife of Maya is a Vidyādhari. (VR-Hemā is a nymph). 3. PCV-Kumbhakarņa is religious. (VRKumbhakarna is of diabolic character). 4. PCV-Monk Vāli humiliates Rāvana on the Kailāśa. (VR-Sankara, the God humiliates Rāvana). 5. PCV-Animal sacrifice of Marutta is stopped by Rāvana, (VR-It is left undisturbed by Rāvaņa). 6. PCV— King of Māheśvara is captured by Ravana. (VR-Māheśvara king captures Rāvana). 7. PCV-Uprambha's love proposal is rejected by Rāvana (VRRāvaņa rapes Rambhā, a nymph). 8. PCV-Rāvana takes a vow not to have sexual relations with any unwilling woman. (VRNalakūbara curses Rāvana for the same). 9. PCV-Añjanā is a Vidyadhari. (VR-Añjana is a nymph) 10. PC"-Vali, Sugriva and Hanu's birth is natural and quite human. (VR states their divine origin).
(c)
Elements Absent :
The following points of the Ráma-story of the VR are not found in the PCV.
1. Aśvamedha and Putresti Yajña of Daśaratha. 2. Rāma as incarnation of Vişņu to bring about an end of the Rākşasas. Rāma's brothers as the (Ambas) parts of Vişnu. 3. Protection of the Yajña of Viśvāmitra and many Puranic intervening stories of the Ist and the 7th Kānda. 4. Deva-Asura battle and Dasaratha's association with it. 5. Giving of sandals to Bharata by Rāma. 6. Atrocities of Rakşasas to disturb the Rșis performing austerities. 7. Disfiguring of Sūrpanakhā 8. Golden deer. 9. Magnifying of his body by Hanu, his jumping across the sea, his conversation with Maināka mountain and his entering into the mouth of Surasa Raksasi. 10. Hanu's assuming the form like a cat while entering Laikā. 11. Igniting the tail of Hanu and setting fire on Lankā. 12. Construction of a bridge across the sea (by the monkeys). 13. Conjuring up of an illusory severed head of Rāma and the bow of Rāma. 14. Killing of illusory Sītā. 15. Bringing of the mountain by Hanu. 16. Bringing

Page #269

240
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN all the dead monkeys to life by God Mahendra. 17. Rāma's horsesacrifice. 18. Splitting up of the earth and Sita's entry into it. 19. Granting of the boon of immortality by Brahmă to Rāvana. 20. Deluding of the mind of Kumbhakarņa by Sarasvati and fotmer's demand from Brahmā of a boon for sleeping in slumber.
(d) New elements: 1. "Svayamvara' of Kaikeyi and driving the war chariot of Drśaratha by her. 2. Bhamandala as brother of Sītā his abduction by a Vidyadhara. 3. Sita's betrothal with Rāma for the latter's valour in defeating the Anāryas. 4. Sītā's 'svayamvara' in the presence of various candidates. 5. Another 'svayamvara' for Bharata. 6. Rāma's voluntary exile. 7. Kaikeyi's attempt to call back Rāma from exile. 8. Rāma and Laksmana's marriages with various girls. 9. Conjuring up of divine colony called Ramapuri by a Yakşa. 10. Ativirya's hostility with Bharata and the defeat of the former at the hands of Rāma. 11. Rāvana's request to Māndodarī to persuade Sītā to accept him as her husband. 12. Episode of sham Sugrīva. 13. Overpowering of Mahendrarāja by Hanu. 14. Rāma's messages to Bhamandala for securing his assistance and the latter's help to Rāma in fighting against Rāvana 15. Rāvana's proposal for peace treaty with Rāma. 16. Rāvana's intention of returning Sitā after defeating Rāma. 17. Vibhīşana's attempt to commit suicide at the time of the death of Rāvaņa. 18. Numerous wives of Rama and Lakşmaņa. 19. Renouncement of the world by Bharata and Kaikeyi. 20. Many sons of Rāma and Lakşmaņa. 21. Marriage of Sīta's sons, their 'digvijaya' and battle with Rāma and Lakşmaņa. 22. Some additional details about the ancestral history of the Rakşasas and the Vanaras. 23. Hanu's several marriages and his progeny.
The above analysis reveals that the Ráma-story of the PCV, in its outline, agrees with that of the VR, but in details there are generally many differences.
4. Obvious influence of Vālmiki Rāmāyaṇa on Paumacariyam:
Despite these differences with the VR, we have certain evidences to prove that Vimalasūri was well-acquainted not only with the story of the VR but even with the text of the VR. This conclusion is based upon certain elements of the PCV, which reveal a strong influence of the VR on them in the form of adopting very popular proper names, of having basic similarities in some points, of creeping in of some elements sub-consciously, of having striking resemblances in the

Page #270

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCY. 241 planning of some episodes and of having used words and phrases on identical situations. (i) Some proper names which were very popular in the VR could not be foresaken by Vimalasuri though they sound peculiar in tne PCV.
Aparajita's son is named Padma but he is addressed as Rāma also and that too for many times more than Padma. Further he is called Raghava, Raghunatha, Raghuttama and Raghupati, though for a very few times.
Anarigalavaņa and Madanārkusa are the birth-names of the sons of Rama, but these names occur four and five times respectively, whereas Lavana and Aukusa for 37 and 49 times and Kuša for 21 and 6 times respectively.
Bhānukarna is often called Kumbhakarna.
Hanu and Śrībaila are the two names of Hanuman but he is often called Māruti, Pavanaputra, Pavanasuta, Pavanatanaya, Vāyukumāra, Marutsuta and Marutnandana. He is called Plavaga and Kapi also. His speed is compared with a fiery gale (candanilasarisajavo 52.28).
Hanu's father Pavanañjaya is called Pavanagati, Pavanavega and Pavana also. The name Añjanāsundarī occurs thrice only whereas Añjanā for many times.
Sugrīva is called Kapivșşabha also though once only (48.33). Sutāra, wife of Sugrīva is addressed as Tārā also.
Vidyadhara Maya, the father-in-law of Rāvana, is twice addressed as Maya-Danava (75.7; 77.66).
Rāvana is a Vidyadhara Raksasa but at 69.10 he is called Danujendra (Daņuinda).
The Rakşasas are sometimes called as. Nisācaras and Rajanicaras. . .
Indra is a Vidyādhara king, but he is often called as Surapati, Surădhipa, Surendra, Suranātha and Sakra and his army as Surasainya and Surānīka (Chs. 12-13).
Sahasagati who claims Tārā is a Vidyadhara, but he is called Duttha-māyāvi-dāņava also (10.3; 46.13). (In the VR a certain Māyaví Dānava had enmity with Vāli for a certain woman).
(ii) Certain points of some episodes have basic similarity in both the works:
The way Kaikasī became the wife of the father of Rāvana.
16

Page #271

242
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
The prophecy about the nature and the traits of Ravana and his brothers.
Encouragement to Ravana by Sumalin to from Vaisravana.
reoccupy Lanka
The killing of Sumalin in the battle between Rāvana and Indra. The particular number 14000 of the soldiers of Khara.
Exposing of the Vanara prisoners to hellish tortures by Vidya. dhara Lokapala Yama and the description of the Vaitaraṇī river (8.232-233) (VR-Description of the punishments inflicted upon the denizens of hell by Yama, Lord of Death and the description of the Vaitaraņi river). The occasion in both the works is of Ravana's
attack on Lord Yama.
The lord of the Yaksas offered Rama and Sītā some presents on the occasion of latter's departure from Rāmapuri (VRAnusuya's presents to Sita while her departure from the Asrama).
Hanu offered to take Sītā along with him while departing from Lanka.
Lakṣmaṇa was hit with the Sakti while intervening in the battle to save Vibhīṣaṇa from Rāvaņa.
The reappearance of the severed head and arms of Ravana in the battlefield,
Sending of some messengers to Ayodha in advance of Rama's return from Lanka (VR-Sending of Hanuman).
Pointing out of various places of their sojourn to Sita by Rama while returning to Ayodhya.
Resemblance in the names of some persons who informed Rāma of the public scandal of Sītā.
The pretext on which Sītā is abandoned in the jungle.
Raising of Sita on a divine throne on the occasion of her ordeal at Ayodhya.
(iii) Some elements are peculiarly similar in both the works though minor in importance:
Vali is said to be circumambulating the whole Jambudvipa, encircled by the ocean (causägaraperantaṁ Jambuddivam) and to be returning to Kişkindhipura after paying his homage to the Jina shrines (9. 3), (In the VR Vali is mentioned to be going to all the four oceans (caturbhyo api samudrebhyah) for performing 'Sandhya'worship (7. 34. 6).

Page #272

243
SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
(iv) Some elements of VR are presented in the PCV in a different garb:
Kumbhakarna is said to have acquired the Nidrāṇīvidya (VR— He is cursed to slumber).
loud cry
Daśānana was named Ravana because he made a (ravokao) on the Kailaśa mountain (VR-because he made the three worlds to weep).
Hanuman, on his way to Lanka, fetches the waters from the sea for extinguishing the conflagration to save some monks (60. 6). (In the VR Hanuman takes a jump across the sea).
(v) Some elements of VR have crept into the PCV sub-consciously though contradictory in the latter work: -
Ravana is depicted as a noble character but at the time of his birth he is prophesied to be a 'varakurakammakārī' (VR-He is depicted as he was prophesied to be a 'krürakarmaṇaḥ).
(vi) At some places Vimalasuri's sub-conscious memory of VR has left its impression on the PCV:
Rama does not entertain any doubt in the character of Sita while reuniting with her at Lanka, but still the celestial beings are mentioned to be declaring that Sītā is pure (Sahu tti sahu deva bhaṇanti Siyǎe nimmalam silam 76.17-18). (In the VR Rama entertains doubt. Devas eulogise Rama (6.117) and the deity of fire declares Sīta pure and beyond reproach (6.118).
(vii) It is highly striking that both the works contain the same details bearing not only upon the theme, but even upon the descriptions falling between Rama's entry into the Daṇḍakaranya and the Candranakha-episode in the PCV and Rama's arrival at Pañcavați and the Surpanakha-incidence in the VR. The PCV devotes three cantos 41-43 while the VR four cantos 3.15-18. descriptions are present in both the works, difference in their order.
All the events and only with a small
According to the PCV Rama, Lakṣmaṇa and Sītā enter the Dandakaranya. They take bath in the Karņarava river. Lakṣmana prepares various household articles with the bamboo plants (41.4). Then after meeting Jatayu, they proceed further into the interior of the forest. It follows a description of the flora and fauna. Then comes the watersports of Rama and Sītā in the Kroñcarava river, which follows a description of the rainy-season. They narrate various stories among themselves. Then the winter-season is described (43.1-4). Then follows the incidents of Śambuka and Candranakhā.

Page #273

244
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
According to the VR Rāma, Laksmana and Sita reach the Pañcavatī (3.15.1 ). Then the vegetation of the forest is described (3.15.16-18). Lakşmana erects a cottage (parpaśala) with the leaves, bamboos and the mud (3.15.21). The winter passes away. Hemanta befalls. It is described (3.16). They proceed to the Godāvarī and take bath in it ( 3.16.41 ). Various stories are then narrated among themselves (3.17.4). Then follows the incident of Surpanakha
There is some similarity in the description of the forest at 42.6-13 in the PCV and at 3.15.16-18 in the VR.
(viii) There are striking resemblances in essence, words and phrases at some places on certain similar occasions. They can be mentioned as follows:
Rama's lamentation during his frantic search for Sită in the Dandakaranya1. Ravņa's imploration to Sita while carrying her to Lañkā in his Puspakavimāna (in the PCV at 46.3,10 ) and his request to Sītā at Laikā (in the VR at 3.55.35,362 ) .
( १ ) एहेहि इम्रो सुन्दरि, वाया मे देहि मा चिरावेहि ।
दिट्ठा सि रूक्खगहरणे, किं परिहासं चिरं कुरणसि ।। पउम० ४४ । ५३ ।। भो भो मतमहागय, एत्थारणे तुमे भमन्तेणं ।
महिला सोमसहावा, जइ दिट्ठा किं न साहेहि ॥ उम० ४४ । ५७ ।। तरुवर तुमपि वच्चसि दूरुन्नयवियडपत्तलच्छाय ।
एत्थं प्रवलिया, कह ते नो लक्खिया रणे ।। उम० ४४ । ५८ || दिट्ठा दिट्ठा सि मए, एहेहि इम्रो इम्रो कउल्लावो ।
घाव तो तो च्चिय पडिसद्दय मोहित्रो रामो || पउम० ४४।६४ || गज सा गजनासोरूर्यदि दृष्टा त्वया भवेत् ।
तां मन्ये विदितां तुभ्यमाख्याहि वरवरण | बा० रा० ३।६०।२४।। किं धावसि प्रिये नूनं दृष्टासि कमलेक्षणे ।
वृक्षैराच्छाद्य चात्मानं किं मां न प्रतिभाषसे ।। बा० रा० ३ | ६०|२६|| तिष्ठ तिष्ठ वरारोहे न तेऽस्ति करूणा मयि ।
नात्यर्थं हास्यशीलासि किमर्थं मामुपेक्षसे ॥ बा० रा० ३।६०|२७|| (२) जइ दिट्ठिपसायं मे न कुणसि वरकमलपतदलनयणे । तो पण सुत्तिमंग, इमेण चलणारविन्तैणं । पउम० ४६ | ३ || ताहे लंकाहिवई निययसिरे विरइऊरण करकमलं ।
पासु ती पडि, तणमिव गरिणश्रो विदेहाए || उम० ४६ । १० ।। आर्षोऽयं देवि निष्यन्दो यस्त्वामभिभविष्यति ।
एतौ पादौ मया स्निग्धौ शिरोभिः परिपीडितौ ॥
प्रसादं कुरु मं क्षिप्रं वश्यो दासोऽहमस्मिने ।
इमा: शून्यमया वाचः शुष्यमाणेन भाषिताः || बा० रा० ३।५५। ३५।३६ ।।

Page #274

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
245
The columns of the army of Malin, Sumalin and Malyavanta when they attack Indra (PCV, 7.14) and in the VR (7.6.49) when they attack the Devas and their protector Vişnu.
The phenomenal occurrences depicting the defeat of Malin, Sumalin, etc. in the PCV at 7.16-17 and VR at 7.6.53,55,57,58..
Sita's retort to Rāma on the occasion of her fire-ordeal'. Rāma's cosolation to Vibhișaņa after the death of Rāvana.
Benedictory verses at 118.93-96 in the PCV and at 6.128.100.107, 111. 114 & 121 in the VR.
As far as the above discussion goes we can say that the VR has exercised considerable influence upon the PCV.
5. Particular Version of Vālmiki Rāmāyaṇa that Influenced
Paumacariyam & Counter Influence of Paumacariyam :
It is held by the scholars that the Valmiki Rāmāyana has its two recensions-Southern and Northern. Further it is held that the Northern recension has two versions; the North-Western and the Gaudiya or the North-Eastern. Dr. Bulcke (see VRTP) has systematically arranged the contents of the three different versions of the VR,
। ३ ) गयतुरयवसभकेसरि-मयमहिसवराहवाहणारूढा।
वच्चन्ति रक्खसमडा, छायन्ता अम्बरं तुरिया ॥ पउम० ७१४ ॥ सिंहैघ्रि राहैश्च सृमरैश्चमरैरपि।
त्यक्त्वा लंको गताः सर्वे राक्षसा बलगविताः ॥ खरैर्गोभिरथोष्ट्रश्च शिशुमार जंगमैः ।
मकरैः कच्छपैर्मीनेविहंगैर्गरुडोषमैः ।। बा०रा० ७।६।४६-४८ ॥ (४) सीया पई पवुत्ता, तुह सरिसो नत्थि निठुरो अन्नो।
पाययपुरिसो व्व जहा, ववससि पइ दारुणं कम्मं ॥ डोहलछम्भेण अहं, जंसि तुमे छड्डिया महारण्णे ।
तं राहव अणुसरिसं, किं ते अइनिठुरं कम्मं । पउम० १०१।३१-३२।। कि मामसदृशं वाक्यमीदृशं श्रोत्रदारुणम् ।
रूक्षं श्रावयसे वीर प्राकृतः प्राकृतामिव ।। बा०रा० ६।११६॥५॥ त्वया तु नृपशार्दूल रोषमेवानुवर्तता।
लघुनेव मनुष्येण स्त्रीत्वमेव पुरस्कृतम् ॥ बा०रा० ६।११६।१४ ॥ ( ५ ) अह भणइ पउमनाहो, मरणन्ताई हवन्ति वेराणि ।
लंकाहिवस्स एतो, कुणह लहं पेयकरणिज्ज ।। पउम० ७॥१॥ मरणान्तानि वैराणि निवृतं नः प्रयोजनम् ।
क्रियतामस्य संस्कारो ममाप्येष यथा तव ।। बा०रा०६।१०९।२५॥

Page #275

246
À CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
which are held to have originated at different dates. Our Paumacariyam contains some such points which have their counterparts with slight variations either in the one or two versions of VR exclusively. A critical examination of those points reveals that Vimalasūri was influenced most probably by the (Northern-Udicya) recension of VR and in some cases the PCV seems to have counterinfluenced some versions of VR.
(a) Portions found exclusively in the Northern recension i. e. the Udicyapātha or tha common recension of the N-W. and the Gaudiya till they were not separated into two different versions :
(i) The order of certain episodes in the Rāvana-Carita in both the works is similar as follows :-PCV-Raising of Kailasa mountain by Rāvana, his discomfiture at the hands of Muni Vāli, the episode of Rāvana's hostility with the king of Māheśvara, the destruction of the sacrifice of king Marutta, then many other episodes.
Udicya VR :-Raising of Kailasa, Rāvana's encounter with the king of Māheśvara and Vāli, Rāvana's challenge to Marutta and then many other episodes. (But in the Southern version, Rāvana's encouter with the king of Maheśvara and Vali are narrated in the last. (VRTP, 150).
(ii) PCV-Preceding the exile of Vibhiệaņa from Laikā, Rāvana in fury tries to have a duel with him (55.20). Udicya VR-Rāvana in fury kicks Vibhīşaņa (Gaudīya, 6.87, N-W, 6,90=VRTP, 123.)
(iii) PCV :-After the killing of Hasta and Prahasta and the recovery of Lakşmaņa, Rāvana is advised by his ministers to sign a pact of Sandhi with Rāma (PCV, 65.7).
At one place Rāvana decides to give up Sīta but only after defeating Rama so that he would not be regarded by the people as coward (69.29f). Before the commencement of the final battle Mandodarī requests Rāvana to give up Sītā because Lakşmaņa is a Prativasudeva and his (Rāvana's) death is destined at the hands of Lakşmana (70.8-37).
The above points bear similarity with those of the Udicya version of the VR as follows:
Udicya VR-When Rāvana demands help from Kumbhakarna, the latter says that he has come to learn from Nārada that his (Rāvana's) assassination is being arranged at the hands of the Avatāra of Viņpu. Nārada had learnt it at the meeting of the Devatās. Kumbhakarna further tells that Rāma has come here to kill us all, so we should sign a pact of Sandhi with him (Gaudiya, 6-40; N-W, 6.41).

Page #276

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
347
Then Ravana replies that if he returns Sītā to Rāma, he would become an object of ridicule. He thinks why should he fear Vişnu, when he has conquered many Devatās (Gaudiya, 6.41; N-W, 6.42 ; VRTP, 132). Rāvana perpares for entering the battlefield after the killing of Prahasta. At that time Mandodarī along with the ministers requests Ravana to sign a pact of Sandhi with Rāma because he is not an ordinary person (Gaudiya, 6.33; N-W, 6. 35). Then Ravana replies that he has previously defeated the Devatās and now he will defeat Rāma also (Gaudiya, 6.34.; N-W, 6,36; VRTP, 131).
It is held by Dr. W. Ruben that the Adi Rāmāyaṇa started bifurcating into two recensions, the Southern and the Northern during the first or the second century A. D. The topics which are not found in the Southern recension but are present in both the Gauţiya and the N-W. versions should be regarded as forming the original 'pātha' of the Northern recension or the Udicya 'pāțha' only. The Udicya recension went on swelling with interpolations uptil approximately before the sixth century A.D. (See VRTP, p. 30-31).
Now as far as the above points are concerned it is more probable that the PCV is influenced by the Udicya recension of the VR, but nothing definite can be said and it may be vise-versa also in some cases.
(6) Portions found exclusively in the Southern recension: (i) Hanuman's fight with Larikādevī (S. VR, 5.3.20-51; VRTP,82).
(ii) Mandoparī's advice to Rāvana to force Sītā to yield to him and Rāvana's refusal to do the same because of his vow of not establishing sexual relations with any unwilling woman (PCV, 46.29-32). Mahāpārsva's advice and Rāvana's refusal on account of the curse of Pitāmaha (VRTP, 110).
It is held by Dr. W. Ruben that the Adi Rāmāyana started bifurcating into two recensions-i. e, the Southern and the Northern (Udicya) by the time of the first or second century A. D. (VRTP, p. 30). Thus the portions which are exclusively found in the Southern recension are interpolated later. As regards the abve mentioned points we cannot be sure about the infiuence of the VR on the PCV or vice-versa. It is also probable that Vimalasūri was acquainted with the Udicya recension and he came into contact with the Southern recension also or vice-versa as far as the similarity of the points of the Udicya and the Southern recension with those of the PCV reveal. (c) Portions found exclusively in the Southern recension
and the N-W. version :

Page #277

248
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
(i) Abusing of Vibhişana as coward by Indrajit (PCV, 55.9; VRTP, 110).
(ii) PCV (Ch. 23) Narada once went to Lanka to worship the Jinas. He heard a prophecy there. Sagaravidhi told Ravana that he would be killed by Dasaratha's son Vibhīşana then plotted to kill Dasaratha. Narada went to Dasaratha and alerted him of the impending danger to his life. S.VR-It contains somewhat similar story in the interpolated chapters 2-4 after Ch. 37 of the Uttarakāṇḍa of the Southern version of VR. In the N-W. version they are placed in footnotes after Ch 39 of Uttarakanda. In the Gaudiya version they are absent. It shows that these chapters did not form the part of the original Uttarakanda of the VR but they are interpolated later. The story is as follows:
"On enquiry from Ravana, Sanatkumāra told him that one who is killed by Prabhu (Hari-Nārāyaṇa) attains the abode of Hari (emancipation). Sanatkumāra further prophesied that Hari would soon take birth in the form of the son of Dasaratha and would go in exile. Thereupon Rāvana decided to kidnap Sītā so that he would attain emancipation on being killed at the hands of Rama." When Narada came to know about this episode he went to Muni Agastya and made him acquainted with it. Muni Agastya narrated it to Rāma.
The striking similarities are Sagaravidhi in the PCV and Sanatkumara in the VR, prophecy in both the works, learning of it by Nārada and then passing it on to Dasaratha in the PCV and to Muni Agastya in the VR.
It is held that as regards the topics which are found in the Southern recension as well as in the N-W. version of VR, there is influence of the Southern recension on the N-W. version (VRTP, p.31) As regards the above mentioned point (a) we cannot be sure
whether the Southern version has influenced the PCV or the PCV has influenced both the versions of VR, but on the point (b) the influence of the PCV is very obvious as it will be clear from the following discussion.
Dr. R.G. Bhandarkar1 says that Rama's indentification with Vişņu had become popular in the early centuries of Christian era, but his worship i.e. Rama-bhakti originated very late, probably in the 11th century A.D. (See Bulcke, p. 150). The oldest works which refer to Rama-bhakti belong to Tamil Alvaras from the 8th century A.D.
1. See Collected works of R. G. Bhandarkar, Vol. IV. p,66.

Page #278

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
249
Rāma-bhakti became very popular with the sect of Ramānuja. The Rāma-Tapaniya Upanişad of the 19th century. A D. reveals this fact. Dr. Bulcke (p. 339) says that it is the first work which mentions that Rāvaņa abducted Sītā for his own emancipation. We find that the same idea is echoed in the above mentioned interpolated chapters of the Southern version of VR. Thus it becomes clear that these interpolations must be dated at least not before the 8th century A.D. The points of similarity between the PCV and the VR are striking. Hence, the influence of the PCV's tradition on the VR is quite certain. It shows that the PCV, as regards this point, has influenced both the Southern recension as well as the N-W. version,
Here we will like to add something more which has come to our light recently. Prof. GH Bhatt' mentions that there exists also a Western (comprising the territory ranging from Jodhpur to Broach) version of Vālmīki Rāmājana,. This is the third version of the Northern recension of VR, the other two being N-W. & N-E. He further states that there are portions in the N-W. version which are missing in the N-E. (Gaudiya) version but are found in the Southern recension as well as in the Western version. In such a case it may be probable that some points of Western version might have passed on to the Southern recension as well as to the North-Western version. We cannot say definitely about it untill the critical edition of complete VR is published and a critical examination of such common portions is thoroughly made. In case some points having similarity with our Paumacariyam are found in the western version, it can be presumed that the PCV has influenced the Western version and then from that version the respective points passed into the Southern recension and the N-W. version. Then it would be possible to assign a particular region to which our author belonged.
(d) Portions found exclusively in the Gaudiya version:
(a) PCV--Rāma sends Hanumán, Angada and Bhāmandala to Bharata for bringing the bath-water of Višalyā for curing Laksmana who was wounded by the Sakti hurled by Rāvana (64.1-20). Gaudiya (6.82)-Hanurnān while bringing the medicinal herb meets Bharata and holds a discussion with him (VRTP, 134 A).
(e) Portions found exclusively in the N-W version: (1) Disturbing of Rāvana's religious ritual and dragging of Mandodarī by Algada (PCV, 68.38; N-W. VR, 6.82; VRTP, 133).
1. See The Vālmīki Rāmāyana, Critical Edition, Vol. I Int. p. XXX.

Page #279

250
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
(ii) PCV-Kaikeyi is trained in various arts. She drives the war-chariot of her spouse and thus helps him in subduing the hostile candidates (24.23). N-W. VR-(2.11.42) Kaikeyi is said to have a cquired some Vidyā from a certain Bhrahmin hence she became successful in protecting her husband in the battle of the Devas and the Asuras (VRTP, 32).
(iii) PCV—The story of Dandaka is narrated to Rāma by two monks whom he meets in the Dandaka forest (41.19-35).
N-W. VR (3.17)-Muni Agastya narrates the story of Dandakavana to Rāma before he proceeds further to the south. This story has been placed here by the complier. In the Southern version it is narrated in the Uttarakānda 79 81 (VRTP, 65).
It is held by Dr. S. Levi that the Udicya pātha (Northern recension) of VR was bifurcated into the N-W. and the Gaudiya versions by the 6th century A.D. (VRTP, p. 33). Thus it is clear that the points which are exclusively found in either of the versions of Udicyapātha are interpolated since approximately the sixth century A.D. (See Bulcke, p. 32). In that case it is the traditions of the PCV that has influenced the N-W. and the Gaudiya versions of VR as far as the above mentioned points are concerned.
As regards the point (i) under the N-W. version it can be definitely held that the source of the VR is the tradition of the PCV as follows :
Indrajit and Kumbhakarņa are captured, and Rāvana's proposal for a 'Sandhi' is rejected by Rāma, Rāvaņa undertakes to aquire the Bahurupāvidyā for becoming unvanquishable (PCV, 65.5), and for inflicting a defeat to the enemies (PCV, 68.48). At 72. 15-18 it is mentioned that as soon as the 'Bahurupāmahāvidya' was invoked by Rāvana, his head and limbs reappeared as many times as they were severed of by Lakşmaņa. Thus we find that there was two-fold purpose of acquiring the Vidyā, firstly to emerge as unvanquishable and secondly to manifest imaginary limbs and heads.
In the VR Indrajit performs the sacrifice for becoming unvanquishable (VR, 6.84.14). Then there is the episode of the reappearance of the head and the limbs of Rāvana as many times as they are severed of by Rāma.
It indicates that the above two episodes in the PCV have parallels in the VR
In the Southern and the Gaudiya versions Rāvana's sacrifice and its disturbance by Angada is not found as there was no necessity of it.

Page #280

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PČV. 251 At the time of demanding boons from Brahmā, Rāvaņa asks for immortality from all other beings except the human beings, for he is confident of himself that the human beings can never vanquish him (7.10.20). Whereas in the PCV Rāvana's meditation to acquire Bahurupāvidyā is purposeful, for he is not granted any boon of immortality or unvanquishableness and again it is felt necessary to explain the reappearance of his head and limbs. In these circumstances the episode of Rāvana's meditation and its disturbance by Angada have originality in the PCV while into the N-W. version of the VR it has crept later.
Thus on the whole we find that the PCV bears more similarity with the Northern recension of the VR and specially with the N-W. version rather than the Southern recension of the VR as regards either being influenced by or having exercised its influence on the Vr. Does it not indicate that the author of the PCV belonged to North India ? As already mentioned above when the VR's critical edition is complete, we may be able to find out the particular region of North India to which our author belonged and perhaps it might come as *the Western part of North India. (The region ranging from Jodhpur to Baroch i. e. the area of VR's Western recension).
C. Influence of Rāmopākhyāna of Mahābhārata on PCV.
The description of Rāvana's palace and Angada's exploring into it at 68.9-15 in the PCV bears resemblance with that of the Māhābhārata at 2.47.1-15 ( See Infra, Ch. 11., Sec. 3F 'Sentiment of Humour') It shows that our author was conversant with the Mahābhārata. There is Rama-story in the Mahabharata. It is titled as Rāmopākhyāna. Let us see if it has exercised any influence on the Paumacariyam
In the following points (See Supra, Ch. 3 & 4 for details) we find some resemblances between the Ramopākhyāna and the Rāmastory of PCV.
1. Sītā is called the daughter ( Ātmajā ) of Janaka but her mother is not mentioned. 2. Pitāmaha is held responsible though Gāndharvi Dundubhi for Rāma's exile. Thus Kaikeyi is to some extent exonerated from the charge (PCV-Rāma's exile is voluntary). 3. Kaikeyi does not mention any specific period of Rāma's exile at the time of demanding a boon. It is at Laukā that Dasaratha's spirit reminds Rāma that the period of 14 years has completed. 4. No reference to manifestation of any huge form while entering Laikā. 5. No references to the severing of imaginary head of

Page #281

252
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN Rāma, the efforts of Mālyavān to set right Rāvana, the duel between Sugrīva and Rāvana and killing of imaginary Sítā. 6. In the battle Prahasta becomes the first casualty, thereafter Sugrīva is captured by the enemy as in the PCV. 7. No bringing of any mountain peak by Hanumān. 8. The order of the incidents which took place with Sītā in Larikā before the arrival of Hanumān agrees with that of the PCV. 9. Rāvana-carita is narrated in the beginning as in the PCV.
There are very few points of resemblance. The Ramopakhyāna does not contain the Uttarakända of Rāma-story i.e. the banishment of Sītā and Lava-Aukusa-Carita whereas the PCV contains them therefore, the Rāmopākhyāna cannot be considered as the source of PCV's Rāma-kathā. However, the points Nos. 6, 8 & specially 9 reveal that the planning of the PCV is influenced by it.
D. What do the Peculiarities of Paumacariyam Reveal ?
Vimalasuri was, as discussed in the preceding pages, not only. well-acquainted with the Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa but was also influenced by it. A comparision of Rāma-story of both the works has revealed that the Paumacariyam has many differences with the Valmiki Rāmāyaṇa as regards the details. How we shall systematically arrange those differences and try to find out whether the differences have been willfuly affected by Vimalasūri to mould the Rama-story in a way different from that of Vālmīki Rāmāyana or he had backing of some other tradition.
The differences reveal the following peculiarities in the PCV :
There is largely absence of (1) Worderful elements; (2) Divine elements; (3) Exaggerations and (4) Unbelievable things. (5) The story sounds realistic. (6) Under various circumstances the characters have been elevated and (7) there is total absence of Brahmanical atmosphere. (8) The story moves in the Jaina atmosphere; and (9) there are some other elements fitting in with the story of Vimalasūri's plan and pattern.
1. Absence of Wonderful Elements :
No golden deer. No magnifying of his body by Hanumat. No talking with the Maināka mountain. No reference to Hanumat's assuming the form like a cat. No attempt of Hanumat to grab the sun.

Page #282

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
253
2. Absence of Divine Elements :
Rama and his brothers are born in a natural way. No DevaAsura battle. Samudra is not the deity of the sea but a ruler. Larikásundari is not the deity of the city but a Raksasa woman. Appearance of Dasarahta's spirit and God Mahendra etc. at the time of Sīta's fire-ordeal at Laukā is not found. Indra is not the celestial Lord but a Vidyādhara king. Añjanā is a human Vidhyādhari and not a nymph. Vāli, Sugriva and Hanu all are born in a natural way. No grant of immortality to Rāvaņa. No entry of Sītā into the splitted earth.
3. Absence of Exaggerations :
No burning of Laikā. No construction of a bridge across the sea by the monkeys. No diabolical character of Kumbhakarņa. No cruelties of the Rākşasas.
4. Absence of Unbelievable things :
No wonderful birth of Sita. Depiction of Jațāyu as a bird only and not as a semi-human being. No creation of illusory severd head of Rāma or assassination of illusory Sítā. No bringing of any mountain by Hanumat. No reviving of the dead Vanaras to life.
5. Realistic Exposition :
The Vidyadharas, Vanaras and the Rakşasas are depicted as human races and not as divine or semi-divine being or demons. Vali, Sugrīva, Hanu etc are born in a natural way. Realistic exposition of the story of Indra and his Lokapālas. No ten faces of Rävaņa. Dasaratha's battle with the disgruntled candidates at the 'svayamvara' of Kaikeyi in place of Deva-Asura battle. Sítā is the legal daughter of the parents, Janaka and Videha.
6. Characters Elevated :
For details see Infra, "Characterisation' under Ch. 11. Sec. 3E. 7. Absence of Brahmanical Atmosphere:
. No reference to Aśvamedha and Putresti Yajña of Dasaratha. No incarnation of Rāma as Vişnu. No reference to the protection of the Yajña of Viśvāmitra by Rama. No promise of Rāma to annihilate the Rakşasas who used to destroy Brahmanical Yajñas. Sambūka is not a Sadra and he is not killed by Rāma. Satrughna's battle with Lavana and Madhu is purely political and not for helping hermits,

Page #283

254
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Muni Valmiki is replaced by king Vajrajangha. No horse-sacrifice of Rāma. No God Sankara's encounter with Ravana on the Kailasa. Various Brahmanical tales incorporated in the first and the seventh kändas of VR are not found in the PCV.
8. Jaina Environment:
Rama, Lakṣmaṇa and Ravana are eighth Baladeva, Vasudeva and Prativasudeva of the Jaina mythology respectively. During his journey Rama ameliorates the conditions of devout Jaina rulers and pays respects to Jaina monks. Many wives of Rama and Lakṣmaṇa are in accordance with the Jaina Mythology that more the number of wives more the glory of Baladeva and Vasudeva. All the characters are devout Jains. They renounce the world in the ending days of their life. Most of the intervening stories and religious discourses are introduced to propagate Jaina doctrines and ethics.
9. Some other Elements to suit the story of the PCV :
Prophecy about Ravana's death at the hands of a son of Dasaratha. Dasaratha's disappearance and attending the 'svayamvara' of Kaikeyi. Bhamaṇḍala-episode and the bow. Killing of Śambuka by Lakṣmaṇa and Rāvāņa's appearance on the scene. Episode of Ratnajațin. Episode of Viradhita Viśalya as a surgeon. Aparajita's message to Rama through Narada.
E.
The Basic Foundation of PCV, Jaina and Popular Tradition.
Critical Examination of three Probabilities:
In view of the above analysis Dr. V.M. Kulkarni1 has come to the conclsion that the origin of the PCV is the Rāmāyaṇa of Valmiki and Vimala was prompted to effect various changes in his Rama-story on account of the following three aims or motives:
1.
(a) Purging the story of its exaggerations and elements divine, wonderful and unbelievable to give it a realistic form based on rational outlook.
(b) Emptying the story of its Brahmanical elements and infusing it with Jaina amtosphere to propagate Jainism.
1. Journal of the Oriental Institute, Vol. IX, No. 2, pp. 199 ff, 204 ff. The Origin and Development of the Rama-story in Jaina Literature'.

Page #284

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCY.
255
(c) Re-shaping the story or introducing some new elements for elevating the characters and for making the story befitting to his own plan and pattern.
The above theory seems at first to be fairly convincing, but a closer scrutiny establishes something else, and for that we will have to take into consideration the Rama-story of Adi Rāmāyna of Valmīki, which reveals many differences with the story of the present inflated versions of the Valmiki Rāmāyana. Dr. Kulkarni has not considered the story of Adi Rāmāyaṇa. A glance at the tables of contents of the Rāmāyana given at two places in the Balakanda (Ch. 1 & 3) shows as to what extent the Rāmāyaṇa has got inflated during the subsequent period. It is held by Dr. Jacobi (Das. Ram, p. 10) that the contents given in the first chapter of the Balakānda of the VR form the nucleus of the oldest form of the VR. Besides that, we shall examine the traditions presented in other early non-Jaina works on Rāma-story and the views of scholars to find out whether the PCV has some traditional backing or Vimalasūri has merely remoulded the Rāma-story of the VR to suit his own purpose.
As far as the first aim is concerned one cannot claim that the Paumacariyan has been totally emptied of all unbelievable elements for there are still intances in it which can be mentioned as follows:
Conjuring up of a town by a Yaksa for the sojourn of Rāma in exile (35.23). Converting of the fire-pit into a reservoir of water during Sitā's ordeal (102.19). Reappearing of the head and the limbs of Rāvana as many times as they were severed of by Lakşmaņa (72.16-18). Raising of the peak ef Kailāśa mountain by Rivaņa (9.69). Rāvana's and Sāhasagati's (sham Sugrīvās) supernatural powers of asumsing any from of their liking (8.25; 47.43). Conjuring up of hobgoblins by Rāvana to frighten Sītā (46.52). Assistance of celestial Garuņādhipati to Rāma in the battlefield (59.83). Hanumat's feat of bringing the waters of the sea to extinguish the conflagration (51.6). Powers of Vidyadhara Sahasrāra to conjure up the paraphernalia of the celestial Lord (7.6). Nourishment of Nārada by celestial beings (11.64). And above all bestowing the Vidyadharas with supernatural powers.
We shall see further that many such elements of VR, which are not found in the PCV, were not the part of the original Ādi Rāmāyana and some of them are not found even in the earlier non-Jaina works.
1. Dr. Kulkarni has not examined these traditions too.

Page #285

256
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
As regards the second aim, it is important to mention that the scholars hold that the story of Adi Ramayana was that of an ideal Kṣatriya. The Brahmanical colouring to it was given by the later interpolators.
For the third aim the consequent discussion will show how far there was backing of some tradition and to what extent Vimalasūri gave a new shape to the story.
Now we shall quote evidences from Adi Ramayana as well as from other early Brahmanical and Buddhist works on Rama-story and the validity of the alleged probabilities and the value of our
contentions.
(a) In criticism of the first aim the following points are worth consideration:
The PCV mentions that Sita was the legal daughter of Janaka. It is supported by the Ramopakhyana of MB and the Harivamsapurana. In the Kathasaritsagara (9.1.60) also Sītā is not referred to as Ayonijā but as Janakātmaja. Not only that but even in the Adi Ramayana i.e. the contents given in the first chapter of Balakaṇḍa of VR (1.1.27), she is said to be 'Janakasya kulejātā (See Supra, Ch. 3. Sec. 28).
The PCV does not refer to any device of deer for abducting Sītā. The Buddhist as well as some Brahmanical works also do not refer to it. The Anamakam Jataka and the Kurmapurana are such instances. The Kathasaritsagara (9. 1. 62) mentions that Rāvana kidnapped Sită deceitfully (māyā). There is no reference to any deer. Even in the VR at (1. 1. 52) i. e. in the Adi Rāmāyaṇa it is mentioned that deceitfut Marica led away Rama and Lakṣmaṇa but there is no reference to the deer. Mr. C. V. Vaidya holds that the episode of deer is a later interpolation in the VR (See Supra, Ch. 3 Sec. 5D)
The PCV does not mention that Hanumat manifested his huge form while crossing the sea and changed his form while entering the city of Lanka. It is supported by the Ramopakhyāna (MB, 3. 282. 59-60). Not only that but even the VR (1. 1. 72) i. e. Adi Rāmāyana does not refer to these two incidents
The PCV does not refer to setting Lanka on fire by Hanumat. This episode, as held by Dr. Jacobi, is interpolated later in the Valmiki Ramayana (Vide Bulcke, p. 366.
The PCV has no reference to the constructing of bridge to cross the sea. The Abhiseka Nataka, the Hindu Padmapurana and the Adbhuta Rāmāyaṇa also do not refer to the bridge. They mention some other

Page #286

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
257
devices (See Supra, Ch. 3 Sec. 8A). There is a general reference in the PCV that Rama and his Vanara army reached Lanka driving. in their Yanas, Vāhanas and Vimānas (54. 37) after defeating Samudra a chieftain (54-40-45). It indicates that Samudra guarded the sea frontiers of Lanka. The Abhiseka Nataka mentions that the sea gave way when Rama was ready to discharge an arrow from his bow. The Padmapurana (Pātālakhaṇḍa) mentions that with the help of the bow of God Sankara, the sea was crossed; its Uttarakhanda mentions that when Rāma discharged an arrow the waters of the disappeared and the Adbhuta Ramayana mentions that when Laksmana jumped into the sea, the waters got evaporated and the army crossed the sea. These accounts may be taken as allegorical references to the defeat of the guard who was protecting the sea-frontiers. Similarly the appearance of the deity of the sea as mentioned in the Ramopakhyana and the VR may be taken as an element of divine touch. In the Ramopakhyāna itself it is mentioned before the construction of the bridge that someone advised Rāma to cross the sea by the available boats (Kecin naubhirvyavasyanti kecicca vividhaiḥ plavaiḥ-MB, 3. 283. 26), but Rāma did not accept the proposal because in his view the availabie boats were not enough to accomodate all the army and further he did not consider it advisable to mar the commerce by engaging those boats for crossing the sea (MB, 3. 283-28). It indicates that boats were available for crossing the sea. This reference in the Ramopakhyāna and the absence of constructing of bridge in the above mentioned works reveal that the boats were most probably used for crossing the sea but for introducing the element of wonder or exaggeration the bridge or some other device has been mentioned in several works. The Yanas and Vimānas mentioned in the PCV are various types of vehicles plied for crossing/
the sea.
sea
The PCV does not refer to bringing of any mountain peak by Hanumat. The same is the case with the Ramopakhyana and the Raghuvamsa. Even in the VR this episode is regarded by Dr. Jacobi as interpolated (Bulcke, p. 381; See Supra, Ch. 3. Sec. 8E).
In the PCV Rama is depicted as a man only. No divinity is attached to him. In the VR he has been raised to the level of a divine being, but it is held by Dr. Jacobi that in the five genuine books of VR Rāma is a man and man only (Das. Rama, p. 50).
In the PCV, Rāvana is depicted as one-faced while in the VR as ten-faced. But there are statements in the VR itself, that prove that he was one-faced. (See Infra, 'Daśamukha, Ch. 10 Sec. 6).
17

Page #287

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
In the PCV the Rakṣasas and the Vanaras are depicted as human beings. In the VR they are depicted as semi-divine beings. The Rākṣasas are said to be cannibals and the Vanaras as monkeys. But there are in the VR various spots where the Rākṣasas and the Vanaras are depicted as quite human like. These contradictory descriptions bring out that originally they were not so, but it has been done in the VR with the purpose of undermining them and finding fault with the Rākṣasas who were against the cult of sacrifice. Whereas the Vanaras are so depicted to create the sentiment of wonder (See Infra, 'Rākṣasas and Vanaras', Ch. 10 Sec. 6).
258
In the PCV Rāvana is depicted as a noble man except that of his defect of passion for Sītā. It was on account of this vice-lust for another man's wife (paranarī-saṁsa (ga) yam' 118.108), that he brought about his own annihilation. He is not depicted as cruel. Whereas in the VR he is depicted as cruel. It is held by Dr. Bulcke that this cruelty is exaggerated in the VR (Bulcke, p. 113). Thus we find that originally he was not so cruel (See Supra, Ch. 10. Sec. 6 'Rakṣasas and Daśamukha').
The PCV depicts Hanumat just like an average human being without any exaggeration. While in the VR his physical powers are described in an exaggerated form. But it is held that such descriptions did not form the part of the authentic Adi Ramayana (Bulcke, p. 112).
It is all about the wonderful elements, exaggerations etc. It shows that Vimalasuri had not merely the aim of emptying the story of all these elements but he must have been backed by some tradition. It is held that the Adi Ramayana did not contain these things to that extent. It was the work of the rhapsodists who went on adding such things keeping in view the taste of the audience (Vide Bulcke, p. 140141), Dr. Jacobi remarks that comic matters and burlesque scenes were later interpolated by the rhapsodists for the applause of the listeners (Das. Rama, p. 49). The sentiment of wonder and the exaggeration about the Vanaras, Hanumat, Daśagrīva and Rākṣasas are later additions in the VR (See Bulcke, p. 118).
(b) The second aim should be reviewed in the following perspective:
In the PCV Rama is described as eighth Baladeva, Lakṣmaṇa as eighth Vasudeva and Rāvaņa as eighth Prativasudeva. They are religious minded and devout Jains, whereas in the VR Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa are the amsas of Visņu. Rāma is an incarnation of Visņu,

Page #288

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
259
and Sita that of Lakşmi. Rāvana is also depicted as a devotee of Brahmanism.
Other characters in the PCV are also followers of Jainism whereas in the VR as followers of Brahmanism.
There are in the PCV various intervening stories which propagate Jainism whereas in the VR there are Puranic stories in the Balakanda and other stories in the Uttarakānda which uphold Brahmanism.
In the PCV Rāma during his journey in exile ameliorates the sufferings of devout Jaina kings, pays homage to Jaina Munis and thus works for the cause of Jainism. In the VR Rāma meets various Rșis, followers of Brahmanism and promises to help them and protect them from the atrocities of the Raksasas. He resolves to annihilate the Raksasas for the cause of Brahmanism.
In the PCV there is no divine birth of Rāma whereas in the VR Răma's birth is divine and the Putrești Yajña is associated with it, which is exclusively Brahmanic al.
Thus we find that the PCV's story moves in Jaina atmosphere whereas the VR's story in the Brahmanical environment.
These differences can be easily explained. The purpose of both the works is different on account of the different faiths they represent.
Dr. W. Ruben holds that Ādi Rāmāyaṇa af Vālmīki depicted Rāma as an ideal Ksatriya. The ideal was to attain Svarga and for attaining that ideal the help of the Brahmins was not necessary. It is gradually that the whole work has been given a Brahmanical colouring (Vide Bulcke, p. 138).
The Adi Rāmāyana which was based on ancient ballads did not contain Putrești Yajña or Avatārvāda or the meeting of various Rşis in the forest and Rama's promise to annihilate the Rākşasas.
The contents of the first chapter of Balakanda do not refer to Rāma as an Avatāra. Even in the Balakānda it was added at the time when it was given a final shape See Bulcke, p. 124, 130, 256 ).
The contents in the first chapter of Balakānda of VR does not mention Putrești Yajña. Even in the Balakanda it is held to be an interpolation ( See Bulcke, p. 256 ). The Rāmopākhyāna, Harivamsa, Vişnu, Vayu, Bhagavata, Kūrma and Garuda Puranas also do not refer to it. The Dasartha Jataka, and the Dasaratha Kathānam also do not mention any wonderful birth of Rama. It reveals that Putrești Yajña was introduced in the VR to give a Brahmanical colouring.

Page #289

260
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN In the VR meeting with Muni Atri, ( 2. 117-118 ; See also Bulcke, p. 312 ), the killing of Virădha, meeting with Sarabhanga, Sutīkşpa and Agastya (3. 1-14 ) all are interpolated ( Bulcke, p. 330 ). They have been introduced to furnish with an account of the period of 12 years duration in the forest. These portions contain Rama's promise to uproot the Raksasas.
Various Puranic stories in terpolated in the first and the last Kända of VR reveal clear Brahmanical influence on the VR and the effort to prove Brahmanical superiority (See Bulcke, 143 ).
Thus we find that the orginal Rāma-story was devoid of any sectarian taint. It was gradually that the VR was heavily interpolated with sectarian element to give it a Brahmanical colouring. The same way we find that the Rāma-story in the Jātakas is coloured with Buddhism. So naturally the Jainas gave it their own religious colour for the purpose of propagating Jainism.
(c) In support of the third aim the following facts are worth notice:
The PCV maintains that Bharata was younger brother of Lakşmaņa. It is supported by the Dasaratha Jātaka, Dasaratha Kathānam, Pratima Nataka, the Vişnu, Bhāgavata and the Padma Puranas. Even the Gaudiya version of VR and a verse in the Southern version of VR support it ( See Supra, Ch. 3. Sec. ID)
The PCV mentions that Sita had a brother. It is supported by the Vişnu, Väyu and the Kalikā Purāsas. Dr. Bulcke holds that the PCV in this respect preserves a historical element (Bulcke, p. 293). (See Supra, Ch. 3. Sec. 2 A).
The PCV mentions that Rāma defeated the Anāryas. It is corroborated by the Buddhacarita of Asvaghoşa. (See Supra, Ch. 3 Sec. 3c).
The PCV mentions that Rāma had more than one wife. There is an indication at least to the custom of polygamy prevalent in the family of Daśaratha. Dasaratha himself had many wives. In the Southern version of VR, Mantharā tells Kaikeys that Rama's wives will live a glorious life when Rāma is made the ruler of Ayodhya (2.8.12). It is held by the scholars that this reading is later on changed in other versions of VR (VRTP, No. 45. and p. 33, See also Supra, Ch. 3 Sec. 1 fn. 2).
The PCV mentions that Kaikeyi was granted one boon only. It is supported by the Dasaratha Jātaka, Da śaratha Kathānam, Padmapurana (Gaudiya version, Uttarakhanda; Vide Bulcke, p. 323). Not

Page #290

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTICN AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
261
only that but even the Ramopākhyāna and the first chapter of the Balakānda of VR itself (i.e. Adi Rāmāyana) refer to one boon only and Kaikeyi demands two things on the strength of that single boon (See Supra, Ch. 3 Sec. B).
The PCV mentions that Bharata's mother did not demand Rama's exile. It is supported by the Dasaratha Jataka and Dasaratha Kathanam (See Supra, Ch. 3 Sec. 3B).
The PCV mentions that Rāma preferred a voluntary exile. It is supported by the Anāmakam Jätaka (See Supra, Ch. 3 Sec. 3B).
The PCV does not mention any definite period of Rāma's exile. It is supported by the Anāmakam Jātaka. Even in the Ramopākhyāna, Kaikeyi does not mention definite period of Rama's exile (MB, 3.277. 26). It is at Lankā that the spirit of Dasaratha asks Rāma to return to Ayodhyā as the period of fourteen years has completed (MB, 3.291 29) (See Supra, Ch. 3 Sec. 3B).
The PCV unlike the VR does not refer to any spying work by Rāvana's men. It is held that even in the VR it is a spurious portion (Bulcke, p. 380).
The severing of the head of imaginary Rāma, the duel between Rāvana and Sugrīva before the commencement of the battle are not mentioned in the PCV. The same is the case with the Ramopakhyāna It is held that these two episodes did not form part of the Adi Rāmāyana also. They are later interpolations (Bulcke, p. 380; See Supra, Ch. 3 Sec. 8 A).
In the PCV Rāma is said to have lived for 17000 years while in the VR for 11000 years. But the Dasaratha Jātaka mentions that Rāma lived for 16000 years. Thus the reference in the PCV is to some extent supported by the old tradition (See Supra, Ch. 3 Sec. 9. E. V).
The PCV refers to Hanumat's wives. In the whole of the VR there is no mention that Hanumat was married. But at one place it is said that Bharata offered 16 girls to Hanumat in marriage (VR, 6. 1 26. 44). Thus the account in the PCV has some traditional basis.
According to the PCV Hanumat, a Vánara scion was the son-in-law of Sugrīva as well as of Rāvana's sister. The Vanaras and the Raksasas formed two branches of the Vidyadhara lineage. In the VR there is no such reference but some scattered references in the VR and the Mahābhārata reveal that Sugrīva and Rāvana were filially related (See Infra, Vānaras under Ch. 10),

Page #291

262
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Vimalasūri tells us that in the popular Ramayana, Rama is said to have killed Vali for the cause of Sugriva and Tara. But according to the VR Rama kills Vāli for the cause of Sugrīva and his wife Ruma who was kidnapped by Vali. Tārā, the wife of Vali after the death of her husband voluntarily accept Sugrīva as her husband. The Ramopakhyāna and the Nrsimhapuraṇa throw some light on this point of Vimalasūri. In the Rămopakhyāna (MB, 3. 280) Rumā is not mentioned and Tara is referred to as the wife of Vali. Once Vali is found to be suspecting the integrity of Tara when she tries to prevent him from holding a duel with Sugrīva Though Rama is informed by Sugrīva, that his wife has been kidnapped by Vali yet after the death of Vali it is nowhere mentioned that Sugrīva gets back any other woman than Tara. This episode indicates that either Tārā was formerly the wife of Sugrīva or Sugrīva wanted to make her his own wife and she had inclination for him. In the Nrsimhapurana (Ch. 50), Tără clearly appears to be the wife of Sugrīva whom she is restored from Vali. These facts go to prove that Vimalasuri's information was based on some such tradition.
All these points show that some of the differences the PCV has with the VR are supported traditionally not only by Buddhist works but by Brahmanical works and even by the Adi Ramayana itself. It proves that Vimalasuri was backed by some tradition and he did not merely brought about changes in the Rāma-story of the Valmiki Rāmāyaṇa. 2. Jaina as well as Popular Tradition as the Basic Foundation:
The most important point in the PCV is that Rāvana is killed because of his passion for Sītā.
In the PCV it is depicted that Ravana brought about his own annihilation on account of kidnapping Sītā. This motto is outlined in the PCV in the ending colophon (18.104-105). In the VR Rāma meets various Munis and promises to annihilate the Rākṣasas. In the Balakaṇḍa it is said that Visņu took birth in the form of Rāma to annihilate Rāvana. But as the authentic story goes, neither there is any indication that Rama is proceeding with the sole aim of annihilating Ravana, nor that the Rākṣasas are disturbing the Munis and Rāma undertakes to annihilate them. The portions, referring to Rāma as Vişņu's incarnation, Rama's meeting with the Munis and his promise to annihilate the Rākṣasas, are all later interpolations. Therefore, only the ignoble act of kidnapping of Rama's wife hy Ravana causes the annihilation of Ravana at the hands of Rama. Thus the VR in its original form and the PCV agree as regards this fundamental point of the Rama-story.

Page #292

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
263
Thus we find that several points of the PCV though somewhat different from the VR are supported by Adi Rāmāyna and other old works. It seems that the source of our PCV's Rāma-story was some old tradition, somewhat other than the VR in its present inflated form. For the point is how Vimalasūri knew that the things alleged as unbelievable and the lies found in the popular Rāmāyaṇa, did not form the part of the true Rāma-story? There must have been some basis on the ground of that he criticised such elements. It is improbable that Vimalasūri would have come across some version of Adi Rāmāyana so late as the 5th century A.D. or he would have been able to distinguish between the original and the interpolated portions when the VR had been so much inflated by that time. Therefore, the basis of his story could not have been other than the Jaina tradition and some popular tradition also written or oral. The earliest evidence of the Jaina tradition can be traced in the Tiloyapanratti, Samavāyānga and the Sthānānga. We have already discussed above in the beginning that the series of names' contained in these works were the basis of the Rama-story of Paumacari yan as pointed out by our author. The Tiloyapannatti is composed after the beginning of Christian era though it contains many things based on old tradition. The date of Sthānā nga and Samavāyā nga fall prior to the beginning of Christian era they are the third and the fourth Angas of the cononical literature and are principal works of the Jaina Āgama. Dr. Jacobi speaks of the great age of the Aigas and Prof. J. Charpentier trusts it (Uttarā, Int. p. 25). Dr. Winternitz (HIL, vol. II p. 442) quotes Weber and says that the Samavāyānga in its present form is either a late work or that it contains some portions of later date. Prof. J. Charpentier meets the general criticism of Weber. He (Opp. Cit, p. 32) says that in certain cases interpolation are there but the original dates back from the 3rd century B. C. to the beginning of our era. Therefore, we can say that most probably the tradition of Rāma-story was present with the Jainas during the 3rd cent. B.C., a date which coincides with the composition of the Adi Rāmāyaṇa by Valmiki. Dr. Bulcke after examininig the arguments of various scholars-A Schlegel, G. Gorressio, H. Jacobi, A. A. Macdonell, A. B. Keith and M. Winternitz, who assign different dates to the composition of Ādi Rāmāyaṇa ranging from 12th cent. B. C. to the 3rd century B. C. (See Bulcke, p. 37) holds that Adi Rāmāyana was composed in 3rd century B. C.
Further Dr. Bulcke holds that the main story of the whole VR has a historical basis and there should be no doubt about it (See Bulcke, p. 113 ). The Adi Rāmāyana of Valmiki which contained the

Page #293

264
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN the main Rāma-story is held to be based on the ancient Gāthās. These Gathās and the Akhyāna Kavya of Rama-story, says Dr. Bulcke (p. 135 ), had very presumably originated during the 6th century B. C. The Buddhist Tripitaka Gāthas concerning the Rāma-story are also held to be based on the old Akhyāna Kavya. (Bulcke, pp. 98. & 134). Brief Rāma-stories found in the Dronaparva and śāntiparva of Mahābhārata seem to be based on the same Akhyāna Kāvya, says Dr. Bulcke (p. 135). He further states that this Gāthā literature of Rāma-story orginated in the Košala country and spread towards the west also when the Mahabharata was composed. He holds that by the time of the 4th century B.C., the Rāma-story ( Ākhyāna Kavya ) had considerably become popular. Pali Tripitaka was being composed during that period (Bulcke, p. 135 ) and some matter of the Akhyana Kavya of the Rāma-story entered into the Paii Tripitaka also ( Bulcke, p. 98 ). Thus we can be sure that Rāmastory in its original and basic form was gaining popularity in North India by the time of the 4th century B. C. Jainism was also popularising during that period in north India and gradually spreading towards the west and south hence there is every possibility that the basis of Rāmastory of the Akhyāna was known to the Jaina tradition. It will be quite worthwhile here to record the view of Prof. Winternitz about the ancient popular narratives and how they were utilised by different religions of India. He says that as early as the time of Buddha there was in existence an inexhaustible store of prose and verse narratives Akhyānas, Itihāsas, Purānas and Gathas, forming as it were literary public property which was drawn upon by the Buddhists and the Jains, as well as by the epic poets (HIL, I. P. 314). In view of this opinion the 'nāmāvalis' in the Sthānanga and Samavāyānga indicate that the Rāma-story in its basic form was known to the Jaina tradition. The 'series of names' formed the nucleus of the Rāma-story and its details remained with the precetors in the oral form. These details passed on to the successors by tradition i. e. 'āyariya paramparāgayam' as Vimalasûri also mentions in his work at 1. 8. To this we can add the Popular Tradition from which Vimalasūri seems to have drawn a lot, as evidenced in the above analysis to compose his Paumacariyam.
3. Rāma's name as Padma :
N
....
Now the question arises why Dabarathi Rāma is called Padma in the Samavāyānga as well as in the Paumacari yam when he is not known by this name either in the Brahmanical or in the Buddhist literature. The Samavāyanga names Dāśarathi Rāma as Padma and Krşņa's brother

Page #294

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV. 265 Balarāma as Rāma while the Tiloyapannatti names them as Rāma and Padma respectively. Both of them are recognised as the 8th and 9th Baladevas in the Jaina tradition. Now why one of these two Baladevas is named Padma. The only plausible explanation seems to be that the similarity in their names might have necessitated to distinguish one from the other and one of them was named Padma. Why this particular name was preferred ? We see that Rama and Krşpa are regarded as the incarnations of Vişņu in the Brahmanical tradition. Vişņu is called Padmanābha i.e. from his navel sprang the lotus which contained Brahmā, the future creator. As a Padmanābha is an epithet of Vişņu, and Rāma and Kệşņa are incarnations of Vişnu, so this epithet has most probably influenced the Jaina tradition in naming either Rāma or Krsna as Padma to distinguish between the two Rāmas, Daśarathi Rāma and Balarāma. In the Hindu Padmapurāņa (Ādikhanda, 1.23-24; 2.31-32) it is said that since the universe descended from the great lotus (mahāpadma) which sprang from the navel of Vişnu, and the universe itself is the embodiment of Vişņu, and there is description of the same in it so the work is named Padmapuräna. This fairly explains the association of the name Padma with Vişnu, i.e. Rāma and Kršņa.
Thus as far as the matter goes we here by conclude that the Rāmastory of PCV has its basic foundation on the Jaina tradition preserved in the form of 'series of names' which was aided with oral details that remained with the preceptors who augmented from time to time by accepting elements of their choice from popular tradition. In this way Vimalasuri seems to have inherited the subject-matter of Rāma-story from his predecessors and on that basis he composed Paumacariya; of his own plan and pattern, notwithstanding the fact that the VR too has considerably influenced the details of PCV and it was quite imperative in view of the great popularity the former had gained by the time of the composition of the latter. Therefore the Rama-story of PCV is not wholly dependent on the VR.
F. Two Jaina Traditions of Rāma-kathā,
1. Tradition of Paumacariyam:
The Paumacariyam represents its own tradition of the Rāma story.
Now we shall deal with the Rāma-stories of two other works namely, Vasudevahindi and Uttarapurāna. They make out a different tradition of the Rāma-story depicting two currents of the same tradition

Page #295

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
266
2. Other Jaina Tradition of Rama-Story:
(a) Current of Vasudevahindi's Rāma-story:
It is discussed following in the section G (i) that the Vasudevahindi of Sanghadāsagani was composed probabably earliar than the Paumacariyam. If it is not so then both the works belong to a somewhat contemporary period and it will be worth while to compare the Rama-stories of both the works so as to find out the points of their agreement and disagreement. A comparative study of them (for details See Supra Ch. 3 and 4) reveals that there are some points of agreement in both the stories but they seem to follow different traditions.
(i) Points of Agreement :
No
1. Bharata and Satrughna as the sons of Kaikeyī. 2. Devăsura battle. Kaikeyi helps Dasaratha in his fight with some kings. The prominence of chariot. PCV-She drives Dasaratha's war-chariot. 3. On the occasion of the 'svayamvara' of Sītā many candidates are present. 4. Dasaratha himself informs Rama of his promise to Kaikeyi and her demands (VR-Dasaratha is silent). 5. Kaikeyi's attempt to call back Rama from exile. 6. No hiding of Rāma while killing (Vali in the VH and sham Sugrīva in the PCV). 7. No burning of Lanka by Hanuman. 8. Bharata sends his army to help Rama on receiving a message from the latter (VH). Rama sends messages to Bhamandala (the brother of Sīta) twice (48.-34; 54. 46). Bhamandala goes to help Rama (PCV). 9. Vibhisana joins with Rāma when the latter reaches the other side of the sea (VR-before crossing the sea). 10. Ravana, Vali and Sugrīva are said to be belonging to the Vidyadhara race (VH). Rākṣasa and Vanara races are the branches of Vidyadhara race (PCV) 11. Rama etc. are called land-farers (Dharanigoy ara VH, I. p. 243; Bhumigoyara PCV, 28. 66).
(ii) Points of disagreement:
In spite of the above mentioned similarities the Rama-story of the PCV widely differs from that of the 'H as follows:-1. The VH does not refer to Rama as Padma. 2. VH. Sītā is born of Mandodari by Ravana. She is abandoned in her babyhood by her parents. Janaka and his wife Dhāriņidevi adopt her as their daughter. PCV Sita is the daughter of Videhi by Janaka. 3. The VH does not contain the device of Bow in the 'svayamvara' of Sītā. 4. VH Two boons are granted to Kaikeyi on two different occasions. PCV-One boon only. 5. VH-Manthara abets Kaikeyi for crowning Bharata

Page #296

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
267
Manthara. Rama's exile is and for exiling Rama. PCV-No voluntary. 6. VH-Rama's period of exile is twelve years. PCV-No period mentioned. 7. VH-Bharata is away at his maternal uncle's home when Kaikeyi demands the boons. PCV- Bharata is at Ayodhya. 8. VH-Bharata brings Rama's 'pādukās'. PCV-No reference to them. 9. The details of Rama's journey and his exploits till he enters 10. The VH refers to the Dandakaranya are missing in the VH. Rama's entry into Vijanasthana and his passing by of various Tāpasa-āśramas. PCV-No reference to the Vijanasthana. 11. VH It does not mention various marriages of Rama and Lakṣmaṇa. 12. VH-Khara and Duşaņa are two sons of Surpanakha. PCV-In place of Surpanakha there is Candranakhā. Kharadūṣaṇa is one person and husband of Candranakhā. 13. VH-Rama disfigures the VH there is the Surpanakha. PCV-No disfiguring. 14. In device of the golden deer. PCV-No deer. 15. VII-Jatayu is a Vidyadhara. PCV-It is a bird. VH-Vali and Sugrīva are PCVhostile to each other for a certain woman. Rama kills Vali. Vali has no hostility with Sugrīva. He long ago became a monk. Rāma kills Sugrīva and Sahasagati quarrel for obtaining Tārā. over the bridge sea is Sahasagati. 17. VH-Construction of a mentioned. PCV-No bridge. 18. VH-Hanuman is the minister of Sugrīva. PCV-The son-in-law of Sugrīva. 19. VH-Rama is enthroned as king of Ayodhya. PCV-Lakṣmana becomes the king of Ayodhya. 20. VH-Exile of Sita and details about Ravaṇa-carita are lacking. 21. VH-Four wives of Ravana's father and their many sons and daughters. PCV-One wife, three sons and one daughter only. are at variance from those 22. Rāvana's parentage and his ancestors given in the PCV.
16.
The above analysis reveals that:
The Rama-story in the VH is akin to the Ramopakhyāna of Mahabharata with certain minor alterations in points Nos. 4,12,13 & 15, under sub-heading (ii).
Point No (ii) 2, is quite new while point No. (ii) 6 agrees with the Dasaratha Jätaka and the Dasaratha Kathānam. Point No. (ii) 21 is more akin to Kurmapurāna than the Ramopakhyāna (See Supra, Ch. 5).
Though some elements are common in the PCV and the VH, yet both the works constitute different Jaina traditions of the Rama-story.
(b) Current of Uttarapurana's Rama-Story:
An analysis of the story of Uttarapurana (for details See Supra Ch. 3 and 4) reveals some traits of Buddhist Jātakas, Ramopākhyāna,

Page #297

268
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Vasudevahindi, Paumacariyan and Vālmīki Rāmāyana and still it has several elements which are quite peculiar to it. Therefore the Uttarapurāna's Rāma-story represents an independent current of the second Jaina tradition of the Rama-story.
Traits of Dasaratha Jataka :-1. Dasaratha as the king of Banārasa
Traits common to Anāmakam Jātaka :-2. Sugrīva's enmity with Vali for his being only deprived of his political right by the latter.
Traits of Rämopākhyāna : - 3. No reference to the wounding of Laksmana by a Sakti. And no reference to the bringing of Osadhi by Hanumān. 4. Accepting of Sita without suspicion and no abandonment of Sitā.
Traits of Vasudevahindi :-5. Circumstances leading to the migration of Rāviņa (in VH) or his ancestors (in Uttara purāņa) to Laukā. Ancestors of Rāvana (See Supra, Ch. 6). 6. Bharata and Satrughna as sons of the third queen (in the PCV also). 7. Sītā as daughter of Rāvana and Mandodarī, her abandonment and adoption by Janaka. 8. Rāvana's sister's name as Sūrpanakhā. 9. No reference to wounding of Lakşmana by a Śakti. 10. Details of battle not mentioned, 11. Accepting of Sita without suspicion. 12. No abandonment of Sitã. 13. Name of Janaka's wife (in somewhat altered form UPVasudhadevi; VH-Dhāriņidevī). Traits common with the Paumacariyar :
14. UP-Kaikeyi as second wife of Dasaratha. PCV-Sumitra's birth-name is Kaikeyi. 15. Bharata and Satrughna as sons of the third queen (In the VH also). 16. Sită was married to Rāma because he protected the Yajña of Janaka (PCV_She was betrothed to Rāma because he saved Janaka's territory from the attack of the non-Aryans), 17. Appointment of Mañjarikā to persuade Sitā ( PCV Mandodarī is appointed for this work ). 18. Sítā breaks her fast and takes food in Lanka at the advice of Aņumān (Hanuman ). 19, Anumān once again went to Laikā for finding solution through the good offices of Vibhīşana (PCV-before handing over the finger ring to Sītā he consulted Vibhişaņa). 20. Lifting of Koțiśīlā by Lakşmaņa after rescuing Sitá (PCV-before sending Hanuman to Laika ). 21. No setting of Laikā on fire by Hanumăn, (UP-He is referred to have only destroyed the Rākşasa soldiers of Rāvana with the power of his lore called Mahājvālavidya ). 22. Renouncing of the world by Rāma, Sītā etc. 23. Same number of wives of Rāma and Lakşmaņa.
Traits common with the Valmiki Rāmāyana:-24. device of golden deer for abducting Sītā. 25. Aņumān's assuming the form of a

Page #298

269
SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
wasp while searching for Sită in Lankā (VR-as a cat). 26. Handing over of Rama's ring to Sītā by Aņumān in the disguise of a monkey. 27. Anuman conjures up an army of monkeys and destroys the garden. 28. Rāvana's sister is called Surpanakha. 29. Slaying of Vali by Laksmana (VR-by Rama ). 30. Disturbance by Vidyadharas and ceasing of the Vidyas to obey Ravana. 31. Conjuring up of illusory severed head of Sita 31. Molesting of Manimati by Ravana and her curse as the cause of the death of Ravana (VR-Vedavati's molestation). 33. Aņumān, the son of Añjana struck the aerial-car of the sun (VR-Hanu wanted to catch the sun).
Points peculiar to Uttarapurāņa:
34. Dasaratha's first wife named as Subālā. 35. No boon granted to the mother of Bharata. 36. Janaka's wife's name Vasudhadevi, no reference to the brother or son of Janaka. 37. No betrothal of Sită with Rama, No 'svayamvara' and the Bow. She was married to Rāma because he protected the Yajña of Janaka. 38, Rāma and Lakṣmana were appointed as the king and heir-apparent of Banarasa respectively. 39. No exile of Rama. No Journey of Rama. 40. No disfiguring of Śambuka. 41. Once Rama sojourned in the Citrakūta garden. 42. Nārada instigated Rāvana to kidnap Sītā. Rāvaņa wanted to put an end to the rising glory of Rama and he was angry also because he was not invited by Janaka on the occasions of performing a Yajña and the marriage of Sītā. 43. Surpanakha was sent to ascertain the wishes of Sītā. 44. No Jatayu. 45. Dasaratha's drean.s indicated that Rāvana kidnapped Sită, 46. Mandodari's sympathy and her advice to Sită refrained her from yielding to Rāvaņa. 47. Hanuman is called Aņuman (his father's name is Prabhañjana). 48. On the advice of Nārada, Aņumān and Sugrīva went to help Rāma. 49. Vāli's offer to help Rāma, Vali's challenge for a battle and then his killing by Lakṣmaṇa. 50. Mandodari's motherly love for Sītā. 51. Sita's sons named as Vijayarāma and Ajitañjaya. 52. No detailed ancestral history of Ravana. 53. There is no story of Añjanasundarī. 54. The son of Añjana by Prabhañjana was named Aņumān because he once assumed the form like a particle of sand (aņu).
As regards the intervening stories of the PCV which are found in the UP, their sources are different, not the PCV while the stories of Hariṣena (No. 11), and 'Origin of Brahmaņas' (No. 16) are specially at variance with those of the PCV (See Supra, Ch. 4).
There is one striking similarity between the PCV and the UP in the description of the water-sports of Rama and Sītā. The PCV is the

Page #299

270
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
first work which mentions the water-sports of Rama and Sītā (42. 20-22). Rāma and Sită play water-sports in the river Kroñcarava in the Dandaka forest. Sitä hurls at the face of Rama lotuses infested with bees. No sooner Ráma wipes them off, the bees rush towards the face of Sită considering it to be a lotus flower. Sita gets frightened and immediately embraces Rama. This particular incident of the bees rushing towards the face of Sita is not mentioned in the PCR (42. 78-84) though their water-sports in the river are described. The PCS (36.2) does not refer to their water-sports in the river. But in the Rama-story of Uttarapurana, Rama while sojourning in the Citrakuṭa garden at Banarasa, is mentioned to be playing water-sports in a lake there. A similar description of the bees rushing towards the face of Sită, considering it to be a lotus flower is found in it.
Aha te tattha mahuyarā, Rāmeņa samāhayā paribhameum Siyãe vayaņakamale, nilanti paumāhisankae (PCV, 42.21) Bhramarāḥ ka ñjakaṁ muktvā kāntasyābje-apatansamam Tairākulikṛtāmdṛṣṭvā khedi hladi ca so abhavat ||UP,68.147).
The above analysis reveals that the Rama-story of Uttarapurana is not based upon that of Paumacariyam. Two most important features of the story are common in the Vasudevahindi and the Uttarapurana. They are -Sīta as the daughter of Mandodari and Ravana and her adoption by Janaka & the absence of Uttarakanda i.e. the abandoning of Sita, It shows that both the works represent two currents of a common tradition but different from that of the Paumacariyam.
(c) VH and UP Represent some Earlier Stage of Rama-katha:
Just as some of the elements of the PCV are backed by an old tradition different from the VR, similarly some of the elements of the rest of the two Jaina Rama-kat has are supported by the old tradition different from the VR.
The Vasudevahindi refers to three wives of Ravana's father and their progeny too. This account does not agree with the VR but it is partly supported by the tradition of Ramopa khyana (Supra. Ravana-carita Ch. 4 and 'Rākṣasa Vamśa' Ch. 5).
That Rama remained in exile for 12 years is supported by the Dasaratha Jataka and Dasaratha Kathānam.
There is no reference in the VH that Hanuman took a flight over the sea. It is held by C.V. Vaidya that even in the VR this episode of Hanuman is based on some wonderful jumping (See VR, p. 160).

Page #300

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
271
There is no reference to the fire-ordeal of Sītā. The Rāmopākhyāna also does not refer to it. Scholars hold that it was not a part of the Ādi Rāmāyaṇa (Bulcke, p. 328).
Then the following points of the VH are supported by some old tradition :Absence of references to :
(1) Setting Lanka on fire by Hanumān. (2) Spying work of Rāvana's men. (3) Manifestation of huge form by Hanumān. (4) Changing of his form by Hanumān while entering Laukā (5) Fire-ordeal of Sītā.
In the Uttarapurāņa Hanumat is through out named as Aņumat. Dr. Bulcke? (Vide Bulcke, p. 11) holds that Hanumat of the VR is adopted from an old Dravidian name Apa mandi ie. Nara-kapi and the word Hanumat is the Sanskrit form of the Dravadian word. In the old Ākhyāna Kávya Hanumat was an aboriginal whose lineage was Vănara. The original meaning of the word Aņa-mandi has been lost in the VR as well as in the UP. In the VR Hanumat is named so because his jaw was broken while in the UP he is named so becanse he assumed the form like a particle of sand (See Supra, Ch. 4 No. 2). Further we find that in all the Rama-stories Hanumat hails from the south. The name Aņumat in UP is more akin to the word Āņa-mandi than to Hanumat. It indicates that the UP preserves some ancient tradition earlier than that of the VR in the name of Anumat.
The following points of the UP's Rāma-story are supported by old tradition:
Absence of references to : (1) Setting Larikā on fire by Hanumān. (2) Spying work of Rāvana's men. (3) Manifestation of huge form by Hanumān. ( 4 ) Construction of a bridge. (5) Fire-ordeal.
VH and the UP moreover represent an old stage of the Ramastory because they do not refer to the abandonment of Sita i. e. the VR's Uttarakānada story. The Rāmopākhyāna also does not refer to the abandonment of Sita. The same is the case with the Rama-stories of Aranyaparva, Dronaparva and Santiparva of the Mahabhärata (Bulcke, pp. 43-44 ). The Harivañía, Vāyu, Vişnu and Nysimha Purānas as well as the Anāmakam Jataka also do not contain the abandonment of Sita.
1. Dhirendra Varma Vişeśānka. p. 344,

Page #301

272
:
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYA
In both the works the Rāvana-carita, as described in the Uttarakanda of the VR and the PCV, is lacking. It is merely at its preliminary state. Lava-Kuśa-Kānda is totally absent as in the Rāmopākhyāna. It is held by the scholars that even Ādi Rāmāyāra did not contain the whole of Uttarakāņla which is said to have originated in the second century A. D. (See Bulcke, p. 35 ).
The Samavāyānga and the Tiloyapannatti give the names of Rama, Rāvana, Lakşmaņa etc, but these works or any other cononical work do not refer to Lava and Kuša.
It indicates that the Uttarakānda was not known to the earlier Jaina tradition on which the VH and the UP are based. It should have gradually entered ihe Jaina tradition as was the case with the Brahmanical tradition or the Valmihi Rāmāyana.
3. Nucleus of Rāma-Story of the Jaina Traditions:
Now we shall trace out the salient features of the Rama-story which are common to all the three stories of the Jaina tradition. They can be mentioned as follows:
(i) Dasaratha had three wives and four sons. Rāma of the first, Lakşmapa of the second and Bharata, satrughna of the third queen. (ii) Ráma married Sita. (iii) Rāvana the Lord of Laukā deceitfully kindnapped Sītā. (iv) Sugrīva along with Hanumān sought help from Rāma in recovering his lost position. Rāma helped him by killing the miscreant. (v) Hanumān was sent to Lanká to bring the news of Sita. (vi) Vibhişaņa, brother of Rāvana joined hands with Rāma. (viii) Ravana was duly attacked and was killed by Lakşmana. (ix) Rāma, Laksmana and Sitā returned home and conquered half of the Bhāratavarşa. (x) The Vidyadharas, Vānaras and the Rākşasas were human races. (xi) Rāma, Lakşmaņa and Rāvana formed the eighth trio of Baladeva, Vāsudeva and Prativasudeva respectively. - One is likely to think that when the Jainas had their own tradition of the Rāma-story, why variations are found in the Rāma. story of Paumacariyaṁ, Vasudevahindi and Uttarapurāna ? The plausible answer to this question is that the story and that also with its oral tradition, is bound to undergo changes with different authors, belonging to different places and different periods.
This is the case not only with the Rāma-story. Even in the biographies of Tiratharkaras and other eminent personages of the Jaina tradition (See Story Nos. 10, 11 and 15 particularly), we find certain differences (See Supra, Ch. 4). These biographies are based on the 'series of names' given in the canonical works. The details remained

Page #302

273
SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
with the preceptors and they were handed over orally to the successive disciples. During the course of time some changes were bound to creep in them (See also JSI, p. 95. fn. 2. and pp. 95-97). If two or three authors are supplied with a set of salient features of the same story as mentioned above for developing them into a full story they are bound to differ as far as the details of the story are concerned.
This case is not with the Jainas only. The Brahmanical and the Buddhist works also tell us the same thing1.
Let us take the case of the Rama-story of the Brahmanical tradition. We find that in several works there are differences on various important points of Rama-story such as birth and parentage of Sita; seniority of Lakṣmaṇa and Bharata; intentions of Kaikeyī; parentage of Ravana and Vibhiṣana; deer incident; building of a bridge across the sea; killing of Śambūka; and progeny of Hanuman.
We cannot altogether reject the influence of one tradition on the other and the influence of one work on the other, may be, belonging to different sects and religions. So the influence of the VR which had become so popular, cannot be denied on the Jaina works such as Paumacariyam, Vasudevahindi and the Uttarapurāna.
G. Sources of Intervening Stories.
A detailed comparative study of the intervening stories of Paumacariyam has been made in the fourth chapter. Before we deal with their sources let us discuss over the date of the VH which contains a number of similar stories.
(i) Probable Priority of Vasudevahinḍi:
Vasudeva, hero of the theme of Vasudeva hindi narrates to his grandsons his experiences in the form of a number of stories. Among these stories there is a Rama-story also. Some of the intervening stories of in the PCV are also found in this work. A comparative study of them and some other elements show that Vasudevahindi was composed earlier than the Paumacariyam. Professor. B. J. Sandesara on the evidence of the Viseṣaṇavati of Jinabhadragaņi Kṣamāśramaņa (609 A. D2), which refers to Vasudevahindi, says that the Vasudevahindi
1. For clarification see details in Supra, Chs. 3 and 4 as well as the book 'Rama Katha by Dr. C. Bulcke.
2. An old palm-leaf manuscript of Visesavasyaka Bhasya of Jinabhadragani Kṣamāśramaņa notes the year 531 of Saka Era. On this basis the date of 609 A. D. is assigned to its author. But Muni Punyavijayaji considers 609 A. D. as not the date of composition of Visesavasyaka Bhasya but regards it as the date of presentation or of writing a new manuscript of the works (Vide personal talk with him at Ahamadabad-July, 1961).
18

Page #303

274
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
on
was composed certainly not later than the 6th century of Vikrama era. i. e. between 443 and 543 A. D. He further the linguistic evidence of the work surmises that it would not be surprising if the works dates probably one or two centuries still earlier because its Mahārāṣṭri language inherits some traits of Pali and many more of Ardhamāgadhi1.
A survey of Paumacariyam reveals that its language is well developed Mahārāṣṭrī with some influence of Apabhramśa on it. The date of Panmacariyam is fixed as the last quarter of the 5th century A. D. Therefore, it is possible that Vasudevahindi was composed earlier than Paumacariyam.
Besides that we find that certain intervening stories of PCV have their source in the Vasudevahindi because some points in these stories of the PCV are not clear and are left out as well-known to the readers as follows:
The Ikṣvāku Vamsa is said to have originated with Adityayasas but it is not mentioned why it was called Ikṣvāku Vamsa. The VH explains this point.2
Vimalasūri merely refers to the episode of the battle between the sons of king Śrīṣeņa at 15.19 considering as it was well-known. This story is fully narrated in the VH.3
In the story of the origin of Hari Vamsa, it is not stated expressly that Hari became the king of Campanagari and the circumstances under which he, who had no relations with Campanagari, was installed as the king of that city. These two missing points are clear in the Vasudevahindi.4
In the story of Sañjayanta, and Vidyuddamṣṭra, the PCV does not mention the causes which led to the torturing of the former by the latter. This point is clear in the VH.5
Besides that, the stories of the 'Origin of Brahmaņas' and the 'Origin of Animal Sacrifice" seem to be in their original setting in the VH while the PCV has borrowed them from there and affected some alterations and omissions. In the former story the introduction of the
1. Vasudevahindi (Guj. Tr.), Int. pp. 2. & 15-30.
2. See Supra, Origin of Various Dynasties, Ch. 5.
3. See Supra, Ch. 4 no. 63.
4. Ibid, no. 20'
5. Ibid. no. 21.
6. Ibid. no. 16.
7. Ibid. no. 17.

Page #304

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCy.
275
device of germinated seeds for testing the real Śrāvakas indicate that the author of the PCV was well-informed of the episode that there were some Śrāvakas who were wrong-faithed. Further the PCV does not explain as to what was the significance of marking the real Srāvakas with the Kākiniratna. In the VH these two points are in their original form. Therein the real Srāvakas are called Brāhmaṇas (mahaņas), because they did not cause injury to any living being. Cakravartin Bharata took their test when he came to know, that there were some unreal Śrāvakas who posed themselves as real ones. Then he marked the real Srāvakas with the Kākiņiratna as many times as the sets of vows were observed by them. Our PCV has given a fanciful mould to this point by telling us that Lord Rşabha asked Bharata not to beat the Srāvakas māhana' hence, they were called Brāhmaṇas i. e. Māhanas.
In the story 'Origin of Animal Sacrifice' it is not mentioned as to what sort of Āranyakas were being studied by Parvataka, Narada and Vasu, whether the Aryan or non-Aryan (Arya or Anārya ). It has been left understood that they were studing Aryan Vedas. But one cannot understand what were these Aryan and non-Aryan Vedas. Secondly it is said that Rākşasa Parvataka composed worng sastras for propagating animal sacrifice. They were composed during the Tirthakāla of Munisuvratanātha ( 11. 39), but at 4.80 it is said in the story of the 'Origin of Brāhmanas' that false Vedas and hymns advocating animal. sacrifice would be composed after the Nirvāņa of Lord Mahāvīra. This is a contradiction. In the VH there is a systematic and well-planned exposition of the subject which gives an impression of its originality. It describes the Origin of Animal Sacrifice under the Origin of non-Aryan Vedas.' The story in its details gives a clear picture of the cause of the origin of Anārya-Vedas and Animal sacrifice. Hence the story in the PCV is a summary of the same given in the VH and Vimalasuri has affected some changes in the story.
All these points establish that the Vasudevahindi belongs to a period earlier than that of the Paumacariyaṁ.
As discussed above, the Rama-story of VH is not followed by Vimalasuri, but the influence of VH is quite apparent on the PCV as we shall discuss below. And if the Vasudevahindi is not an earlier composition then it is sure that both the works belong to a comtemporary period and they might have a common source as regards the following stories and features.
The motive of the whole theme and the planning of the Vasudevahindi have resemblances with the Paumacariyam:

Page #305

276
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
The hero of the VH is depicted as a romantic character who wanders from place to place and marries various girls. In the PCV also Rama and Lakşmaņa, during their journey, are depicted as romantic, exhibiting their exploits and marrying various girls (In the VR there are no such marriages).
The VH (p. 1) is divided into five main divisions called Adhikaras (tattha ime ahigārā). Our PCV is also planned into seven divisions called Adhikāras (satta purānettha ahigārā 1. 32). (In the VR they are called Kändas). The VH is further divided into many Lambhakas each dealing with a separate episode er story and having a separate title. Our PCV also contains many cantos with their separate titles. (The VR has no separate title for each canto).
In the story of Pradyumnakumāra we find that he is kidnapped on the very day of his birth and he unites with his parents after a long time (VH, p. 82 f). The motif of this story has its counterpart in the PCV's story of Bhamandala.
The story of Citravega of (VH, p. 215) in which she is transformed into a male by some medical treatment and is again brought to her original condition at the time of her marriage, seems to have its counterpart in the PCV in the story of Kalyāṇamālā who lives as a disguised prince and discloses her identity when she meets Lakşmana with a desire to marry him.
Then we have striking similarities in a few descriptions and phrases.
The descriptions of Magadha, Rājagpha and king Śreņika are based on the same pattern in both the works (PCV, 2. 1-10; 3. 1; VH, p. 2). Compare the opening verse of the 'stuti' in the PCV (1.1) with that of the first line following the first verse of the VH.
On the basis of the above evidences it can be regarded that certain intervening stories of the PCV have their sources in the VH or both the works might have common sources.
(2) Sources of Respective Intervening Stories of PCV:
The sources of the intervening stories can be briefly stated as follows:
(A) Jaina Sources : (i) The 'nāmávali' sūtras in the Samavāyanga and the Tiloyapannatti as well as the oral Jaina tradition are the sources of the biographies
1. Siddh asurakinnaroragadaņuvaibhuvanindavanda parimahiyam.--PCV. Namo vinayapaņayasurindavindavandiyakamāravindām Arahantānan-VH.

Page #306

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
277
of Tirtharkaras Mahāvira (4) Rşabha (5) Ajita (6) Munisuvrata (7) and Cakravartin Harişeņa (11). There is influence of the Kalpasūtra and the VH on the biography of Rşabha (5).
(ii) Sources in the Painnas .
(a) Kirtidhara and Sukošala (13) :
The Bhattaparinnā (16), Maranasamahi (466-67) and Santhāraga (63-64) refer that Sukośala was strangled by his mother, now a tigress.
(6) Saudāsa (1:):
The Bhattaparinnā (145) mentions that Saudāsa suffered being a slave of taste. In the PCV, there is clear influence of the Vişnupur ana on this story.
(c) Vasu and Parvataka (17):--
The Bhattaparinnā (101) states that Vasu went to hell for telling a lie. In the PCV, the story seems to be based on the
Vasudevahindi. (d) Cakravartin Sanatkumāra (10) :
The Maranasamāhi (410-11) refers that Sanatkumāra suffered
diseases. In the PCV, the story seems to be based on VH. (iii) Sources in the Vasudevahindi :
The following stories appear to have their sources in the VH. · Various minor changes are affected in them by the way of abridgement ommissions, alterations and additions or changes in proper names. If the VH is not earlier than the PCV, then both the works have their sources of the following stories in the common Jaina tradition :
Rşabha (5); Bharata and Bahubali (8); Sagara (9); Origin of Brāhmaṇas (16); Origin of (yajña) Animal Sacrifice (17); Origin of Hari Varsa (20); Muni Sañjayanta (21); Śrīvardhana and Jvalanasimha (22); Madhu and Kaitabha (57); Battle between the sons of Srīşeņa (63).
(B) Brahmanical Sources :
(i) Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa (VR) as the Source : Rāvana-carita (1) :-In details there are various differences.
Añjanāsundari and Hanumat (2) :-This story stands on an independent line. Mythological aspect of the VR is absent and it has got a realistic touch.

Page #307

278
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYA Madhu and the Śūlaratna (30) :-The PCV gives an independent story but the seeds of its motif are in the VR.
Story of Ahalya (32) ;-It is quite an independent story in the PCV. It counteracts the superstitious and divine elements of the mythological story found in the VR.
King Dandaka (40) :-It is quite independent of the VR. Only the burning of the capital of king Dandaka is a common element.
Dhanadatta and Gunamati (54): -The PCV gives a very detailed story and a number of characters play part in it. The basis of it is the story of Vedavati in the VR but there are in the PCV a number of additions and differences. (ii) Stories found in the Mahābhārata but the PCV narrates them in
quite a different way :
(a) Naghușa and Simhikā (14). (iii) Stories found in the Purānas but the PCV narrates them on
different lines : Nárada (3), Saudāsa (15).
(C) Popular Sources : The sources of nearly 35 stories are not traceable. It is quite probable that the author of the PCV might have invented some of them with his genius and he might have inherited some stories through the oral tradition of his predecessors. At least the five stories (46 to 50) coming under Mayopākhyāna very clearly reveal that some floating - popular stories have been introduced in the PCV, because the purpose or the point the author wants to explain is not served by them.
SECTION 2. CONTRIBUTION OF VIMALASŪRI
The preceding section I B (3) (d) of Chapter VI clearly brings out the elements which have been contributed anew by Vimalasūri, Of them the prominent ones are: "Svayamvara' of Kaikeyi; Sītā's brother as Bhāmandala; Ráina's betrothal with Sitä on account of his valour; Rāma's success among various candidates contesting for the hand of Sīta ; voluntary exile of Rāma, especially for the favour of Bharata; Kaikeyi's unsuccessful efforts in preventing Rāma from going into exile; many wives of Rāma and Lakşmaņa; marriage of Sitā's sons, their 'digvijaya' and battle with Rāma; Hanumat's character depicting general human traits and some details about the ancestral history of the Rakşasas and the Vānaras. Vimalasūri's historical, cultural and literary contribution consists in bringing these elements into light.

Page #308

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTICN AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
279
The Paumacariyam has its originality in re-establishing the fact that Sītā was the daughter of Janaka born of his wife. In the Mahabharata she is mentioned as 'Janakasya atmaja' (MB, 3. 274.9), but in the absence of any reference to the mother of Sītā this ‘ātmajā' term is not safe enough for concluding that Sita was the legitimate daughter of Janaka. Similar is the case with the references in the VR such as duhita Janakasya' (3. 47. 3), Janakātmajā' (5. 13. 15) etc. There are references in the Raghuvaṁsa such as 'duhitřśulka' (11. 38), 'Maithili (11.93), "Videhādhipateḥ sută' (12.26), in the Adhyātma Rāmāyara as 'mayātmajā' (1.6.20) and so forth in the Padmapuräna also, but in all these works she is clearly said to be born of the furrow. In the Vasudevahindi also Sītā is called Jaņayataņayā (I. p. 242), but there she is the legitimate daughter of Rāvana and Mandodarī. Therefore, it is Vimalasūri who tells us in very clear terms that Sītā was the daughter of Janaka and his wife and thus removes all doubts about her birth.
The Paumacariyam has further preserved a historical element in telling us that Sītā had a brother.
About the Rākşasas and the Vānaras the Paumacariyan has preserved some semi-historical material in stating that they were some original tribes of south India.
Having not given prominent place to many supernatural elements which had grown around the original Rama-katha in later times, Vimalasūri has preserved some realistic traits of the story. Of these supernatural elements the most important ones are the strange birth of Sītā; episode of golden deer; Rāvana as a ten-headed monster; Kumbhakarna, a diabolical character; the Rākşasas as demons; the Vānaras as animals and Hanumat as a super-being.
Vimalasūri has assigned respectable place to Rāvana, the hero of an aboriginal tribe and thus has voiced tolerance for other races.. Rama's and Laksmana's various marriages with the girls belonging to different races convey a message of tolerance and free racial miscegenation, though the ideal of monogamy emphasised in the Valmiki Rāmāyana has been obliterated.
He has further removed the shortcomings of the characters like Rāma, Lakşmaņa, Vali and specially Kaikeyi and has elevated them.
He made Rāma-story popular among the Jainas by creating Jaina environment around it and by assigning Rāma, Lakşmaņa and Rāvana a respectable place among the sixty-three illustrious persons of the Jaina faith.

Page #309

280
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
On the whole the story has a realistic pattern and Vimalasūri has made the greatest contribution to the Prakrit Literature in the form of the first Rāma-epic in Prakrit.
· SECTION 3. INFLUENCE OF PAUMACARIYAŃ
A. Influence of Jaina Works. The tradition of Paumacariyaṁ is generally followed by subsequent Jaina authors such as Ravişeņa, Svayambhu, Hemacandra, Bh. Somasena etc. The tradition of Vasudevahindi remained only with it, scarcely any subsequent author has been found to have followed its story, Guņabhadra's tradition of Rāma-story is followed by a few authors namely, Puşpadanta etc. It is the tradition of Vimalasūri's Paumacariyam which became very popular among the Svetāmbaras and the Digambaras alike. 1. Ravişena's Indebtedness to Vimala suri:
(a) Vimalasuri, Predecessor of Ravişena: There has been some controversy over the precedence of Vimalasūri and Ravişena. We shall now examine the question as to who is earlier of the two.
Even a casual glance at the PCV and the PCR shows that either of them is a mere translation of the other. When we examine them in details we find that both the works are planned on the same pattern. Every corresponding chapter of the PCV and the PCR bears the same heading, commences with the same topic, follows the same sequence and ends with the same topic. In the ending verse of every chapter both the authors employ their own name as test words.
The PCV contains in all 118 cantos while the PCR has 123 cantos. The five additional cantos in the PCR do not contain any thing new but whatever topics are dealt in canto Nos. 56, 66, 103 and 108 of the PCV are found to be bifurcated in the canto Nos. 56 & 57; 67, 68 & 69; 106 & 107 and 112 & 113 of the PCR respectively.
There are some glaring instance which prove beyond doubt that one is the copy of the other. Both the works while enumerating the queens of Vasudevas in the canto No. 20 mention Prabhāvati as the queen of Lakşmaņa, the eighth Vasudeva (PCV, 20.187; PCR, 20. 228). But in both the works there is no reference to Laksmana's marriage with Prabhāvati. The PCV at 91. 14-16 and the PCR at 95.20-23 while referring to the eight queens of Laksmana mention Visalya as his chief queen, but there is no reference to Prabhāvatr. The PCV (105.16)

Page #310

281
SOURCES,CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV. mentions that a period of 64000 years lapsed between Rāmāyana and Mahābhārata and at 20.81 it is said that eleven lakh years intervened between two Tirthaikaras, Munisuvrata and Nemi. The PCR (20.89;109.28) contains similar defect. The order in which the 14 Kulakaras are mentioned in the PCV (3.50-55) does not agree fully with the Digambara or the Švetambara tradition (See Infra, Ch.7.Sec.1). Ravişena, though a staunch Digambara, puts them in the same order (3.75-87). The Mayopakhyāna (77.66ff) narrated in the PCV does not seem to be properly connected with the previous context and the enquiry made by Srenika. The same inconsistency is found in the PCR (80.149ff.).
The PCV contains in all 8651 verses (Aprox. 10000 granthāgras) while the PCR (123.186) has 18023 verses. The descriptive portions? such as geographical places, physical beauty, natural objects, love scenes, ceremnies, battles, religious discourses etc. are larger in the PCR. There are very rare instances in the PCR2 when a similar topic of the PCV comparatively occupies shorter portion in the PCR. Generally the length of all the cantos of the PCR varies with those of the PCV. The cantos (1-90), 20 (1-208), 73 (1-35), 75 (1-85), 87 (1-20) and 88(1-43) are roughly equal in size to the PCR's cantos (1-102), 20(1-250), 76(1-43), 78(1-95), 90(1-29) and 91(1-51). On the whole it appears that either the PCV is a contracted version of the PCR or the PCR is an enlarged version of the PCV.
Pt. Nathuram Premi observes that there are various instances of reproducing Prakrit works into Sanskrit, but there is scarcely any example vice-cersa. He further says that in both the works the origin of Brāhmaṇas has been associated with the etymological meaning of the word 'mā-hana=do not kill'. Má hana is a Prakrit equivalent of Sanskrit Brāhmaṇa, therefore, the episode of the origin of Brāhmaṇas befits the Prakrit word Mahana. In Sanskrit no-where the Brahmanas are called Mahaņas. In his opinion Ravişeņa has copied and reproduced Paumacariyain into Sanskrit (See 781, p. 90). Now we propose to bring out some other points which support the fact that Ravişena has recast Vimalasūri's work.
1. Education and Training of Kaikeyi PCV, 24.5-8; PCR, 24-6-83; Qualities of
Marudevi PCV, 3.58; PCR, 3.91-100; Description of Krauñcarava river PCV, 42.15-16; PCR, 42,62-74; Rāma's mourning after the kidnapping of Sita PCV, 45.57-66; PCR, 45.105-149. Laikāsundari's love for Hanuman PCV, 52.17-20; PCR 52.46-58; Battle between Kişkindhi and Aśnivega PCV, 6.176-201 PCR,
6-428-501; Watersports of Sahasrakirana PCV, 10.37-44; PCR, 10.37-84. 2. Heavenly abodes-PCR, 105,173; PCV, 102.149--166; cemetary ground.
PCR, 109.54; PCV, 105.53-61.

Page #311

282
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
In the previous birth story of Bharata and Bhuvanāla kāra elephant there is a lapse in the PCV. The soul of the elephant should have been generally deceitful in all his previous births for earning the karmas of being reborn as an animal. This point is missed at one place in the middle of the story and so the previous births of the elephant have been assigned to Bharata in the later half of the story and thus Bharata also becomes deceitful in some of his previous births. This error has been rectified by the PCR (See Supra, Ch. 4 no. 51).
There is one specific instance as to how Ravişena while copying the PCV forgets the name of a king mentioned by him earlier and gives another name on the basis of the Prakrit word occurring in the PCV. In the story of Muni Sañjayanta and king Vidyutdamṣṭra, the PCV regularly refers to the king as Vijjudaḍha (5.20-41). The PCR mentions him as Vidyuddamṣṭra at 5.25. Even in the contents given in the first canto the king is named as Vidyuddamṣṭra (PCR, 1. 51). But further at 5.30, 34 and 47 we find that the same person is called Vidyudṛdha, the name being a new but faulty Sanskritisation of Vijjudaḍha of the PCV.
In the story of a Senapati and two farmer brothers, the words 'Sahoyara Karisaya' occur in the PCV for two farmer brothers. In the PCR they are named as Surapa and Karṣaka. It is an example of how Raviṣena has changed 'Sahoyara Karisaya' to Surapa and Karṣaka.
Jakkhaṭṭhāpanivāsī sahoyarā karisaya do vi PCV, 39. 681 Surapaḥ karṣakaścāstāṁ yakṣasthāne sahodarau, PCR, 39-137//.
Then in the genealogical lists of the dynasties, we find that some kings' names have been altered in the PCR. These alterations are done in the PCR for the purpose of regulating the 'varpas' of the concerned metre. If Sanskrit names of the PCR are Prakritised, the number of morae remain the same, therefore, in such cases the PCV had no necessity in altering these names. It is the PCR which has altered them to reduce or increase the number of Varnas.
(PCV) Aridamano 5.7. = (PCR) Avi (ri) dhvamo 5.8; (PCV) Jalanajaḍī 5. 46=(PCR) Vahnijațī 5. 54; (PCV) Riumahano 5.263= (PCR) Arimardanaḥ 5.396; (PCV) Akkateo 5. 46=(PCR) Vahnitejāḥ
5.54.
The PCV (5. 145-157) enumerates the names of all the 63 illustrious persons of the Jaina faith and calls Padma as the eighth Baladeva and Rama (Balarama) as the ninth Baladeva. The Svetambara tradition1 has Padma as the eighth and Rama as the
1, See Samava. Su, 159. (Abhaya). Pravacanasaroddhara, Gatha-1211; AC, 698.

Page #312

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
283
ninth Baladeva, but the Digambara tradition mentions Rāma as the eighth and Padma as the ninth Baladeva. Ravişena's work reveals that he is a staunch Digambara. Had this work been original there was no reason in naming it as Padmacaritam, because according to the Digambara tradition Padma is the ninth Baladeva and Ravişena was relating the story of the son of Dasaratha, who is the eighth Baladeva. At 5.212-226 he gives the name of Tīrthalikaras and Cakravartis but altogether omits to mention the names of Baladevas, Vāsudevas and Prativāsudevas, though the PCV has mentioned all the names. Then the PCV in Ch. 20 and at 70.35 enumerates the names of Baladevas, but the PCR in Ch. 20 and at 73.99 enumerates Vasudevas etc. but leaves the Baladevas. Whenever there has occurred an occasion for enumerating the Baladevas, the PCR has kept silence (25.34). Had he mentioned the names of the Baladevas in the traditional Digambara chronology, his statement would have gone against the title of his own work and this fact proves that he kept silence on such occasions and went on following the story of the PCV without stating anything which would have gone against the Digambara tradition.
All the above evidences prove beyond doubt that Padmacaritam of Ravişena is an enlarged reproduction of Vimalasūri's Paumacariyam.
Vimalaśūri says that he is narrating the traditional story handed down from Mahāvīra to Indrabhūti and other ācāryas, having himself based it upon the 'nāmāvalinibaddha' sūtras. Ravişeņa also mentions the tradition through which he inherited the story: Mahāvīra to Indrabhūti, Sudharman, Jambū, Prabhava, Kirtidhara and Anuttaravāgmin (PCR, 1. 41-42; 123. 166). He additionally tells us that he based his work on the written work of Anuttaravāgmin PCR 1. 42. The various meanings of Anuttaravāgmin are: the chief spokesman, principal author, the chief who spoke well in the sense that he was the first to put something in writing in a systematic form or an unparalleled author. The PCV is the first systematic and detailed work which has treated the Jaina Rama-story so eloquently. Therefore, it is most probable that Ravişena's reference to the work of Anuttaravāgmin is to the Paumacariyan of Vimalasűri and he has used Anuttaravāgmin perhaps as an adjective of Vimalasūri because he was the first author who pointed out the unreliable points of the popular Rāmāyana (VR) with firmness and spoke eloquently of the Jaina Rāma story. Dr. H.C. Bhayani is also of the opinion that Anuttaravăgmin is perhaps a reference to Vimala (See PCS, I. Int).
1. See TP, 4.517; HVP 60.290; UP and MP. also.

Page #313

284
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
(6) Padmacaritam of Ravişeņa : Ravisena's Padmacaritam composed in Sanskrit in 678 A. D., is a thorough and word to word copy of Paumacariyaṁ. It agrees with the PCV in all its essential points but reveals Digambara traits throughout the work. It affects the following, especially minor, additions and alterations (For details see Supra, Ch. 3, 4 & 5).
Main Rāma-Story. Additions:
(1) Suprabhā is the fourth queen of Dasaratha and her son is Satrughna. (2) Janaka receives two bows, Vajrāvarta and Sāgarāvarta. Lakşmaņa strings the latter bow. (3) Vibhīşaņa destroys also the statue of Janaka. (4) Rāvaņa utters "Rāma, Rāma' in his lion like roar to deceive Rāma. (5) Vibhīşaņa promises Hanumän to reapproach Rāvana for rescuing Sitā. (6) Hanuman changes his form when he drops Rāma's finger-ring before Sitā, (7) Khecara Suvela of Suvelapura is also defeated by Rāma before attacking Larkā. (8) Rāma promises the crown of Laikā to Vibhișana when the latter takes shelter under the former. (9) Hanumān also joins Lavana and Aukusa in their fight against Rama and Lakşmana. (10) Laksmana has 17000 wives (PCV-16000).
Alterations :
• (11) Kaikeyi's mother is named Pșthuśrí (PCV-Pșthvīšri) (12) Janaka's mother is Vipulā (PCV-Ilā). (13) Bharata's wife is Lokasundari (PCV-Subhadrā). (14) The place where Rāmapuri is conjured up by the Yaksa is specifically called Vanasthali. (15) Sītā is enstrusted to an Aryā when Rāma proceeds to capture Ativīrya. (16) Sītā refuses to accompany Hanumān because Rama has not given him orders to that effect. (17) Bhagavati is mentioned in place of Abhayamati as one of the eight chief queens of Lakşmaņa.
Dynastries.
(18) Generally in all the genealogical lists there are a few additional kings. (19) In the Ikşvāku Vaṁsa Pșthu and Aja, ancestors of Rāma, are important additions.
Intervening stories.
Rāvana-Carita. (20) Ratnāśrava is the only son of Sumalin-In the PCV there are three sons of Sumälin. (21) Two more Vidyās are acquired by

Page #314

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
285
Rāvana. (22) Mandodarī requests monk Vali to forgive Rāvana. (23) Sudarśanacakra which is acquired by Rāvana belonged to Nalakūbara. (24) Varuna marries his daughter, Satyavati to Rāvana. According to the PCV she is married to Hanumān.
All the intervening stories of the PCV are found in the PCR and they agree with the former. Digambara traits are observed especially in the stories of the illustrious persons of the Jaina faith. On the whole there are very minor changes. The PCR rarely drops any point (story no. 9). In a few cases it has improved upon the stories of the PCV for the sake of clarity (Nos. 47. 48, 50). It affects sometimes alterations in proper names and in a few cases in other points (Nos. 20, 61, 62). It makes minor addition in some points (Nos. 14, 25, 41. 44) and in a few cases it mentions more previous births of some characters (Nos. 23, 51, 52, 54). In two cases (Nos. 22, 58) the point of similarity can be traced in the Vasudevahindi.
There is a clear evidence of the influence of the VR on the PCR as regards the point No. 4, 6, 8, 14 and 19. As regards the fourth queen of Dasaratha and her son the PCR agrees somewhat with the Daśaratha Kathānań.
2. Svayambhu's Paumacariu :
Paumacariu is an Apabhraíba work composed in the later half of the ninth century (840-920 A. D.; See PCS, Vol. III Int.). Svayambhū (PCS, 1.2.9) expressly mentions that he composed his work through the favour of Ravişeņa (puņu Raviseņāyariya pasāem PCS, 1.2.9). His work is more poetic and attractive in style. He has not slavishly imitated Ravişeņa. He has affected several omissions, abridgements, alterations, modifications, divergences and additions especially as regards the intervening stories. In the main story there is no far-reaching change except that Kaikeyi is jealous at heart, Vajrajangha is the husband of the sister of Rāma and Indra is painted as if he is a celestial lord. The influence of VR on the PCS can also be traced. (For details see Supra, Ch. 3, 4 & 5).
Main Rāma-Story. Omissions:
(1) Rāma's teachers. (2) Brother of Janaka and his daughter's marriage with Bharata. (3) Ratimālā and Vijayasundari's marriage with Laksmana and Bharata respectively. (4) Reference to the Ganges on the occasion of banishing Sītā. (5) Kşullaka, the teacher of Lavana and Ankusa.

Page #315

286
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Alterations:
(6) The boon was offered to Kaikeyi at Kautukamangalapura (PCV-PCR-at Ayodhyā). (7) Janaka's father's name is Candraketu PCV-PCR-Indraketu). (8) Višalyā is offered to Lakşmaņa in marriage on the occasion of Sita's 'svayamvara' (PCV-PCR-in the battlefield). (9) Khara and Dūşaņa are two persons and husbands of Candranakha (PCV-PCR-Kharadūşaņa as one person; VR-Two persons but not husbands of Surpanakhā). (10) Rāvana was temped by the beauty of Sita in advance through the message of Duşaņa (PCV-PCR-He was tempted on the spot). (11) Hanuman destroys the park to tease Rāvana PCV-PCR-When the men sent by Rāvana besiege him, he ruins the park). (12) Rāvana is ready to abdicate his throne for possessing Sītā (PCV-PCR-He offers some parts of his territory to Rāma).
Modifications:
(13) Vidyadhara Śaśivardhana marries his eight daughters to Lakşmana, other ten to Bharata and Satrughna (PCV-PCR-All married to Lakşmana). (14) Viradhita was enthroned as the king of Patalaňkārapura during Rama's sojourn at that place, immediately after having killed Khara-Duşana (PCV-PCR-after returning from Larikā). (15) Hanuman concealed himself in the sky when he dropped the finger-ring before Sita (PCR-He changed his form). (16) Suvela is not defeated but he joins Rāma (PCR-He is defeated PCV--No mention). (17) Vibhişaņa escapes from stabbing himself to death for he falls into a swoon (PCV-PCR-Rāma saves him). (18) Vibhīşaņa is crowned as the king of Laikā after the death of Rāvana (PCV-PCR-After Rāma's returning to Ayodhyā). (19) Vajrajangha is mentioned as the husband of the sister of Rama (PCV-PCR-No relation with Dasaratha). So the marriage of his daughter with Lavaņa is dropped. (20) Here king Pșthu marries his two daughters, Kanakamala and Tarangamalā to Lavana and Aukusa respectively (PCV-PCR-Only Kanakamālā to Ankūsa).
Additions:
(21) Šatrughna also was married to some Vidyādhara girls on the occasion of Sita's 'svayamvara' (PCV-PCR-His marriage not mentioned) (22) The period of Răma's exile is 16 years (23) Triširas also was killed by Lakşmaņa on the occasion of the latter's battle with Khara and Daşana: (24) Two Cáraņa munis consoled Rāma following the abduction of Sīta and Jațāyu's death. (25) Trijata's dream and Akşayakumāra's killing are mentioned. (26) The sea is crossed in aerialcars (PCV-PCR--No specific mention). (27) Setu, an additional lord also is

Page #316

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
287
defeated before encamping near Lankā. (28) Samudra and Setu jointly offered five girls to Lakşmana in marriage (PCV-PCR-Samudra only offered four girls). (29) Rāma challenged Rāvana through Angada before the commencement of the battle. (30) Here Trijatā and Larkāsundari spoke for Sita's purity after the battle between Rama and his sons. They further asked Rāma to arrange an ordeal if he was not convinced with Sita's chastity. (PCV-PCR-Rāma asks Sīta to adduce proof, then Sītā offers for fire-ordeal. Divergences:
(31) Kaikeyi is jealous at the proposed Räma's coronation, Bharata abuses Dasaratha, Lakşmaņa becomes furious and is ready to imprison Bharata. (32) Bharata. goes to call back Rama of his own accord. Kaikeyi follows him but does not speak. She is here also jealous at heart, (33) Rudrabhūti commissions his warriors to snatch away Sītā, but after having learnt that Rama is a Baladeva, he surrenders to Rāma. (34) Candranakhā assumed her hideous form and Lakşmaņa raised his sword to threaten her men if they dared to put him in danger.
Dynasties. Omissions:
(35) The origin of the Ikşvāku and the Hari Vamsas as well as the genealogical lists of Ikşvāku, Vidyadhara and Hari Varšas are dropped. Abridgement:
(36) The genealogical list of Vānara Vamsa is curtailed (37) The genealogical list of Rākşasa Vamsa seems to be influenced by the PCV (See Supra Ch. 5).
Intervening Stories.
Rāvana-Carita. Omissions :
(38) Request of Vaisravana to Rāvana for avoiding a battle. Abridgement:
(39) number of Vidyās acquired by Rāvana is curtailed. There is a mere reference to the destroying of the Yajña of Marutta by Rāvana. (40) Some of the Vidyās have their counterpart in the PCV, but not in the PCR. Alterations :
(41) Indra is depicted as the celestial lord. (42) Sahasrakirana of Mahişmati fought with his one thousand arms. (43) Hanuman tried ro fasten the soldiers of Varuna with his magic tail,

Page #317

288
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Modification:
(44) Rāvana was named Daśamukha in his boyhood (PCV-PCR— when he was a babe). (45) Uparambha herself offered the Sudarśanacakra along with the lore to Ravana (PCR-Cakra came into the possession of Ravana when Nalakübara was defeated).
Additions:
(46) Rāvana sends his men to celebrate the marriage of Candranakha with Khara and Duşaņa. (47) Personal combat between Vali and Rāvana and humiliation of Rāvana on being lifted up by Vali. (48) Pārāśara, Kautilya and Manu also mentioned as ministers of Indra (49) Sending of an envoy by Indra to make friends with Ravana, offering of his daughter to Ravana in marriage and inciting of Ravana by Narada for a battle with Indra. (50) Vidyadhara lords Candra, Yama, Kubera, Keśarin, Kanaka, Agni, Anala, Anila and Surya all taken as captive by Ravana (51) As regards the marriage of Ravana and his brothers, the PCS agree with the PCV, not with the PCR.
Other Intervening Stories.
Previous birth stories are generally dropped or abridged. In the rest of the stories, leaving aside sectarian differences there are minor droppings, alterations, modicications and additions.
Omissions:
Caritas: Story Nos. 3, 4,7 & 10.
Legendary kings: Story Nos. 12, 13, 14 & 15.
Stories of Genesis: Nos. 16 & 20.
Didactic stories: Nos. 21-23, 25-28, 30-33, 36-37, 41-42, 43-50,
52, 53 & 57.
Stories of General Prudence: Nos. 58 to 63.
Abridgement:
Story no. 11, 38 & 54 are curtailed and No. 17, 24, 34, 35 & 51 get merely a passining reference.
52. There are some minor points which reveal that Paumacariu is influenced by the PCV (See also PCS, I. Int. p. 50-51).
An analysis of various changes affected by Svayambhu reveals that he has cut short the volume of (the epic) his work by dropping altogether many intervening stories.

Page #318

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCy. 289
Though he has followed Ravişeņa yet he seems to have consulted Vimalasüri's work (See above points No. 37, 40,51 &52) as it is brought out also by the description of the Raksasa soldiers marching to fight Rāma's army (59.7). Its similarity with that of the PCV at 53.107-113 is striking. The PCC does not contain this short of description. Similarly the description of the palace of Rāvana in the PCV at 68.1-17 and in the PCS at 72.2f can be compared.
He has been influenced by the Valmiki Rāmāyana also for he divides his work into five Kāndas of which four are named as in the VR (Ayodhyā, Sundara, Yuddha and Uttara). Further see. points Nos. 9, 10, 11, 15, 21, 22, 23, 25, 29, 31-34, 41-43, 47 & 50. These points do not bear complete identity with those of the VR. There are alterations and modifications, but the influence of the VR is apparent.
Calling Rāma as Ramacandra seems to be an influence of Bhavabhūti.
There are many other points which differ from the PCV and PCR. For their source he might have followed some other tradition or might have affected innovations. Dr. Bhayani proposes that in such cases his source was Caturmukha's Paumacariu (See PCS, I. Int.).
(3) Hemacandra's Trişașțiśalākāpurușa-caritam:
The TSP is a work of the 12th century A. D. It contains Rāma-story and other intervening stories also. It generally follows the PCR. Minor changes, omissions and additions are traceable in the Rāma-story as well as in other siories. The influence of PCV and PCS is apparent on the Rāma-story as well as other stories. It adds the picture of Rāvana which became the cause of Sītā's exile. A few of the intervening stories have their sources in other works (For details See Supra, Ch. 3, 4 & 5).
Main Rama-Story Omissions:-(1) Only one fight between Sugrīva and the imposter. (2) No request of Mandodarī to give up Sītā. (3) No multiplication of the head and arms of Rāvana in the final battle with Lakşmapa.
Alterations and Modifications:-(4) Kalyāṇamālā is offered to Lakşmaņa in marriage at Kūbarapura. (5) Rudrabhūti is named Rudradeva. He is called a Kāka, the lord of the Kirātas. (6) River Tāpti is specifically mentioned to have been crossed by Rāma. (7) Candranakhā herself requests Rāvana to help Khara and Düşana. (8) In the final battle Rāvana conjures up many counterfeits of himself. (9) Rāma's age is 15000 years (PCV-PCR, 1700 years).
19

Page #319

290
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Additions:-(10) Padma and Lakşmaņa were born at Rājagpha when Daśaratha was sojourning there after marrying Kaikeyi. (11) Dasaratha sends his officers to bring back Rāma from exile but in vain. (12) Kaikeyi takes permission of Dasaratha to call back Rāma. (13) Picture of Ravana drawn by Sita, becomes the cause of her banishment. (14) Laksmana sends Rāma to search for banished Sīta but in vain. (15) Lavapa's son is named Anangadeva.
Though Hemacandra has followed the PCR but he has consulted the Paumacariyam and Paumacariu also.
Influence of PCV on TSP:-(16) Kaikeyi's mother's name is Pșthvišri. (17) Janaka's mother's name is Ila. (18) Bharta's wife is named Subhadra.
Influence of PCS on TSP:-(19) The boon was offered to Kaikeyi at Kautukamangalapura (20) Rudradeva (bhūtī) tried to snatch away Sită. (21) Triširas and Trijatā are mentioned. (22) Virādhita was appointed the king of Patalankārapura before attacking Larkā. (23) Hanu kills Akşakumāra also. (24) The sea was crossed in aerial-cars.
Influence of VR:-(25) Candranakhā excites Rāvana referring to the beauty of Sita. (26) Sitä сompells Rāma to go to assist Lakşmaņa fighting against Khara.
Dynasties:-(27) There is influence of Vasudevahindi on the genealogical list of the Hari Vamsa and that of the VH and Harivamsapurana on the origin of Hari Varsa. (28) The origin of Raksasa Vamsa and the genealogical list of Ikşvāku line is influenced by the PCV. (29) The origin of Vidyādhara Vamsa is influenced by the PCS.
Intervening-Stories. The following alterations are found in the Rāvana-Carita :(30) Indra's mother is named Citrasundari (PCR-Mānasasundari) (31) Sahasrāra assumed the form of the celestial Indra to fulfil the pregnancy longing of his wife (PCR-No change of form). (32) Vīra as father-in-law of Vibhīşana (PCV-PCR-Visuddhakamala). (33) Battle between Rāvana and Vaisravana is dropped.
Hemacandra agrees with the PCV as regards the following points:-(34) Marriage of Rāvana and his brothers. (35) Installing of Adityarajas and Rkşarajas as kings of certain places. (36) Varuna's battle with Rāvana.
Hemacandra is influenced by Svayambhū also :-(37) Khara and Duşaņa are two brothers (Khara is the husband of Candranakha). (38) Humiliation of Rāvana by Vali in the battle. (39) Uparambhā-episode,

Page #320

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF Pcy.
291
As regards other intervening stories Hemacandra seems to have consulted both Paumacariyam and Padmacaritam. Minor droppings, alterations, modifications and additions are affected. Some stories are altogether dropped, some are abridged and a few have quite different sources.
40. The following stories are not found in the TSP:-Nos. 19 (it is mixed with No. 18); 21-22, 27-28, 31, 41-42, 43-44, 46-50, 55.58-63).
41. The following stories are abridged Nos. 23-25, 54 & 56. Story No. 43 is included in the story No. 54.
42. The source of story No. 17 (Origin of Animal sacrifice) is probably Vasudevahindi.
43. The sources of story No. 8 (Bharata and Bahubali) and No. 16 (Origin of Brahmanas) are probably Vasudevahindi and Avaśyakacũrni.
44. The sources of story No. 9 (Death of the sons of Sagara) and No. 10 (Sanatkumāra) are probably Vasudevahindi and Devendragani's commentary on Uttarădhyayana.
45. The source of story No. 40 (King Dandaka) is probably cũrni.
46. Story No. 20 (Sumukha and Viraka) is influenced by the Harivaṁsapurana of Jinasenasūri.
47. Story No. 56 (Priyankara and Hitankara) is influenced by the PCS.
48. The sources of story No. 57 (Madhu and Kaitabha) and No. 11 (Cakravartin Harişeņa) are quite different.
(4) Rāmapurāņa of Bhattāraka Somasena :
The RPS is a Sanskrit work of the 17 th century A. D. (RPS, Int. p. 6). The author Somasena mentions that he has followed Ravişena. He seems to have consulted various other Jaina works composed by the Svetāmbaras, Digambaras and the Yapaniyas He has taken some elements from the Rāma-story of Guņabhadra's Uttarapurāņa and Mahāpurāņa of Puşpadanta. There are very minor omissions, alterations, modifications and some additions also.
Main-Story. Omissions :-(1) Offering of girls in marriage to Lakşmaņa by king Simhodara of Ujjenī, Vajrakarņa of Daśapura and Samudra of Velandharapura. (2) Disturbing of Rāvana's meditation and dragging of Mandodarī by Angada.

Page #321

292
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN Alterations and Modifications :-(3) River Bahu in place of Gambhirā. (4) Nalakacchapura in place of Kūvavadda. (5) Valikhilaya's appointment of Rudrabhūti as his minister. (6) Land of Tapi called Khānadeśa. (7) Locating of Kotisila at Nabhigiri. (PCV-Sindhuddesa, PCR-No place mentioned). (8) Fastening of Mahendrarājā by Hanuman with his Langūlavidya. (9) Manifestation of his Kāmadeva-rupa by Hanuman to attract Lankásundari. (10) Sending of Višalyā for curing Lakşmaņa without any objection because she was destined to become his wife.
Additions:-(11) Kaikaya, as one more brother of Kaikeyi. (12) Birth place of Suprabhā, queen of Daśaratha as Ratnapura. (13) King Mahīdhara alsoccomapanied Rāma to subdue Ativīrya. (14) Rāvana's promise to regard Sītā as his daughter (and to return her to Rāma after subduing him when she requested Rāvana not to kill Rāma and Lakşmaņa). (15) Disclosure by Mandodarī to Rāvana that Sita is their daughter. (16) Offering of the Siddhartha Vidyā to Lakşmaņa by the daughters of Khecara Cakravardhana. (17) Marriage of Lavaņa and Arkuśa with the eight daughters of king of Podanapura and 300 of Kuberakānta. (18) Turgagiri as the place of emancipation of Hanumān and Rama and Pāvāgiri as that of Lavana and Ankusa.
Influence of PCV :-Pșthvimati as the name of the mother of Kaikeyi.
Influence of PCS:- Appointment of Virādhita as the king of Patalarkārapura before attacking Lankā.
Influence of TSP :-Lakşmaņa commissions soldiers to search for exiled Sita (TSP-Laksmana sends Rāma). Lavana's son named Anargalavaņa (TSP-Ananigadeva).
Influence of Guṇabhadra's Ráma-story :-(1) Rāma's date of birth. (2) Sita as the daughter of Rāvana and Mandodarī (When Bhāmaņdala is lost, Sita who was found abandoned in a field is adopted by Janaka as his daughter). (3) Mandodarī's motherly love for Sitā gushes forth (When she tries to persuade Sītā to accept Ravana as her husband), She promises Sítā to help her preserviag in chastity.( 4) Hanuman's assuming the form of a monkey (when he is attacked by Rāvana's soldiers in the garden).
Influence of Puşpadanta's Rāma story :-(5) The reference to the burning of Larika by Hanuman is an influence of Puşpadanta's Rama-story.
Influence of VR :-(1) Rāma becomes so furious that he is ready to kill Sugrīva for his negligence in searching for Sítā, but Lakşmaņa

Page #322

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV. 293 intervenes (VR- Laksmana warns Sugrīva that he will be killed by Rāma. Tārā intervenes and pacifies Lakşmaņa). (2) Hanumān climbs up the tree (having changed his form) and drops the ring before Sitā.
Dynasties:-(1) The origin of Ikşvāku Varsa is influenced by the Adipuräna and TSP and its genealogical list is influenced by the PCV and the TSP. (2) The origin of Vidyadhara Vamsa is influenced by the PCS and its genealogical list is influenced by the PCV and HVPJ. (3) The origin of Hari Varsa is influenced by the HVP), TSP and AP.
Intervening-Stories. The following alterations are affected in the Rāvana-Carita :(1) Indra designated his territory as 'Svarga' and the Vidyādharas as Devas (It is an influence of the PCS and the VR). (2) Rávaņa assumed the form of Indra and raised the peak of Kailāśa with his one lakh arms.
3. There is influence of the PCV also :-It does not mention that Sudarsanacakra was seized by Ravana from Nalakūbara,
4. There is influence of the PCS also :-Naming of Dasamukha in his boyhood. Agreeing of by Indra's Lokapālas also to perform menial services in Lauka. Fastening of Varuņa's soldiers by Hanuman with his 'Largūla' charm.
Other Stories:-As regards other intervening stories which are based on those of the PCR there are minor droppings, alterations, modifications, and additions also. A few stories are altogether omitted A few have different sources. Generally the influence of other works is also there.
1. The following stories are omitted :-No. 10 (Sanatkumāra), 28, (Previous birth of Śrīkantha) & 63 (sons of Śrīşeņa), Story No. 61 and 62 are mixed, taking characters from the former and the theme from the latter.
2. There is influence of the PCV :-Story No. 56 (previous birth of Lavana and Aukusa) and 60 (Atmaśreyas and the Mystic ring).
3. There is influence of the PCS :-Story No. 8 (Bharata and Bahubali).
4. There is influence of the TSP --Story No. 35 (previous birth of Hanu) and 39 (previous birth of Mleccha Senāpāti).
5. There is influence of the Uttarapurāna:--Story No. 17 (Origin of Animal Sacrifice). Story No. 16 (Origin of Brāhmaṇas) is modified in the light of Uttarapur äna.

Page #323

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
6. Mixed Influence:-Story No. 20 (Sumukha and Viraka) is influenced by the PCV, AP and TSP. StoryNo. 51 (previous births of Bharata) is confusive. It is influenced by the PCV and TSP. Story No. 54 (previous births of Rama and Sita) in influenced by the TSP and (Manņimati's resolve) by the Uttarapurana.
294
7. Other Sources:-Story No. 9 (Sagara's sons) is based on Gunabhadra's Uttarapurana, No. 21 (Muni Sañjayanta) on Puspadanta's Mahapurana and No. 22 (Śrīvardhana and Jvalanasimha) on the Harivaṁśapurāņa of Jinasenasuri).
(5) Influence on Jinasenasuri and Hastimalla :
The Harivamsapurana (HVPJ) of Jinasenasūri is a work of 783 A.D. The author of this work remembers his predecessors and mentions Raviṣena (1.34), but there is no reference to Vimalasuri. Various lists. of dynasties given in his work resemble those of the PCR. While writing on the Paumacariyam, Shri Nathuram Premi in his book JSI proposes that it is proble that the Harivamsapurana is based on the work of the same name composed by Vimalasūri as referred to in the Kuvalayamala of Udyotanasuri. The Harivamsapurana of Vimalasuri has not been discovered so far, still the influence of the PCV is visible on the genealogical list of the Iksvaku and the Vidyadhara Vamsas of the HVPJ (See Supra, Ch 5). It indicates that Jinasenasūri had consulted the Paumacariyam.
Story no 22 (Previous births of Sañjayanta and Vidyuddamṣṭra) and No. 57 (Madhu and Kaiṭabha) in the HVPJ reveal that their source is the Vasudevahindi.
Hastimalla (13 th centnry A. D. has adopted in his Maithili Kalyana the incident of Rama's success among various candidates in stringing the bow (Supra, Ch. 3.2E) from the tradition of the PCV and has based his Añjana-Pavanañjaya-Năṭaka on the
tradition of the PCV.
(6) Minor Influence of Paumacariyaṁ on the Mahapurāṇa of Puspadanta :
Puspandanta was a poet of the 10th century A. D. He followed the Rama-story of Uttarapurana. His main contribution is the changing of the prosaic form of Rama-story of Gunabhadra into a highly artistic style of poetry.
Main changes affected over the story of the UP are as follows:-(1) Satrughna as the son of the fourth queen of Dasaratha. (2) Rama is called Padma also. (3) Naming of Lakṣmaṇa after hsi

Page #324

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV. 295 qualities. (4) Rāma is said to have strung his bow to dispel the fear of enemies while protecting the Yajña of Janaka. (5) Rāvana decides to kidnap Sitā because she was previously promised to him by Janaka. (6) Sūrpanakhā is called Candranakha. (7) Mandodari recognised Sita by the marks on her feet. (8) Hanuman convinces Sită of his genuineness by referning to her love-quarrel with Rama and applying of a Tilaka on her forehead by Rama. (9) Anumān and other Vidyadharas burn the city of Lanka with their fiery tails. (10) Vibhişana tries to stab himself but in vain.
The above analysis reveals that in point No. 3 there is influence of the PCV exclusively. In the points Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, & 10 there is influence of the PCR or the tradition of the PCV. In point No. 8 the reference to a lovequarrel shows the influence of the PCV-PCR tradition.
The reference to the applying of Tilaka (point No. 8) and the burning of Larkā (Point No. 9) is indicative of the influence of the VR.
B. Influence on Non-Jaina Works Now we shall arrange, according to their age, the non-Jaina works which have been influenced by the tradition of Paumacariyan.
1. Works composed in India :
(a) Sanskrit works : (i) Ny simhapurāņa (5th cent. A.D. ?) :- It is an 'Upapurāņa' (1) Stringing of the bow by Rāma in the presence of many candidates on the occasion of Sita’s ‘svayamvara' (See Supra, Ch. 3.S.E). (2) Tără originally the wife of Sugrīva (See Supra, Ch. 3.6 G). (3) Prophecy that the piercer of the trees would be the killer of Vali (In the PCV the prophecy is to the effect that the lifter of the Kotisila would be the killer of Rāvana. (See Supra. Ch. 3.7 B).
Dr. R. C. Hazra (See Bulcke, p. 160) holds this Purāna to be of the 5th century A. D. But it is an Upapurāna and the date of Upapurāņas is always posterior to that of the principal 18 Purăņas which are generally held to have been composed up to the 5th century A. D. Therefore, its date should very probably fall later than the 5th cent. A. D. If it is not so, then the Paumacariyam and Nysimhapurāna belong to a contemporary period, hence all the above points should have some common source.
(ii) Bhatti Kävya (6th-7th century A.D.):- Appearance of Garuda when he is remembered by Rāma (See Supra, Ch. 3.8C).

Page #325

296
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
According to the VR, When Rama and Lakşmaņa are noosed by Indrajit, Garuda appears suddenly. It is in the PCV that the Garudadhipati appears when Rama asks Lakşmaņa to remember of him. Therefore, it is the influenee of the PCV's tradition on the Bhatti Kavya.
(iii) Bhagavatapurāna (6th to 7th century A.D.):-Rama's success among various candidates in stringing the bow (See Supra, Ch. 3.2 E).
(iv) Mahāviracarita of Bhavabhūti (8th century A.D.) :-1. Rāma's success in stringing the bow in the presence of various candidates (Supra, Ch. 3. 2. E). 2. Kaikeyi's complete exoneration from the charge of exiling Rāma (Supra, Ch. 3.3. B).
(v) Uttararāmacarita of Bhavabhūti (8th century A.D) :-1. The episode of an agile elephant and Sītā's request to Rāma to subdue it (Supra. Ch. 3.7 E). 2. Lava's battle with the son of Lakşmaņa (Supra, Ch. 3.9 D).
(vi) Chalitarāma (9th cent. A.D):-1. Battle of Lava and Kusa (Supra, Ch. 3.9 D)
(vii) Rāmacarita of Abhinanda (9th century A.D):-1. Vānaravarasundari's love proposal to Hanumān (Supra, Ch. 3.7 C).
The above mentioned three works are titled on the style of Jaina works on Ramakathā, called Paumacariyań, Padmacaritam or Paumacariu. In the Jaina tradition works on the life of great persons are generally titled as caritas.
(viii) Anargha Rāghava of Murāri (9th-10th century A.D) :1. Rāma's success in stringing the bow in the presence of various candidates (Supra, Ch. 3.2. E). 2. Kaikeyi's complete exoneration from the charge of exiling Rāma (Supra, Ch. 3.3. B).
(ix) Bala Rāmāyana of Rajasekhara (10th century A. D.):1. Failure of other candidates and Rāma's success in striging the bow on the occasion of Sita's 'svayamvara' (Supra, Ch. 3.2. E) 2. Kaikeyi's complete exoneration from the charge of exiling Rama (Supra, Ch. 3.3. B).
(x) Brahmapurana:-The Gautami Mahātmya section in the Brahmapurana (Ch. 70-175) which contains Rāma-story, is held to be composed not earlier than the 10th century A.D. The influence of the tradition of the PCV is apparent on the following points:
1. Episode of war-chariot and granting of boon to Kaikeyi (on the occasion of Dasaratha's taking part in the Devāsura battle (See Supra, Ch. 3. 1. b). 2. performing of penances by Hanuman and Rāma after the abandonment of Sită (Supra, Ch. 3. 9 E (ii) & (iv).

Page #326

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
297
(xi) Kathasaritsagara (10-11th century A.D.): -1. Lava is Kusa's senior (Supra, Ch. 3. 9D). 2. Lava and Kuśa's fight with Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa (Supra, Ch. 3. 9 D). 3. Sītā enters a lake to prove her purity in the Asrama of Valmiki (In the PCV the fire-pit gets converted into a reservoir of water-Supra, Ch. 8. 9 D).
The source of Kathasaritsagara is Gunadhya's Vṛhatkatha whose date is regarded as earlier than the 6th century A. D. (A. B. Keith. HSL, p. 266). It is not possible to say how far the PCV or Vṛhatkatha has influenced vice-versa or both the works may have their common But as far the Vṛhatkatha is not recovered, we cannot be sure about its originality as regards the above points.
source.
(xii) Mahānāṭaka (10 th to 14 th century A. D) :-1. Failure of others and Rama's success in stringing the bow (Supra, Ch. 3.2.E). 2. Elevating the character of Dasaratha by mentioning the presence of Bharata on the occasion of his decision to crown Rama (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. A). 3. Meeting of Hanuman with Bharata while taking the medicinal herb and his reaching Laikā before the sun-rise (Supra, Ch. 3. 8 E). 4. Sending of an envoy by Ravana to affect truce with Rama (Supra, Ch. 3. 8 F).
(xiii) Śrīmaddevī Bhāgavatapurana (11th century A.D.);-1. Rāma's success in stringing the bow in presence of many candidates (Supra, Ch. 3. 2. F).
(xiv) Jaimini Bharata (12th century A. D.): 1. The Jaiminiya Aśvamedha portion contains Lava and Kusa's battle with the army of Rama (Supra, Ch. 3.9 D). 2. The Merävanacarita portion contains reference to the son of Hanuman (Supra, Ch. 4.2).
The PCV is the earliest work which refers to the wives and the son of Hanuman. Therefore, the influence of PCV's tradition is apparent on the subsequent works.
(xv) Prasannaraghava of Jayadeva (12th century A. D.) -1. Failure of other candidates and Rama's success in stringing the bow (Supra, Ch. 3.2, E).
(xvi) Padmapurana;-The Patalakhanda and the Uttarakhanda of Padmapurana containing Rama-stories are held to be composed in the 12th and the 15th century A.D.
1. Names of the third and fourth wife of Dasaratha (Patalakhaṇḍa specially PCR's influence). 2. Episode of war-chariot and granting of boon to Kaikeyi (Bengali version) (Supra, Ch. 3. 1. B). 3. Cause of naming Lakṣmaṇa as such (Patalakhanda- specially PCR's

Page #327

298
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
influence). 4. Sītā's betrothal with Rāma, Nárada's intervention and introduction of the Bow (Pātāla; Supra, ch. 3.2.C & D). 5. Failure of others and Rama's success in stringing the bow (Pātāla khanda; Supra, ch. 3. 2. E). 6. Performing of a sacrifice by Rāvaņa to acquire invincibility and its disturbance (Uttarakhanda; Supra, Ch. 3.8 G). 7. Battle of Lava and Kuśa (Pātālakhanda; Supra, ch. 3.9. D).
Striking similarity of the Padmapurāņa with Ravişena's Padmacaritam as regards points Nos. 1 & 3 indicate that the author had consulted Ravişena's work.
(xvii) Adhyātma Rāmājana of the Rāmānanda sect (14th cent. A.D.):-1. Episode of war-chariot and granting of boons to Kaikeyi (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. 1. B. 2. Christening the name of Lakşmaņa (Supra, Ch. 3. 1. D). 3. Rāma's success among various candidates in stringing the bow (Supra, Ch. 3. 2. E). 4. Exonerating Kaikeyi from the charge of cruelty by introducing Rāma's decision to go in exile rather than accepting kingship, at the advice of Nārada (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. B)! repentance by Kaikeyī for her folly of exiling Rama and her request to Rāma on the Citrakūta hill to pardon her (Supra, Gh. 3. 3. C). 5. Viradha is a vidyāhara and not a Gandharva as in the VR (Supra, Ch. 3. 5. C). 6. Hanuman's request to Sītā to carry her on his shoulders (Supra, Ch. 3. 7. E, fn. 3). 7. Raising of his sword by Rāvana while kicking and exiling Vibhīşana (Supra, Ch. 3. 8B). 8. Automatic fleeing away of the Sakti by which Lakşmana was wounded (Supra, Ch. 3. 8E). 9. Disturbing of Rāvana's sacrifice and dragging of Mandodari (Supra, Ch. 3. 8. G).
For the first time so much influence of the tradition of the PCV on a Brahmanical work like the Adhyātma Rāmāyaṇa is seen. Elements No. I and 3 & 9 had already become popular with the earlier Brahmanical works. The striking similarities in such minor points as Nos. 2, 5, 6, 7 & 8 reveal that the author of Adhyā tma Rāmāyaṇa had studied well some of the Jaina works on Rama-story. It is possible that the Sanskrit works of Ravişeņa and Hemacandra might have been consulted. But the resemblance in the point No. 2 exceptionally reveals as if the PCV was before the author of Adhyatma Ramayana.
(xviii) Ananda Rāmāyana (15th century A.D.):-1. Kausalya's father's name as Kośala (Supra, Ch. 3.1. A). 2. Rāvana's vain efforts in foiling the marriage of Daśaratha and Kausalyā, and in killing Dasaratha to escape his own death destined at the hands of the former's son (Supra, Ch. 3. 1.B). 3. Episode of war-chariot as the cause of granting boon to Kaikeyi (Supra, Ch. 3. 1.B). 4. Janaka's wife (Sumedhā) introduced specifically for the first time (Supra, Ch. 3.2.A).

Page #328

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
299
5. Failure of various princes and Rāma's success in stringing the bow (Supra, Ch. 3.2.E). 6. Exonerating Kaikeyi from the charge of exiling Rāma by Rāma's decision to enter forest rather than accepting kingship (Supra, Ch. 3.3.B), repentance of Kaikeyi for her folly and her requests to Rāma on the Citrakūta hill to pardon her (Supra, Ch. 3.3. C). 7. Killing of Śūrpanakha's son, Samba by Lakşmaņa (Supra, Ch. 3. 5. B). 8. Association of Laksmana with the test of Rama taken by Sugrīva, and the prophecy about the destined killer of Vāli (Supra, Ch. 3.7. B). 9. Hanuman's seeing of Vibhīşaņa during his mission to Lankā (Supra, Ch. 3.7.D), 10. Hanuman's proposal to carry Sīta on his shoulders (Supra, Ch. 3.7.E). 11. Disturbing of Rāvana' sacrifice (Ch 3.8. G). 12. Rāma's Digvijaya (Supra, Ch. 3.9.B). 13. Madanasundari's marriage with Yūpaketu, the son of Satrughna (Supra, Ch. 3.9. B). 14. Kusa and Lava's marriage in a 'svayarivara' (Ch. 3.9.D). 15. Chandravadanā's marriage with a son of Lakşmaņa (Supra, Ch. 3.9.D). 16. Kuśa and Lava's battle with Rāma (Supra, Ch. 3.9.D). 17. Rāma's fight with the grandsons of Kumbhakarņa (Supra, Ch. 3.9. E iii). 18. Preparing a lute with the parts of his body by Rāvana for eulogising Siva (Supra, Ch. 4.1.x). 19. Son of Hanumān (Supra, Ch. 4.2).
Here for the first time in a Brahmanical work the father of Kausalyā and the wife of Janaka are introduced (Nos. 1 & 4) specifically. Point No. 2 is influenced by the episode of Närada and Kaikyi's marriage; No. 12 by the Digvijaya of Laksmana; Nos. 13,14, 15 by the marriages of Laksmana and the sons of Rāma and No. 17 by the attack of the grandsons of Chandranakhā on Rāma.
This work describes Rāma's water-sports with Sīta.. The PCV is the earliest work in the whole of the Indian Literature, which describes the water-sports of Rāma and Sitā (PCV, 42. 18-24) in a river flowing in the forest of Daņdaka.
In the PCV (102. 29-31) on the occasion of her fire-ordeal Sita is raised on the divine throne, and she is saved. Then she renounces the world. In the VR (7. 97) the throne on which Sita is seated enters the earth and Sită disappears for ever. But in the Ananda Rāmāyana the deity of earth raising Sitā on the throne offer her to Rāma and Sītā gets reunited (5. 8. 77) with Rāma.
In the PCV (6. 165) on the occasion of the 'svayamvara' of Srimala Vidyadhari, her foster-mother Sumangala introduces to her various princes who came there to seek her hand. Similarly in the Ananda Rāmāyana on the occasion of the 'svayamvara' of Campika, her fostermother named Sunanda introduces to her various princes (6. 2. 31).

Page #329

300
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
There is a striking resemblance in the name of the foster-mother and the method of introduction.
Points No. 3, 5, 6, 10, 11 & 16 are already found in the older Brahmanical works but the rest of the thirteen reveal that the author of Ananda Ramayana had studied some Jaina works on the Rama-story.
The above analysis reveals that it is this work among the Brahmanical works, on which there is the greatest influence of the tradition of the PCV.
(xix) Dharmakhanda (Considered as a part) of Skandapurana (15-16th Cent. A. D.): 1. Kaikeyi's request to Rama in exile to. come back (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. C).
(xx) Satyopakhyana (16 th century A. D): -1. Kaikeyi's love marriage with Dasaratha and Narada's association with it (Supra, Ch. 3. 1. B). 2. Introduction of the bow specially for the purpose of Sita's 'svayamvara' (Supra, Ch. 3. 2. D). 3. Rama's success in stringing the bow in the presence of various candidates (Supra, Ch. 3. 2. E). 4. Rama's water-sports with Sita (see Bulcke, p. 479; PCV, 42. 18-24).
Point Nos. 2, 3 & 4 have their presence in the earlier Brahmanical works. Point No. 1 is a special introduction and it is based with variation on the pattern of the tradition of the PCV.
xxi) Rămarahasya of Mohanaswāmī (17 th century A. D):1. Stringing of the bow by Rama in presence of many other candidates (Supra, Ch. 3. 2. E). 2. Meeting of Hanumat with Bharata while bringing the medicinal herb (Supra, Ch. 3. 8.E).
(xxii) Ramalingamṛta (17 th century A. D.):-1. Ram's success in stringing the bow in the presence of many candidates (Supra, Ch. 3. 2. E). 2. Exonerating Kaikeyi from the charge of exiling Rāma (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. C). 3. Narada as the instigator of a battle between Rama and his sons (Supra, Ch. 3. 9. D). 4. Son of Hanumat (Supra, Ch. 4. 2).
Point No. 3 shows specific influence of the tradition of the PCV.
(xxiii) Tattvasangraha Ramayana (17th cent. A. D). of Rāma Brahmānanda:-1. Kaikeyi's approach to Rama in exile and a request to him to come back. (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. C).
(b) Works in Modern Indian Languages:
(i) Tamil Rāmāyaṇa of Kamban (10th century A. D.): -1. Rama's success among various candidates in stringing the bow (Supra, Ch. 3. 2. E).

Page #330

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV. 301
(ii) Telugu Dvipada Rāmāyana (12th century A. D):-1. Rāma's success among various candidates in stringing the bow (Supra, Ch. 3. 2. E.). 2. Kiling of the son of Rāvana's sister by Lakşmaņa (Supra, Ch. 3. 5. B) 3. Rāvana's unsuccessful sacrifice (Supra, Ch. 3. 8. G).
(iii) Assamese Rāmāyana of Madhavakandali (14th cent. A.D):"Svayamvara' of Kaikeyi (Supra, Ch. 3. 1. B).
(iv) Oriya Mahābhārata by Sáralādāsa. (15th cent. A.D.):-Killing of the son of Sûrpanakha by Lakşmaņa (Supra, Ch. 3. 5. B).
(v) Marāthí Bhăvārtha Rāmāyaṇa (16th century A. D.): – 1. Bharata and Satrughna as real brothers (Supra, Ch. 3. 1. D). 2. Observing of Vibhīşaņa by Hanumat (Supra, Ch. 3. 7. D). 3. Rāma's success in stringing the bow in the presence of various candidates (Supra, Ch. 3.2. E). 4. Killing of the son of Surpanakha by Lakşmaņa (Supra, Ch 3.5 B). 5. Son of Hanuman (Supra, Ch. 4. 2). 6. Battle of Lava and Kuśa with Rāma (Supra. Ch 3. 9. 'D.)
(vi) Kannarese Torāve Rāmāyaṇa of Narahari (16th century A. D.):-1. Exonerating Kaikeyi from the charge of exiling Rama (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. C). 2. Killing of Sambuka, the son of Rāvana's sister by Lakşmaņa (Supra, Ch. 3. 5. B). Rāvana's unsuccessfull sacrifice (Supra, Ch. 3. 8. G)
(vii) Kannarese Mairāvana Kalaga of Narahari (16th century A. D.):-1. Son of Hanumat (Supra, Ch. 4. 2).
(viii) Bengali Kịtivasa Ramāyana (16th century A. D):-1. 'Svayamvara' of Kaikeyi (Supra, Ch. 3. 1. B). 2. Meeting of Hanumat with Bharata while taking the medicinal herb and putting the sun under his armpit to reach Lanka before the sun-rise (Supra, Ch. 3.8. E). 3. Lava and Kuśa's battle (Supra, Ch. 3. 9. D).
(ix) Ramacaritamanasa of Tulasidasa or Tulasi Ramāyana:We shall deal with it in the following pages separately,
(x) Ramacandrikā of Keśavadása (16th cent. A. D):-Lava-KusaBattle (Supra. Ch. 3. 9 D).
(xi) Govinda Rāmāyana of Gurugovindasingh (17th cent. A. D):1. Battle of Lava-Kuśa.
(xii) Rāmāyaṇa Masihi of Mullā Masīhi (16-17th cent. A. D):Lava-kusa Battle (Supra, Ch. 3.9.D).
(xiii) Gujarāti Rāmāyana of Premānanda (17th century A. D.):1. Rāma's success in stringing the bow in the presence of many candidates (Supra, Ch. 3. 2. E).

Page #331

302
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
(xiv) Kā śmiri Rāmāyana (18th century A. D.):-1. Introduction of the bow specially for the purpose of Sīta's 'svayamvara' (Supra, Ch. 3. 2. D). 2. Exoneration of Kaikeyi by introducing Nárada's advice and Rāma's decision to go in exile rather than accepting kingship (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. B). 3. Hanumān's encounter with Bharata while taking the medicine to Laikā (Bulcke, p. 391 & Supra, Ch. 3. 8. E). 4. Disturbing of the sacrifice of Rāvaņa (Supra, Ch 3. 8. G). 5. Lava as elder brother of Kusa and their battle with Rāma (Supra, Ch. 3. 9. D).
(xv) Oriyā Vicitra Rāmāyana of Madhavadāsa (18th Cent A.D):Killing of the son of Surpanakha by Lakşmaņa (Supra, Ch. 3. 5. B).
(xvi) Guiarāti Rāmāyana-sara (19th century A. D.):-1. Observing of Vibhīşaņa by Hanumat on his mission to discover Sīta (Supra, Ch. 3. 7. D). 2. Rāvana's unsuccessful sacrifice (Supra, Ch. 3. 8. G). 3. Lava and Kusa's battle (Supra, Ch. 3. 9. D).
(xvii) Gujarati Narmakathākośa (?) (Bulcke, p. 432):-1. Son of Hanumat (Supra, Ch. 4.2).
(xviii) Birhor Rāmakathā:-1. The influence of the Jaina tradition that Lakşmana killed Rāvana is found even on the stories popular among the Birhors, the aboriginal people of Bihar (Bulcke, p. 215).
(2) Works composed outside India :
(a) South Asia: (i) Tibetan Rāmāyana (9th Century A. D.):-1. Voluntary exile of Rama specially for favouring kingdom to his younger brother and no intrigue of stepmother as in the Dasaratha Jātaka (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. B). 2. Lava as elder brother of Kuša (Supra, Ch. 3.9. D).
(ii) Khotāni Rāmāyaṇa (9th century A.D.) :- 1. Rāvana's unsuccessful sacrifice (Supra, Ch. 3.8. G).
(iii) Simhalese Rāmakatha (15th cent. A D.):-1. Lava as elder brother of Kuša (Supra, Ch. 3. 9. D). 2. Lava and Kuśa's battle (Supra, Ch. 3. 9. D).
(iv) Rāmāyaṇa Kakavin of Jāvā (12th cent. A.D.) :1. Vibhīşana's going to Rama for shelter along with his army (Supra, Ch. 3. 8. B).
According to the VR Vibhīşaņa approaches along with his ministers. According to the PCV Vibhișapa goes along with his army.
(v) Brahma cakra of Laos (earlier than 16th cent. A. D.)-1. Presence of various candidates on the occasion of Sīta's 2. Battle

Page #332

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
303
of Lava and Kuša (Supra, Ch. 3. 9. D). 'svayarvara' (Supra, Ch. 3. 2 E).
(vi) Seri Räma of Malaya (15th century AD.) :-1. Wrecking of Dasaratha's litter (for war-chariot incident in the PCV) and granting of a boon by Dasaratha to Bharata's 'mother for saving him from falling down (Supra, Ch. 3. 1. B). 2. Bharata and Satrughna as real brothers (Supra, Ch. 3.1. D). 3. Rāma's success at the 'svayamvara' of Sītā in the presence of many candidates (Supra, Ch. 3.2. E). 4. Voluntary exile of Rāma specially for favouring kingdom to Bharata and no intrigue of stepmother as in the Dasaratha Jātaka (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. B). 5. Son of Surpanakhā killed by Lakşmaņa (Supra, Ch. 3. 5. B). 6. Lakşmaņa's association with the test of Rāma taken by Sugrīva (Supra, Ch. 3. 7. B). 7. Rāvana's unsuccessful sacrifice (Supra, Ch. 3. 8, G), 8. Lava and Kuśa's battle (Supra, Ch. 3. 9. D). 9. Performing of penances by Rāma and Sita (Supra, Ch. 3. 9. E. V). 10. Son of Hanumān (Supra, Ch. 4. 2). (vii) Hikāyata Mahārāja Rāvana (popular story based on Seri Rāma) :
1. Wrecking of Dasaratha's litter (Supra. Ch. 3. 1. B). 2. Rāma's success at the 'svayamvara' of Sita in the presence of various candidates (Supra, Ch.3.2. E). 4. Sons of Hanuman (Supra, Ch. 4.2).
(vii) Serata Kānda of Jāvā (16th century AD.):-1. Rama's success at the 'svayamvara' of Sita in the presence of many candidates (Supra, Ch. 3.2. E). 2. Son of Śūrpanakhā killed by Laksmana (Supra, Ch. 3.5. D). 3. Lava and Kuśa's battle with Rāma (Supra, Ch. 3.9.D). 4. Performing of penances by Rāma and Sītā (Supra, Ch 3.9.E.v).
(ix) Reāma Kera of Cambodia (16th cent. A.D.):-1. Rāma's success among various candidates in stringing the bow (Supra, Ch. 3.2.E). 2. Lakşmapa's association with the test of Rāma taken by Sugrīva (Supra, Ch. 3.7.B). 3. Rāvana's unsuccessful sacrifice (Supra, Ch. 3.8.G). 4. Battle of Lava and Kuśa with Rama (Supra, Ch. 3.9.D).
(x) Rāma Kiyen of śyāma (16th cent. A.D.):- 1. War-chariot episode for the boon granted to Kaikeyi (Supra, Ch. 3.1. B). 2. Son of Sūrpanakhā killed by Lakşmaņa (Supra, Ch. 3.5 B). 3. Procuring of the water specially from Bharata for curing Lakşmaņa (Supra, Ch. 3.8.E). 4. Rāvana's unsuccessful sacrifice (Supra, Ch. 3. 8. G). 5. Captivity of Vibhișapa at the hands of Rāvana's son and his rescuing, by Bharata and Satrughna (Supra, Ch. 3.9. E. v). 6,

Page #333

304
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Battle of Lava Kusa (Supra, Ch.3.9.D). 7, Hanumat's sports with Puşpamāli (Supra, Ch. 3.7.C and Bulcke, p. 363) and various love episodes of Hanumat (Bulcke, p. 363). 8. Sons of Hanumat (Supra, Ch. 4.2.). 9. Renouncing of the world by Hanumat (Supra, 9. E. (ii)).
In point No. 4 there is influence of PCV through Ananda Rāmāyana point No. 17. In point Nos. 6 and 7 there is specific influence of the tradition of PCV.
(xi) Rāma Jātaka of śyama (16th cent. A. D):-1. Lava and Kuśa's battle (Ch. 3. 9. D).
(6) Western Europe: Missionaries and travellers from Western countries visited India and wrote some works relating to India for specific works see Bulcke, p. 246). In these works written from the 17th to the 18th century A. D. we find material about Rāma-story. The influence of the tradition of PCV can be obsermed as follows:
Western Accounts No. 1: 1. Laksmana's association with Rāma's test taken by Sugrīva (Supra, Ch. 3. 7. B).
Western Account No. 3 :- 1. Rāma's success at Sita's 'svayamvara' in the prepsence of many candidates (Supra, Ch. 3.2. E).2. Unsuccessful sacrifice of Rāvana (Supra, Ch. 3. 8. G).
Western Account No. 4:-1. Rama's success at Sita's syayınvara in presence of may Candidates (Supra. Ch. 3-2. E).
Western Account No. 6:41. Lava and Kuşa's battle (Supra, Ch. 3. 9. D).
Western Account No. 7:-1. Rāma's success at Sita's 'svayamvara' in the presence of many candidates (Supra, Ch. 2. 3. E). 2. Battle of Lava and Kuša (Supra, Ch. 3. 9. D). 3. Son of Hanumān (Supra, Ch. 4. 2).
Western Account No. 8:-1. Rāma's success at Sita's 'svayamvara'. 3. Lova as elder brother of Kusa and their battle (Supra, Ch. 3.9.D.). in the presence of various candidates (Supra, ch. 3. 2. E). 3. son of Hanumān (Supra, Ch. 4. 2.).
Western Account No. 13-1. Rama's success at Sita's 'svayamvara' in presence of many candidates (Supra. Ch. 3. 2. E) 2. Prophecy that the piercer of the trees would be the destined killer of Vāli (Supra, Ch. 3. 7. B). 3. Seeing of Vibhīşaņa by Hanuumān during his mission to Larkā (Supra, Ch. 3. 7. D).

Page #334

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
305
Western Account No. 14:-1. Voluntary exile of Rāma for the favour of Bharata (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. B). 2. Battle of Lava and Kuša (Supra, Ch. 3. 9. D).
Western Account No. 17:-1. Lava as elder brother of Kuśa and their battle (Supra, Ch. 3. 9. D).
Western Account No. 19:41. The episode of cursing Sūrpanakha's son and his emancipation at the hands of Rama (Supra, Ch. 3. 5. B).
(3) A Note on the Previous Birth Stories of Daśaratha, Rāma
and Rāvana:
Previous birth stories of Dasaratha, Rāma, Rávana and Vibhisana do not find place in the Vālmīki Rāmāyana and Mahabharata. The Puraņās and subsequent Brahmanical works on Rāma-story contain stories of their previous births. All these works are later than the Paumacariyan which systematically deals with their previous births (Supra, Ch. 4). Though Brahmanical works contain independent stories yet the indirect influence of the tradition of Paumacariyaṁ can be presumably seen on the Brahmanical works as in the line with the Paumacariyaṁ explain the causes of Dasaratha's fortune, Rāma's separation from Sīta, kidnapping of Sīta by Rāvana and Vibhīšana's good character.
Previous Birth of Dasaratha:For the first time the Skandapurāna (Vaisnavakhanda, Ch. 24) narrates that Brahmin Dharmadatta on account of his devotion to Vişnu was reborn as Daśaratha (Bulcke, p. 274). The Ananda Rāmāyana also contains this story (1.4.117 to 1.5.28).
The Adhyatma Rāmāyana (1.2.25 and 1.4.14) and the TR (1.186.3) narrate that Kaśyapa on account of his penances was reborn as Dasaratha.
The Padmapurāna (Uttarakhanda, Ch. 246) and the Rāmarahasya (canto 1 ; Bulcke, p. 274) as well as the TR (1.141) narrate that Svayambhu Manu was reborn as Daśaratha.
Kidnapping of Sīta by a Rākşasa and her Separation from Rāma:-The episode of the curse cast on Vişnu by Bhțgu is found in the Brahmānda, (Ch. 73), Väyu (Ch. 97) and Matsya (Ch. 47) Purānas ranging from the 4th cent. A. D. to 6th century A. D. (Bulcke, p. 274) but therein Rāma, Sītā and Rāvaņa are 'not connected. The same episode is narrated in the Southern version of VR (Uttara, 51. 1218) Here Bhřgu cursed Vişnu to suffer separation from his wife, but still the abduction of his wife by any Rakşasa is not referred to. It is in the Skandapurāņa of the 9th century A.D. (Vaisnavakhanda, Ch. 20-21) that
20

Page #335

306
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
the Rakṣasas are introduced. It narrates that Visņu once with the help of Jaya and Vijaya beguiled the chastity of Vṛnda, the wife of Daitya Jalandhara. Then Vṛnda cursed Vişņu to be reborn as a human being and suffer separation from his wife who would be kidnapped by Jaya and Vijaya in the form of the Rākṣasas. This story is found in the Sivamahapurana also (Rudrasamhita Yuddhakhanda, Ch. 23; Bulcke, p. 275). The Ananda Rāmāyaṇa (1. 4. 82-110) also narrates this episode. We find further development in the TR (I. 122. 139). It mentions that Jalandhara was reborn as Ravana and on account of his previous enmity with Vişņu he abducted the wife of Rāma.
One other episode is narrated in the Sivamahapurana (RudrasamhitaŚrstikhanda, Ch. 3-4). Narada wanted to marry a particular girl but Vişņu contrived to marry her. Then Narada cursed Vişņu to suffer separation from his wife and cursed two attendants of Śiva who had laughed at him to be reborn as Ravana and Kumbhakarna (Bulcke, p. 276). The TR (I. 122-139) also contains this episode.
The TR additionally introduces the previous birth of Vibhiṣaṇa in the story of Pratāpabhānu (Supra, Ch. 4. story No. 52).
(4) Influence on Tulasidāsa:
The Ramacaritamanasa was composed by Tulasidăsa in 1574 A.D. (Vide M.P. Gupta, p. 276). Its sources are various works of Brahmanical tradition on Rama-story and specially it is based on the Adhyatma Rāmāyaṇa. Tulasīdasa has completely deified Rama and his work depicts the cult of Ramabhakti. There are certain elements in it which show influence of the tradition of Paumacariyam's Rāma and that of the style of the Jaina-carita works.
The following elements reveal the tradition of PCV on the Ramacarita mannsa. As they had become popular with the Brahamanical works composed before the TR, hence they should be regarded as indirectly influenced by the tradition of PCV:
1. Rama's success among various candidates in the 'svayamvara' of Sita (Supra, Ch. 3.2.E). 2. Exonerating Kaikeyi from the charge of cruelty by (i) introducing goddess Sarasvati (Supra, Ch. 3.3, B), (ii) Kaikey's implicit repentance twice on the Gitrakuta hill for exiling Rāma (Supra, Ch. 3.3. C), (iii) clear statement of Muni Bharadvaja that Kaikeyī is not at all guilty. It was the Sarasvati who beguiled her mind (Supra, Ch. 3.3.B) and (iv) Narada's advice and Rama's decision to forego kingship for exile. Point No. (iv) is found only in the interpolated portions of the TR (Supra, Ch. 3.3.B). Point No. (iii) is not found in the earlier Brahmanical works. It is

Page #336

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
307
a new point in the TR. 3. Hanuman's encounter with Bharata while taking the medicinal herb and his reaching Larkā before the sunrise (Supra, Ch. 3.8. E). 4. Disturbing of the sacrifice of Rāvana and dragging of Mandodari (Supra, Ch. 3.8.G). 5. Lava as elder brother of Kuša (Supra, Ch. 3.9.D). 6. Battle of Lava & Kusa (Gītāvali and interpolated portions of TR; Supra, Ch. 3.9.D). 7. Christening of the name of Lakşmaņa (Supra, Ch. 3.1.D). 8. Mentioning of the name of Janaka's wife (Supra, Ch. 3.2.A). 9. Automatic fleeing away of the Śakti by which Lakşmana was hurt in the battlefield (Supra, Ch. 3. 8. E.)
Now we deal with such elements which are found exclusively in one or two versions of VR but we are not definite about VR's or PCV's originality (See preceding section 1. B. 5) :
10. Insulting of Vibhisana by Rāvana by kicking him while exiling him from Laukā (Supra, Ch. 3 8. B). 11. Mandodari's request to Rāvana four times to bow down to Bhagavān Rāma and return Sitā to Rāma (Supra, Ch. 3. 8. C & J).
In addition to the above the following elements of the TR are directly influenced by the tradition of PCV :
12. Hanumān's approach to Vibhīşana while on his mission to search for Sítā (Supra, Ch. 3. 7. D). 13. Prahasta's advice to Rāvana to return Sītā to Rāma and then to fight with Rāma if he so liked (Supra, Ch. 3. 81. C). Compare it with the PCV's Rāvana's decision to release Sītā after subduing Rāma (Supra, Ch. 3. 8. H). 14, According to the Gaudiya and the N-W. versions of VR, Lakşmana erects two cottages for their temporary sojourn on the Citrakūta hill (Bulcke, p. 316). According to the Rāmacaritamā nasa these cottages are conjured up by gods. The Rāmacaritamānasa seems to be influenced by the tradition of Paumacariyaṁ in which a Yakșa (divine being) conjured up Rāmapuri for the temporary sojourn of Rāma, Laksmana and Sita (Supra, Ch. 3. 3 C ; Supra, Ch. 3. 4. C). 15. There is influence relating to the sequence as regards the episode of killing of Kumbhakarna. He is shot dead after the wounding of Laksmana by the Sakti (in the VR Kumbhakarna is shot dead before the wounding of Laksmana (Supra, Ch. 3. 8. C). 16. There is an all round effort of dropping some of the defects associated with the main characters of the Räma-story. Dasaratha's suspicion on Bharata has not been brought into light when he decides to enthrone Räma as the king of Ayodhya (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. A). Further he is ready to enthrone Bharata but he does not want that Rama should depart to the forest in exile (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. B). For Kaikeyi see above (No. 2). Sita does not

Page #337

308
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
abuse Rāma when initially he does not permit her to accompany him to the forest (Supra, Ch. 4.3. 3. B). Lakşmana does not become furious and does not abuse Dasaratha for exiling Răma. He even says that it is all due to misfortune (Supra, Ch. 3. 3. B). The TR drops down the reference to Śūrpanakha's desire to devour the blood of the culprits (i.e. Rama & Lakṣmaṇa) as narrated in the VR (Supra, Ch. 3. 5. C). Virādha is not referred to have snatched away Sitā from Rāma and Lakşmapa as narrated in the VR (Supra, Ch. 3. 4. C).
Influence on the Style and Pattern of Tulasi's works: Now we take up the influence of the general style and pattern of the Jaina Rāma caritas as well as the particular works which have influenced Tulasīdāsa.
The pattern of the previous birth stories of Dasaratha, Rāvana, Rāma and Sītā in the TR resembles that of the Jaina works on Rāma Katha. The missing link of enmity between Rāma and Rāvana is furnished by Tulasīdāsa in his Rāmacaritamanasa (see the Preceding section B-3).
The very title of the work Rāmacaritamanasa shows an influence of the Prakrit works, the first being the Paumacariyam which is titled as caritam. Whereas the earlier or later Brahmanical works are generally titled as Rāmāyaṇa.
It is the style of the Jaina poets that they in the beginning pay obeisance to all great persons. Tirthaukaras, Maharşis, Ganadharas and Anāgata sadhus. (See PCV, 1.1-7; PCR, 1.1-15; PCS, 1.1-2). On the same pattern we find that Tulasidasa in the beginning of his Rāmacaritamanasa remembers in his salutations not only one or two but a number of deities and great persons. He pays obeisance to Sarasvati, Bhavāni, Salikara, Sita, Rāma, Vālmīki, Hanumān, Hari, Ganesa, Nārāyana, Teachers (Gurus) Santasamāja (saints), etc. (TR, 1.1-3). Thereafter he salutes the wicked persons (Tr, 1. 4-5):
Bandauṁ khala jasa seșa saroņā Sahasa badana baranai para doşā (I. 4. 4) Bacana bajra jehi sadā piārā
Sahasa nayana para doşa niharā (1. 4. 6) Compare it with the PCV at 1. 12 where Vimalasūri before commencing to narrate the story ridicules the fault-seekers :
Atthetha visamasila kevi nará dosagahapatalliccha/
Tutýhā vi subhaņiehim ekkam pi gūņam na geņhanti//
Svayambhū also in the beginning of his PCS contrasts the saints and the wicked (1. 3. 12-14).

Page #338

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCY.
309
Ehu sajjana loyaho kiu viņaul Jam avuhu padarisiu appaņau/ Jai ema virūsai ko vi khalu/ Taho hatthutthalliu leu chalu//
Pisuner kim abbhatthiena, Jasu ko vi pa ruccai/ Kim chana candu mahāgaheņa, Kampantu vi muccai//
Tulasīdása has further developed it and has written a number of verses in the praise of saints and the wicked alike (See TR, 1. 4-7).
Tulasīdāsa in his Rāma caritamānasa at the end of every kända gives one or two verses which express blessings to the readers of the story (See TR, 1. 261; 2. 326; 3. 46k; 4. 30k, 5. 60; 6. 12k; & 7. 130).
In the VR it is only at the end of the work that such blessings are expressed It is in the Paumacariyaṁ and Padmacaritam that closing verses of many of the cantos either praise religion or express wishes for the emancipation of the readers. The PCS does not contain them at the end of every Sandhi. It seems that this style has its origin in the PCV and the PCR, which has passed on to the TR through the Ananda Rāmāyana which bestows blessings generally for prosperity in the worldly things while the TR blesses for Virāga, Rāmabhakti and Mukti like the PCV and PCR which bless for emancipation.
Works Probably Consulted by Tulasidasa: There are some similarities in descriptions of TR and the PCV as the PCR on the occasion of the 'svayamvara' of Sītā. These descriptions are not found in the PCS.
According to the TR when some candidates observe Rama there they think of returning to their respective places.
Binu bhañjehum bhava dhanuşu bisālā, Melihi Siya Rāma ura mala/ Asa bicāri gavanahu ghara bhāi, Jasu pratāpu balu teju gavāmi/l.
(TR, 1, 245, 2).
According to the PCV the candidates who could not be able to string the bow thought of returning to their homes.
Kei bhananti thāṇam, jai vi hu jīvantayā gamissāmo/ To dānamaneyaviham, dahāmo dinakiviņānam//
(PCV, 28. 110; See PCR, 28. 230 also). In the TR Rama is said to have strung the bow sportively like an elephant:
Sahajahim cale sakala jagasvāmi/ Matta mañju bara kuñjara gämi//
(TR, I. 255. 3).

Page #339

310
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Guruhi pranāma manahiṁ mana kīnhā / Ati laghavam uṭhāi dhanu linha Now see the PCV and the PCR:
(TR, 1. 261. 3)
Paumo gayavaragāmī allīņo dhaņuvaranteņam | PCV, 28. 113b. Dhanuyampi vigayajālaṁ, gahiyaṁ Rāmeņa sahasatti /
PCV, 28. 114b.
In the PCR the wordings are somewhat different:Dhudhauke ca mahānāgamantharam gatimudvahan/ PCR, 28. 234b. Tato viśrabdhamādāya dhanurudveṣṭya camśukam / PCR, 28. 236a.
Similarly we can compare the description of the chaotic situation. and the divine elements appearing after the raising of the bow by Ráma. (TR, 1. 261. 3 to 1. 262; PCV, 28. 115-120 & PCR, 28. 230-244).
According to the TR after the success of Rama in stringing the bow, Sita approaches him and sits by him:
Satananda taba ayasu dinha /
Sītām gamanu Rama pahim kinhā-TR, 1.263.4. Gavanī bāla marāla gati suṣamā anga apăra-TR, 1.263. Now see PCV:-Ullasiyaromakūvā, siņehasambandhajaniyapariosa/ Lilae sañcaranti, Rāmassa avaṭṭhiyā pāse// 28.122. See PCR, 28.243-244 also.
Tulasidasa seems to have consulted not only the PCV or PCR but some other Jaina works also. The influence of Ravişena, Svayambhu and Hemacandra can be seen on the following points of TR:
Influence of Ravişena's Padma caritam:-According to the TR (5.16), Hanuman while on his mission to Lanka tells Sita that he can take her along with him to Rama but he is unable to do so in the absence of Rama's explicit orders for the same (Abahiṁ matumaiṁ jāum lavai/ prabhu ayasu nahiṁ Rāma dohai). This idea for the first time appears in the PCR at 53.146. Here Sītā refuses to accompany Hanuman in the absence of any order from Rama (Antareņa prabhorājñāṁ gamanam me na yujyato) (See Supra, Ch. 3.7 E). It shows that Tulsidasa was definitely acquairted with the PCR.
Influence of the TSP of Hemacandra:-According to the TR Sumantra asks Rāma to return to Ayodhya as Dasaratha had ordered him to request him to do so. According to the TSP Dasaratha sends his officers to bring back Rama from exile before Kaikeyi and Bharata go there to call him back (See Supra, Ch. 3.3.C).
Influence of Svayambhu's Paumacariu:-The TR in its Ravana-carita mentions that Ravana had subdued celestial Indra as well as Ravi, Śasin,

Page #340

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV.
311
Pavana, Kubera, Agni, Yama etc. In the VR there is reference to the defeating of Indra, Ravi & Saśin only. It is in the PCV that others are also referred to have been subdued by Rāvana, though there they are Vidyadhara chiefs (See Supra, Ch. 4.1.xvi & xviii).
In the TR it is depicted that on the Citrakūța hill gods in the form of the Kols and Bhils offer their services to Rāma (2.135-136). It is in the PCS for the first time that before reaching the Cirtakūța hill, Rama enters the Dhanuskavana. He sojourns there happily amidst the Bhils. (PCS, 24.12).
According to the TR (3.12-14) Rāma delivers a sermon to Lakşmaņa on the nature of Jiva and Iśvara in the forest after meeting Jațāyu. Tulasidāsa purports to say that Bhakti (devotion) to God leads to Jñana and Vairāgya which bring Mokşa. This new element in the TR is influenced more probably by the PCS according to which Muni Gupta and Sugupta while narrating the story of Dandaka to Rāma deliverd a sermon on philosophy (See Supra, Ch. 3. 5 A & PCS, 45.5 also).
In the TR the munis who were killed by the Raksasas and were later on observed by Rāma in the forest are described as follows:"Asthi samūha dekhi Raghurāya” 3.9. It is strikingly similar with the phrase in the PCS. The candidates wishing to marry Jitapadma fail to withstand the test and are consequently killed by her father. The heap of their bones is shown to Lakşmaņa "so ghippai tam haddairi ehu” 31.5.8. The VR describes the concerned incident as follows:-(Sarīrāņi munīnām bhāvitātmānām-VR, 3.6.16.
Influence on Other Works af Tulasidasa: The influence of the tradition of PCV can be marked on even some other works of Tulasidasa.
In his Rāmalala Nahachū (Vide M.P. Gupta, p. 230) there is a reference to the wife of the elder brother of Dasaratha:
“Kausalyā ki jethi dinha anusāsasana ho
Nahachū jāi karāvahu baithi simhāsana ho” (RLN, 9.) In the whole of the Brahmanical literature there is no reference to any brother of Dasaratha. It is in the tradition of the PCV that Dasaratha's elder brother Anantaratha is mentioned (PCV, 22-101).
According to the Citävali, in the beginning of the exile journey Sita feels thirsty. Then Lakşmaņa proceeds to bring water for her (2. 14. 1). In the PCV also after crossing the Vindhya forest when Sītā feels thirsty Rāma goes along with her and Lakşmaņa to the house

Page #341

312
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
of Brahmin Kapila in the village of Arunagrama and quenches there her thirst (35. 1-6).
In the Gitavala just before conveying of in advance by Hanuman the news about Rama's return to Ayodhya from Laňkā. Kausalyā is depicted as suffering from the agony of separation from her sons. She looks around in the directions waiting for the return of Rama. She requests a crow to tell her as to when her son will return to Ayodhya. She promises to offer milk and rise (gruel) to the crow when she meets her sons and Sītā (Lankākāṇḍa. 18-10)
"Baithi saguna manavati mātā/
Kaba aihem mere bāla kusala ghara kusala ghara kahahu kāga phuri bata/
Dūdha bhāta ki doni daihaum sone coñca madhaihaihaum/ Gitävali, 6. 19. 1-2).
A similar description on the identical occasion is found in the PCV also. Here Aparajita (Kausalya) promises to offer payasa to the
crow.
"Tam bhaņai vāyasam sã, jai me puttassa tattha gantūņaṁ/ Vattam ānehi lahum, dehāmi ya pāyasaṁ tujjha//" PCV, 78. 3.
A similar reference is there in the Paumacariu of Svayambhu. A comparison with it-"gharapangane vayasu kulakulai, pam bhaṇai Rahuvai milai" (PCS, 78. 15. 3) indicates that Tulasīdasa has either drawn upon the Paumacariyam or Padmacaritam.
The above discussion shows that Tulasīdasa was acquainted with the Jaina works on Rama-story. He has expressly admitted in his Rāmacaritamānasa that he had consulted also the works which were outside the pale of Brahmanism.
Nanapurapanigamāgamasammatam yad,
Rāmāyane nigaditam kvacidanyatoapi/ (TR, 1.7).
Now what remains after consulting the Vedas, Puranas and the Ramayana. It is an implicit reference to the Jaina works on Rama-story. Not only that but he pays his homage to the Prakrit poets who composed works on Rama-story:
Je prakṛta kabi parama sayane, bhāṣāṁ jinha hari carita bakhane/ Bhae je ahahim je hoihahim agem, pranavauṁ sabahi kapaṭa saba tyageṁ// TR, 1.14.3.
Thus he praises Prakrit poets for all time to come and that also with a pure heart, without any deceit.

Page #342

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV. 313
He also praises the importance of the spoken dialect i. e. in a wide sense the Prakrit language of his time. It shows that the influence of the Prakrit works was so great on him that he avoided to compose his work in the traditional way i. e. in Sanskrit, but he preferred to adopt the colloquial language of his time, i. e. a dialect of modern Prakrits. And as it was the spoken language, the impact of it was considered to be more strong and permanent on the people. Tulasīdāsa says:-Syāma surabhi paya visada ati gunada karahi saba pāna/Girā grāmya Siya Rāma jasa gāvahim sunahing sujāna/TR, 1.10 (kha).
Hereby we can conclude that Tulasidasa was acquainted with the Jaina works on Rama-story. He has adopted some elements of Rāma-story of the tradition of Paumacari yaṁ without disturbing in any way his allegiance to the Brahmanical Rāma-story. The influence of PCV's tradition is seen on the characterisation as well as on the pattern of the previous birth story and specially on the style of his Ramacaritamanasa.
C. CONCLUSION
It would be apropriate now to designate the influence of Paumacariyam as the influence of the tradition of Paumacariyam because there can not be on several works a direct influence of the Paumacariya. Its influence has been spreading through subsequent Jaina works based on it and through the Brahmanical works which were initially influenced by either the PCV or by the Jaina works based on the former,
The elements of PCV's tradition which have influenced non-Jaina works are generally concerned with the upgrading of the valour of characters and the elevation of characters. According to the proportion of their influence they can be arranged in the following descending order?:--
1. Rāma's success among various candidates at the 'svayamvara' of Sīta.
Battle between Rāma and his sons. 3. Disturbing of Rāvana's Yajña. 4. Progeny of Hanumat.
5. Association of Kaikeyi with the war-chariot of Dasaratha, Exonerating of Kaikeyi from the charge of exiling Rāma and her request to Rama to come back, Sambūka as the nephew of Rāvana and his death at the hands of Laksmana, Lava as elder brother of Kuśa.
1. See also the Table attached in the end of the work.

Page #343

314
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
6. Meeting of Hanu with Bharata while bringing the medicine to cure the wounded Lakṣmaṇa.
7. Hanu's meeting with Vibhīṣaṇa during his mission to Lankā.
8. Bow introduced specially for the 'svayamvara' of Sītā, Voluntary exile of Rama (specially a favour for Bharata), Prophecy about the destined killer of Vali (Ravana in the PCV), Association of Lakṣmaṇa with Rama in the episode of killing of Vali (sham Sugrīva in the PCV), Bringing of the medicine by Hanumat before the sun-rise, Performing of penances by Rama.
9. Bharata and Satrughna as real brothers, Elevating the character of Dasaratha (on the occasion of declaring Rāma as his heir to the throne), Hanumat's love episode, Performing of penances by Sitā.
10. Ravana's attempt to foil the birth of any son to Dasaratha, Kaikey's love marriage with Dasaratha, Initial betrothal of Sītā with Rama, Taking of Shelter under Rama by Vibhiṣaṇa along with his army, Appearance of Garuda in the battlefield at the request of Rama, Procuring medicinal water particularly from Bharata, Sending of a peace proposal to Rama by Ravana through his envoy, Killing of Ravana by Lakṣmaṇa, Digvijaya by Rama (or Lakṣmaṇa in PCV), Marriages of Lava and Kuśa, Narada as the instigator of thebattle between Rama & his sons, Association of water-reservoir with Sita's ordeal, Performing of penances by Hanumat, Continuation of the enmity of both Rama and Sita with Ravana from the previous births.
Details as discussed in the preceding pages and Chs. 3 and 4 show that the tradition of the Rama-story of PCV has been iufluencing nonJaina works up to the recent century, belonging to the Buddhist as Iwell as the Brahmanical fold. The Buddhist work are a few i.e. the Khotani Ramayana and the Rama Jataka of Syama whereas the Brahmanical works are numerous-religious and secular or ornate. The religious ones are the Puranas, sectarian Ramayanas and other religious works whereas the ornate ones are poems, dramas and narratives composed in Sanskrit, various modern Indo-Aryan and Dravidian languages. In India the influence of Vimalasuri's tradition holds from Kashmir to Cape Comorin and from Gujarat to Bengal. Out side India also Vimalasuri's tradition has excercised influence on the works hailing from Tibet, Eastern Turkeystan, Ceylon and SouthEast Asia and even on the western accounts written by some foreign travellers.

Page #344

SOURCES, CONTRIBUTION AND INFLUENCE OF PCV. 315
The greatest influence of the tradition of PCV is 'marked on the Padmapurāna, Adhyātma Rāmāyana, Ananda Rāmāyaṇa, Tulasi Rāmāyana and his other works, Seri Rama of Malaya and Rāmakiyen of Syāma. According to the largeness of the influence they can be arranged as Ananda Rāmāyana, Tulasī's works on Rama-story, Seri Rāma, Padmapurāna, Adhyatma Rāmāyana and Ramakiyen.
Generally such works have been influenced greatly which belong to a period later then the TSP of Hemacandra. He was a great poet and scholar. His TSP is composed in Sanskrit. Therefore, its popularity among the non-Jaina circle must have been wider than that of any other Prakrit work. Hence it is all the more probable that the tradition of PCV has influenced non-Jaina works through Hemacandra's TSP as far as the non-Jaina works composed not earlier than the 12th century A. D. are concerned and they are not small in number.

Page #345

CHAPTER VII.
SOCIAL CONDITIONS SEC. 1. SOCIAL EVOLUTION, CASTES AND STAGES OF LIFE
A. Social Evolution Utsarpiņi and Avasarpini (Cycles of Time) : -Every religion has tried to solve the riddle of the Universe in its own way and the Jaina seers did not lag behind in this sphere. The Jaina tradition (PGV, 3.18, too aņāinihaņo; Mula, 8.22) holds that the Universe (loka) is natural, uncreated and beginningless (sāsao sahāvattho logo--PCV, 102-63) while the factor of time is divided into certain parts for practical purposes. The biggest division of time (kāla) is called 'kalpa' (AP, 3.15) which consists of two eras of ascending and descending orders. The Paumacariyaṁ mentions that the facter of time is differentiated into two eras, viz. Utsarpiņi and Avasarpiņi (Ussappiņi and Avasappiņi 3.49). Both these eras form a complete cyclic order (Kalpa) which goes on repeating itself for ever. During the Utsarpiņi era there is all round gradual prosperity and progress in age, strength and height (20.92-93). This cyclic process is explained by comparing it with the periodical waxing and waning of the moon (3.49) and so it can be designated as Evolution and Devolution. It is further stated that this change is experienced in the regions Airavata and Bhāratavarşa whereas the rest of the countries in the Jambūdvipa enjoy static conditions for ever (3.33).
The PCV (20.67-72) states that Avasarpiņi is further subdivided into six periods of Aisusamă (Atisuşamā), Susamā (Suşamā), Susamādūsamā (Suşamāduşşamā), Dusamā (Duşşamā) and Accantadūsama (Atyantaduşşamā) which are of the duration of four, three, two and one (minus forty-two thousand years) koțākoţi sägara years respectively, and the last two periods twenty-one thousand years each. The Utsarpiņi is calculated vice-versa. Thus the total period of time of a complete cycle (Kalpa) comes to twenty koțākoțisāgara years. The number of years in a 'sāgara' is so large
1. It is the name of the current period (PCV, 89.42). 2. A Sāgara measures ten kotākoti palyopama years, A Palyopma' corresponds
to innumerable years i.e. the time spent in vacating a dench one yojana wide and one yojana deep, full of the foremost part of the hair of a new born child, at the rate of removing one hair-part every one hun. dred years (PCV, 20.66). See the Tiloyapannatti (1.116.130) which mentions a ram of the age of one to seven days in place of a new born child.

Page #346

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
317
that it is beyond the capacity of human mind to reckon it. The TP (4.313-319) and the AP (3.14-21f) give the same account in corroboration of that of the PCV.
The Brahmanical tradition (Vişnupuräna 1. 2. 61-67) maintains that Hari is the cause of creation, maintenance, and destruction of the Universe at the end of every Kalpa. A Kalpa consists of one thousand Mahāyugas and every Mahāyuga is divided into four Yugas, viz. Krta, Tretā, Dvāpara and Kali. In the first age (Yuga) all men are equal and good. There is no evil. In the second age evil appears still men are much happier than in the third age. In the the third age good and evil are equal and in the fourth age evil dominates over the good. Thus the conditions and the prosperity of the people deteriorate gradually in every age. At the end of the fourth age (Kali-yuga) there comes the end of the world by deluge or fire and again the Universe is created and followed by the end. This chain is maintained for one hundred years of Brahmã whose one day is equal to one Kalpa. Chaos or 'pralaya' succeeds every 'Kalpa' (or a day of Brahma) when Brahma goes to sleep and when he wakes up (after a Kalpa), the order is again restored. Again on the completion of the age of Brahma (100 years of Brahma) there is a greater chaos when the Universe is engulfed into Mahāpralaya which lasts for one hundred years of Brahma during which all gods, demons and human beings and the other living beings are destroyed.
The measurement of the Kalpa given by the Brahmanical tradition is however reckonable. It is said that a Kalpa is equivalent to 4, 32,00, 00, 000 years and every Mahāyuga consists of 17, 28,000; 12, 96, 000; 8, 64, 000 and 4, 32, 000 years of the Kộta, Tretā, Dvāpara and the Kali-yuga respectively. Every Kalpa gets repeated and thus the cycle continues through creation, preservation and destruction for ever.
Kulakaras (Law-givers):-As mentioned above the second age of Avasarpini (Susma) is marked with all round good, therefore up to that age there arises no necessity of any law and punishment. It is during the third age (Susama-dūsama) of good and bad that the imperative need of law-givers is felt when people gradually become victims of evils. The Paumacariyam mentions that in the last part of the third age fourteen patriarchs (Kulakaras) or law-givers are born in succession (3.50) They
(1) See P. Thomas--Hindu Religion, Customs and Manners,' p.1;Vişnupurāņa,
1. 2-3; Manu, 1. 64-86.

Page #347

318
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAW
are experts in laws (niikusala) and affectionate to the people (loyassa vi piyasama 3. 56). They are the chief guardians of the people and they maintain order and law, They are named as follows: Padisui, Sammui, Khemankara, Khemandhara, Simarikara, Sīmandhara, Cakkhunāma, Mahappā, Vimalavāhaņa, Abhicanda, Candābha, Marudeva, Pasenai and Nabhi.
These names are corroborated by other Jaina works except some differences in their order. The PCR (3. 72-88) mentions Yaśasvin and Vipula for Mahappā and Vimala. The TP (4. 421-494) and the AP (3.62f) give seventh place to Vimalavāhana. The JP (Su, 28) puts them in quite a different order while the TSP (I. p. 96-110) mentions only seven Kulakaras starting from Vimalavāhana, agreeing with the order given in the JP but it leaves out Candābha.
The TP (4. 452, 474) reveals that with the deterioration of the public life the institution of punishment also grew up. It states that the first five Kulakaras promulgated the punishment of 'hakāra' i. e. expressing disgrace at crime. The next five Kulakaras enacted the punishment of 'mākāra' i. e. ordering non-repetion of the crime. The JP (Su, 29) adds that the last Kulakaras brought into force the punishment of dhikkāra' i. e. repudiating the crime. The AP (3. 216) mentions that Bharata, the first Cakravartin prescribed fourth kind of punishment namely. 'sarīradandanam' i. e. corporal. It indicates that with the increase of crimes the punishment became more severe.
The Kulakaras are variously called as Yugadipuruṣas because they were born in the beginning of the Yuga, Kulakaras because they estalished the instutution of family (family-life), Kuladharas because they taught how to maintain the family life, and Manus because they discovered the means of livelihood.
Fourteen Manus are recognised in the Brahmanical tradition 4 also. It is said that every Manu is born after regular interval of seventyone Mahayugas i. e. 30,67,20,000 years (approx). But their names
1. See Sthānanga, 7. 556. Sānticandra, the commentator on JP states that the
Avasyakacūrņi also mentions seven names. He further explains that it is a practice to describe more and more ancestors of the meritorious and eminent persons. According to different traditions their number is seven, ten or even fifteen. (See AvaN, 151, Sthānanga, 556, 767; Samavā, 157 and JP, 40).
See also AvaN, 148, 166. 3. Prajānām Jivanopāyamananānmānavo matāḥ, āryāņām kulasamstyāyakste
Kulakarā ime Kulänām dharoņādete mataḥ Kuladharā iti,
Yugādipuruşāḥ proktī yugādau prabhavişnavaḥ (AP, 3.211-22). 4. Visnupurāna, 1.3.16-18; Manu, 1.61-63.

Page #348

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
differ from those of the Jaina tradition, only the name of Cakṣuşa being common to both the traditions. They are Svāyambhuva, Svārociṣa, Uttama, Tamasa, Raivata, Cakṣuşa, Vaivasvata. The next seven are Săvarņi, Dakṣasāvarņi, Brahmasāvarņi, Dharmasavarņi, Rudrasavarni, Ruci and Bhauma. Manu. (8.129) states that a king should successively resort to warning, public censure, fine & corporal punishment (vägdaṇḍam, dhigdandam, dhanadaṇḍam and vadhadandam).
319
Bhogabhumi:-A picture of the way in which the wants of the early society were fulfilled is drawn in the Paumacariyaṁ. It states that before the dawn of 'Krtayuga' (Kayajuga) there was all round prosperity in Bharatavarṣa. At that time it was called Bhogabhūmi because the people did not make any efforts for their maintenance. Their wants were fulfilled by the wish-trees which were of ten kinds (3.37f) and they bore the desired articles. These wish-trees (Kalpadrumas) were called Tudiyanga (Truțitānga-of music), Bhoyananga (Bhojanānga-of food), Vihusaṇanga (Vibhuṣaṇānga-of ornaments), Mayanga or Cittarasa (Madānga or Citrasasanga 102.122of intoxicant), Vatthanga (Vastranga of coitumes), Giha (Gṛha— of dwelling), Joi (Jyotiś-of natural light), Diviyanga (Dipikāngaof lamps), Bhāyaṇa (Bhājana-of utensils) and Mallanga (Malyāng or Kusuma 102.115-of flowers) tree which provided all the requirements of life without undergoing any labour. People enjoyed according to their whishes and remained happy. They were endearing to one another and were good-looking. They were fearless. The beasts were not ferocious and they strolled freely. People were born in couples consisting of a male and a female (husband and wife) and every couple gave birth to a fresh couple just before its own death. There was no social distinction because the society was uniform. There was complete absence of the rulers and the subjects. No body was disfigured and crippled. There were no poverty and misery. There was no complaint of any disease and all lived like gods (102. 126-132).
The above account is corroborated by the TR (4. 340-342) and the AP (3. 39).
The above picture of Yugala-dharma i. e, taking birth in the form of couples as husband and wife reveals that in the primitive
1. Visnupurana, 3.2.
2. Bhagavatapurana, 8,15,13. It mentions Devasavarni and Indrasavarni for Ruci and Bhauma. 8.13 (30,33).

Page #349

320
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
society there was possibly a custom of marring one's own sister. Some stray evidences of the practice can be traced out. The 'sakta' of Yamayami (Rgveda, 10-10) reveals that sexual relation between a brother and a sister was in vogue. The Ambattha Sutta (Digha Nikaya) refers to the Sākya princes marrying there own sisters for preserving the purity of blood. The Dasaratha Jataka mentions that Rāma and Sita were brother and sister and they were married to each other. Instances of the wedlocks of brothers and sisters are known in the history of the royal families of Egypt and Persia and these occurred also among the Incas of Peru. In recent times the marriage of brother and sister is, or has been, the custom in Siam, Burma, Ceylon, Uganda and the Hawaiian islands in the Muslim society the custom of marriage between a stepsister and a stepbrother is still prevalent.
This was the picture of the society, as the PCV reveals, before the down of the Kštayuga which was ushered in by Rşabhadeva, the first Tirthaikara of the Jaina faith. It throws light on that primitive stage of society when the civilization had not made strides. At that time the life was simple. The complication of rules and laws, manners and customs, politics and religion, and agriculture and commerce had not grown. People lived chiefly on natural products. There was a common kingdom of the animals and the humanity. They were endearing to each other. Both lived as friends. There was no advancement in arts. Various social institutions had not originated and the society was classless and creed-less.
Kytayuga (Era of Sweat and Toil) :-The PCV further mentions that as the time passed, the conditions began to change gradually, The wish-trees (Kalpavřkşas) disappeared and the sugar-cane juice became the chief food of the people (3. 111). At that time Rşabha was born of Marudei by Nābhi, the last Kulakara. He was the first Tirthankara and the enunciator of Kộtayuga?-an age of strife, sweat and toil. He was the first person to establish settlements for the habitation of the people. He introduced sciences and arts which became the means of livelihood of the people. It was at this stage of Kệtajuga that the professional classes (castes) were established.
1. Ency. Religion & Ethics, Vol. 8. p. 425. 2. Jeņa ya jugam divittham puhaie sayalasattasuhajanana tena u jagammi
juttham tam kayajugam nāma-PCV, 3.118. 3. Gāmāgaranagarapattananivesa kallānapayaranāņi ya sayari ca sippāņa
uvaittham-PCV, 3. 114.

Page #350

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
321
B. Castes: Origin, Duties, Occupation and Position
Origin of Castes:-Varna and Jati (class and caste) meant the same thing to our author. It was divided on the basis of labour. The PCV mentions that those who were strong and powerful, were appointed by Rṣabha to protect the people and were called as 'Khattiyas' (3. 115). Those who took to the profession of trade, agriculture and animalhusbandry came to be known as 'Vaisas' (3. 116) and those who performed menial work and served others were known as 'Suddas' (3. 117). He taught the science of statecraft (rayanii) to the Samantas, Bhatas, Purohitas, Senapatis, Śreşthins and the Bhogikas further imparted to the people instructions in secular knowledge (logassa vi logasambandham 3. 121). Thus we find that the Ksatriyas are given the first place in the society and the Brahmaņas have been left out here altogether.
These accounts of sciences and arts are corroborated by the JP (Su. 30) and the Kalpasutra (209-10). The AP states that Rṣabha was Yugadi Brahma (3.119) and his era came to be known as Kṛtayuga. It relates that Rşbha enunciated six professions of Asi (sword), Masi (writing), Krsi (agriculture), Vidya (science), Vanijya (trade) and Silpa (arts). On account of these professions which involved labour, the 'Bhogabhūmi' of Bharatavarṣa came to be known as 'Karmabhūmi.
Brahmanas:-The PCV (4.65-84) relates that once Bharata, the first son of Rṣabhadeva honoured the lay votaries who were righteous and drew (three) lines on their bodies with the Kakiņīratna to distinguish them from the pretenders. But as soon as he came to learn that the persons honoured by him would pretend in future and preach animal-sacrifices, he punished them and turned them out of his city. These victims took refuge under Rṣabha, The latter prevented Bharata from beating them declaring 'ma haņasu putta ee'. Therefore, they came to be known as 'Mahaņas' (Brahmaņas).
This is a fanciful account of the origin of the Brahmaņas upon the capricious etymology of the word 'Mahana' which in reality is only the Parkrit form of 'Brāhmaṇ'.
1. Jaina ya uppatti 1. 38; Uannana samuppatti tinham pi suya-4. 65 & Cauvannam ca janam apuccheūņa niggao Ramo-31. 103.
2. AP, 16.179.
3. Ibid, 16.146.249.
21

Page #351

322
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Other Jaina works except the PCR (4.92-122) do not support this origination of the 'mahana' class. They mention that those who were righteous were called "Māhanas' because they did not cause 'himsa' (injury) to any living being and kept themselves engaged in studying the sacred scriptures.
Jinasena (AP, 16.243f) has further associated the origin of the four Varnas with the limbs of the Adi-Jina. He mentions that Rşabhadeva himself took up weapons in his arms and trained the people in wielding them, hence they (Kșatriyas) were called as created by his arms. He taught the people how to travel by thighs for earning livelihood by trade, hence they (Vāņijakas) came to be known as created from his thighs. He taught with his own feet how the people should serve others therefore they (Śūdras) were said to be created from his feet. Then the Brāhmaṇas were taught with the mouth of Bharata how to study, teach and perform rituals, hence they were known to be created by mouth. This account reminds us of the Brahmanical theory of the origin of four Varnas. It is a rational attempt to explain the theory that refers to the divine origin of the four Varnas. The Puru șasūkta of the Rgveda mentions that the Brāhmaṇas were the mouth, the Rājanyas the arms, the Vaisyas the thighs and the Sūdras were the feet of Prajapati or Brahma (10. 7.90). The same theory is echoed in the later Braham anical works which state that the four Varnas are born from the respective parts of the body of Brahmā.
Duties:- The PCV (4.65; 11.39,98) refers to the Brāhmaṇas as 'suttakanthas'. That is to say they were recognised by the thread they used to wear. It was a mark of their distinction (Manu, 2.63). The PCV categorically mentions their six-fold duties (chakkam marayā 105.21). These duties are referred to by Manu, (10.75-76) as study, sacrificing, offering of gifts, teaching, officiating at sacrifice and accepting of alms. Various references in the PCV indicate that these duties were being duly performed by them.
The PCV referes to the Brāhmaṇas as leearned in the Vedas (82. 45) and their auxiliaries (sangovarge Vee), as the followers of the Vedaśruti (Veyasui 105. 80) and as the students of Aranyakas (sattham Āranpayam 11.10). The study of religious scriptures was their main duty, but the study of secular subjects (loiyasui 58. 6) was not altogether neglected (savvakalāgamakusalo 82. 86). Learned Brahmins are called Pandiyamāņi (105. 21).
1. See 'Origin of Brāhmaṇas' under 'Intervewing Stories'. 2. MB (Santi), 296. 5-6; VR, 3. 14. 30; Manu, 1. 31; VnPu, 1.66.

Page #352

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
323
Batuka Kapila was a typical orthodox Brahmin. He used to bring fruits and sticks of wood (samiha) to perform daily scrifical rites. The sacred fire remained kindled in his house (aggihottagharam). He would daily go to the forest, bring the darbha grass, holding a Kamandalu in his hand1. He would not allow improper persons to enter his house to avoid impurification of his residence (35.5.27).
Two Vipra brothers, Indhana and Pallava are said to be devoted to the duty of accepting alms and offering gifts 'bhikkādāņujjaya' (58. 5).
Kṣirakadamba is mentioned to be a teachar who taught the Aranyaka sastras (11. 8-9). Airakucchi was the teacher of the sons of Dasaratha (25. 18-24).
Purohitas formed a distinct class among the Brahmins because of their duty, of officiating at sacrifices. They are referred to be descending to the hells on account of officiating at animal-sacrifices (purohiya homakarapujjuttā 14. 16). Many Brahmins are mentioned to be vouchsafing and liberally taking part in the cermony of an animal sacrifice which was being performed by king Marutta (11. 47).
Vimuci wandered from place to place for receiving alms (dakkhiņākankhi 30. 63). Giribhuti and Gobhūti were favoured with gifts by a queen (55. 36).
The above mentioned Batuka Kapila is a typical example of a greedy Brahmin (Ch. 37).
Occupations and position :-The primary means of their livelihood were (bhikkha) begging-alms, receiving presents from kings and other persons when they officiated at sacrificial ceremonies. They also worked as counsellors to the kings. Hemanka was bestowed with gifts on account of his intelligent advice to the king (sampavio ya riddhi apegadāṇābhimaneņam 77.80). Dasaratha offered valuable presents to the teacher of his sons and honoured him greatly (sammāņadāņavibhaveņa 25.36). Bhargava on account of his learning held a position of respect among the kings and became abundantly rich (dhanariddhisampautto savvanarināņa aipujjo 77.83). They also held the eniviable position of royal priests (5.31;26.6;82.37;41.45;5.105). The learned Brahmins used to hold debates on religion with their opponents
1.
Manu lays down that a Brahmin snataka should always keep with him a bamboo-staff, a Kamandalu of water, sacred thread, Vedas, golden earrings, a girdle and a deer-skin (4. 36; 2. 64),

Page #353

324
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
(105.26). In the religious field the Brahmins are referred to as following Tápasadharma (Pingala 30.52; and one other Brahmin 5.30). Brahmaruci and his wife Kūrmi are referred to have been leading the Tāpasadharma in the forest (11.54).
The respectable position they held in the society can be inferred from such general remarks that even if they commit any guilt they should not be killed (35.15) and the noble persons never slay a Brahmin or a śramana (65.30). Thus the Brahmins occupied an equal position with the śramaņas. But the PCV criticises those Brahmins who bore deplorable conduct. It mentions that there was no paucity of pretending Brahmins who were really unchaste, sensuous and characterless (105.46). They injured living beings, acted contrary to the practice of a true ascetic and demonstrated undue pride. True Brahmins in the opinion of the author were those who devoted themselves to penances, who were of good conduct, who maintained purity, who observed vows of forbearance and forgiveness, who did not give vent to the passions and stuck to the path of liberation (105.46-48). It indicates that those who led the life of renunciation, simplicity and high-thinking deserved to be called as Brahmins.
There are several instances to show that vices had crept into the life of the Brahmins. The reverence and the privileges which were granted to them by the Brahmanical Sūtras and Smrtis were not wholly enjoyed by them. The PCV refers to the Brahmins committing murder and adultery wiih the wife of a grhapati (48.64), or with the woman of his own caste (30.61) or with the wife of an ambassador (39.42). Mụdumati was immodest, criminal, very cruel and was addicted to the vice of gambling. He attempted to commit burglary and used to keep company of courtezans (82.79,79). Purohita Satyavādi was expelled from the country on account of swindling the wealth of a merchant (5.34). A Vipra was, though on account of being betrayed by a queen, punished to the severity of mutilation of the limbs of his body (88.12). Rudrabhūti on account of committing theft was awarded the death penalty (34, 46). These examples sufficiently prove that they were not immune from proper punishments. In this light the injuction of the Brahmanical Sūtras that a Brahmin must not be subjected to corporal punishment, must not be imprisoned or fined or exiled or reviled or excluded, was not rigidly followed. The heckling of rude behaved Kapila by Laksmana (35. 13) and the beating of Brahmins by Rāvana (11. 90) belie the dictum that he who in anger
1. Gautama, 8. 12-13 Vide OGCI, Vol. I p. 158, and also Avadhyo Brāhmaṇo
danļairiti sāstravido viduḥ--VR, 7.59 2. 34.

Page #354

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
325
raises his arm against a Brahmin, will be banished from heaven for a hundred years and he who strikes, for a thousand years. The orthodox Kapila's bowing down to Rama for gaining economic favour (35. 62) goes against the pronouncement that a Brahmin shall not rise from his seat to receive a Kşatriya or a Vaiśya, however learned and superior he may be. The instances of the insulting of Brahmins by the public (105. 44), the plundering of the house of a Brahmin (30. 62), the kidnapping of the wife of a Brahmin by a king (26. 12) and the raping of a Brahmin girl by a king (103. 99) indicate that they occupied the same position as the average people did. Making allowance for a certain amount of exaggeration in these accounts, the stratum of truth at the base is obvious.
Kșatriras : The Kşatriyas are called Rāj putras also. The PCV mentions (89. 36) Satrughna as a 'rājaputra' (Sattuggha-rāyaputteņam). The first and the foremost duty of the Ksatriyas was to govern and protect the people from internal disorder and external enemies (rakkhapakarananiutta 3.115). Manu (10.79) mentions that the wielding of arms was the means of their subsistence and their duty was to protect the people. The AP? (16. 243) defines Ksatriyas as saviours and protectors of the wounded. There are several instances of Ksatriya kings who ruled over various parts of India, viz. Dasaratha of Saketa (22. 103), Janaka of Mithila (21. 33), Śreņika of Magadha (2. 15) etc. The institution of punishment was controlled by them to maintain internal peace and order. There are a number of examples when kings are found to be punishing the criminals and breakers of law. They posseessed a large army to protect the people from external attacks (caturangabala 24. 28; 26. 29; 33.76; 37. 5 & 56. 1). There are several occasions when they defeated the Mlechas (27. 40) or the notorious chief of a wild tribe (34. 44), or an oppressive king (33. 118), or the invaders (37. 60; 22.60) or imprisoned and chased. off the rebels (26. 29; 105. 92). Thus they were responsible for the destiny of the country and in exchange of their services they were entitled to get sixth part of the income of their subjects by way of tolls and taxes.
According to the Brahmanical preaching as received in the PCV (11.72) the Yajña was prescribed for three Varņas i e. the Brahmins,
1. Gautama, 21.17-20, Vide OGCI. 2. Āpastamba, II 2. 4. 18 Vide OGCI, Vol. I p. 150. 3. Kşatātrāņe niyuktā hi Kşatriyaḥ sastraponyaḥ; See Raghu, 253 (Kşatat kila
trāyata ityudägraḥ kṣatrayasya sabdo bhuvanegu rūdhah). 4. See “Punishment under Polity and Administration'. 5. VR, 2.75.25; Manu, 7.131; 8.307-308.

Page #355

326
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Kşatriyas and the Vaiśyas. King Marutta of Rajagủha is stated to have been performing a great sacrifice (11.5). No other example of performing sacrifices by the kings are available. It is due to the fact that the Jainas never approved of these sacrifices. In its place the 'bali karma'-offering of oblations (of corns and fruits) in the temples (7.157; 32.83) is mentioned, which was meant for all who followed the Jaina faith.
The other duties of the Ksatriyas consisted of study, officiating at coronation ceremony and offering alms. Thus the PCV reveals that the sons of Dasaratha (25.23-24) received instructions in archery and other sciences. References to the education of various other princes and princesses are not lacking, viz. Lavana and Ankusa (97.22), Deśabhaşana and Kulabhūşaņa (39.88), Kaikeyi (24.4) and Atisundarā (26.5). Kaikeyi (24.85) and Simhikā (22.59) were well-trained in the art of warfare. As regards officiating at the coronationceremony it is said that on receiving orders form king Dasaratha many warriors attended upon Rāma with golden pitchers to coronate him (26.14). Thereafter Rama and Lakşmaņa were coronated by many kings (85.20) and Rāma and Somitti (Lakşmaņa) had formally coronated Bharata as the king of Sāketa in the forest (32.53). The duty of offering of presents was duly performed by the kings and princes by favouring teachers, Brahmins and miserables with wealth (25.26; 58.7; 55.36; 33.86). Mahīdhara gave presents to the person who brought him the news of the arrival of Lakşmaņa (36.35). Rama favoured Ratnakesin with presents when the latter acquainted him with the whereabouts of the kidnapper of Sītā (48.45). Raksasa kings (77.24), Vānara kings (7.19) and Vānara queens (49.14) also offered alms on happy occasions. Rulers' hospitality to guests was very liberal and thus we find that Rāma was received and entertained with due respect during his exile-journey by Vajrakarņa 33.91, by Kalyānamala 34.12-13, and the king of Vamśasthalapura. This hospitality was extended to householders (4.77) as well as to monks (4.12; 21.42; 115.197) and hermits (82.29).
Thus we find that on account of beeing a ruling class they occupied the rank of the nobles and wielded power and wealth.
The teachings of the monks prepared many royal persons to renounce the world and get intitiated in to the Jaina ascetic order for the upliftment of their spiritual life (Dasaratha 32. 27, Bharata 82. 5, Rāma 114. 15, the sons of Laksmana 106.46, Ativīrya 37. 68, Ratnaratha and Citraratha 39, 85, Indra 13-51, Kaikeyi 82. 12, Mandodari 75. 82, Sitā 102. 49, Satrughna, Vibhīşana, Sugrīva

Page #356

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
327
114.20 & many other queens 114. 22). Then there were others who became Tapasas viz. prince Anuddhara (39. 84) etc.
Vaisyas :- The Sanskrit Dictionary mentions that the word 'Vaisya' is derived from “Vis'. 'Vis' means the people who settle on the soil and 'Vaisya' means the working man (MWSED). Thus the Vaisyas were the producers of wealth in various ways. On them depended the prosperity of the country. The Aryan society as a whole is called “Vis' and their king as 'Visāmpati' in the Vedic literature (MWSED). Out of this universal society the other castes developed on account of their specialised pursuits (learning-Brāhmaṇa, arms-Kșatriya and service-Śūdra). Thus the Vaiśyas constituted the real society, the backbone of all the other three castes whose subsistence depended upon the wealth produced by the former class. Therefore, the Vaisya class becomes the most important one of all the four castes.
The PCV mentions that the Vaisyas consisted of the people who were engaged in the profession (vāvāraparāyana) of trade, agriculture, or cattle-breeding (vāņijjakarisaņāim gorakkhaṇapālanesu ujjutta 3.116). Manu also corroborates it (vāņikpaśukršiḥ 10.79). They must have been highly esteemed because they constituted the productive and the economic strength of the state and the complete material prosperity of a nation depended on them. The Paumacariyaṁ states that the sārthavāhas; śreşthins; gļhapatis (66. 8) and kauțumbikas (80. 12) enhanced the prosperity of the Magadha country (2.3). There is also a reference to the 'jyeșthakas' who enhanced she Sri of Saketanagara (80. 12) and the city of Rājagrha was adorned with the activities of the merchants from various neighbouring states (2.10). These were the financiers, merchants and the agriculturists of those days who held prominent position in the society. The 'Satthāha' was the chief merchant leader of the Caravan, who controlled extensive trade inside and outside the state. The 'Setthis' were the Aldermen of guilds (probably merchant). About a 'gahavai' it is mentioned in the PCV (48.79) that his sons were engaged in the work of agriculture and cattle-breeding. Its mention along with the 'Setthis' (66.8) and the 'Satthahas' (2.3) indicates that the 'grhapatis' were the persons of wealth. In the Buddhist Jātakas they are forming a land-owning and mercantile class”. The “kodumbiyas' have been explained as the representatives of the middle class which had the duty of offering to the
.
1. BI, p. 50. 2. Gihapasuk hettaisu-kuņai kammar. 3. OGCI, Vol. I, p. 269.

Page #357

328
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
king voluntary presents and taxes1. They are also explained as the heads of the families of cultivators and merchantile people by D. R. Bhandarkar2. Gahavai and koḍumbiya is synonymous to Bhandarkar and to N. K. Dutta' who mention that they were also engaged in trade and money-lending. The 'jetthakas' were the Aldermen or presidents of the guilds of handicrafts". They were the headmen of professional guilds who looked after the enforcement of rules and regulations in their respective groups. The Vaniks seem to be the average tradesmen and merchants. All these merchants were the pillars of economy. They went to the capitals of neighbouring countries (2. 10; 33. 66) or distant countries (5. 83) by land route or water route (48. 21; 55. 39).
The rich persons were called 'dhani' (10. 3. 7). Their richness can be inferred from references to a dealer in gems (5. 32), to a very rich merchant (bahudhhapaiņņo 41. 54), to an owner of wealth worth four crore (5. 82) and to another owner of thirty-two crore (82-56).
Kings used to consult prominent merchants for the welfare of the state. The PCV (114. 5) states that Rama had enquired about the conditions of the people of his state form Śreṣthi Arhadasa. It indicates that prominent merchants or guild-presidents held high position in the state and they were consulted by the king on important matter relating to the administration of the country and its economic policies.
Hospitality was the most sacred duty of this class Arhadāsa of Saketa (89.12) became very remorseful of not offering alms to certain monks. He took rest when he could follow them to Mathura and felt happy when he could pay his homage to them (89.32). His daughter-in-law had duly accorded hospitality to those monks (89.17). Hitankara is referred to as 'susadhupratiṣevin' (5.28).
Besides these merchants, the farmers have been referred to (Karisaya 39. 68), Karisao 105. 32) as going to their fields for agricultural purposes. A cow-herd (govālao 5.96) is mentioned to be maintaining a big cow-pen and dealing in their sale.
1. Jinist Studies, pp. 79-82.
2. Ibid. p, 79-82.
3. Ibid, p, 80.
4. OGCI, p. 270.
5.
BI, p. 50:
6. OGCI, p. 273.

Page #358

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
329 The PCV refers to some other professionals without mentioning their caste. They were the interpretors (nemittiya 5.68;48.86) of marks and omens, the expositors of dreams (sumine-nemittio 7.80). the astrologers (nakkhatta pādhaya & ganiyaņū 17.106, 112) and the physicians (vejjā 65. 42;110, 27). By their very professions it can be inferred that they belonged to the higher grade of society. The Buddacarita refers to the interpreters of nimittas as Brahmins (Viprasca ......... nimittāni vicārya, 1.31) who prophesied the future of lord Buddha and they were offered presents of wealth by the king (1.46).
Sūdras :-The Sūdras are mentioned to be constituting the lowest class of the society. They pursued the professions of lower grade and served the other classes (niyakammaņirayā parapesaņa-kārayā 3. 117). The AP (16.185-186) states that the Sūdras were assigned the duty of serving other three classes and they were divided into two classes, viz. Karu and Akāru. The artisans and craftsmen came under the Káru class and those who lived by peforming services constituted the Akāru class. Manu lays down that if the Sūdras are not able to serve the higher castes, they may live by the means of Kärukarma. The Kárukarmas are said to be various artisan and craft-works (silpāni 10 99-100). According to the above definitions the following professionals, mentioned in the PCV can be put under this lower grade. The weaver (kuvinda 21.2), the potter (kumbhāra 5.207), the painter (cittayāra 1.21), the mason (sippi 78.48), the garland-maker (sippi yakayamālā 6.175); and along with these the acrobats, dancers and bamboo-players (nadanațțachattalaikhayā 2.5) also belonged to the lower caste. Then there were the betel-leaf dealers (tamboliya 77.90) the fowlers (loddhaya 49.26), pāraddhifandiya 6.140), the hunters (vāhā 82.52), the fishermen (dhivara 55. 42; 82. 43), macchabandhā (14. 15), the trappers (vāuriya 14. 15), the wood-gatherers (taṇadārujīviya 31. 44; 103. 30), and the charcoal-makers (alivīyā=ādīpikāḥ 14, 15) who lived on lower type of professions.
The kinkaras (mentioned as bath-givers 90, 7; and menial servants 35. 34 ) and kammakāras (17. 7. working as cart drivers) can be taken as performing services under the people of higher castes.
The slaves are referred to as Dåsas. They were put to the service of the Jaina temples (jiņa-hara.nioga-karane 5. 102). Their status can be inferred from a simile. It is said that Bharata, Lavana and Ankuša had subjugated the land like a slave-girl (dāsīvvavasīkayā 5. 179; 99. 18). It indicates that they were completely dependent at the mercy of their masters.

Page #359

330
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN The PCV refers to Candālas (26. 64) and grants them the right of attaining deliverance. Kautilya lays down that they should live in the vicinity of the cemetery grounds (2. 4. 31).
Caste-flexibility:--The professional (caste) rigidity was not observed in its extremity as there are instances of persons following the pursuits of other castes. Vaivasvat as the name indicates was a Brahmin who was a teacher of archery (25. 18). Under him thousands of pupils from various parts of India received training in the science of archery. Bhargava is referred to as an adept in archery (isatthāgamakusalo 77. 83) and his son Śrīvardhita was a valorous fighter. His (viņņāņalāghava) academic attainments were so high that he was made the king of Potanapura by Kararuha, the ruler of Puşpāvatirņanagara (77. 75-88). Rudrabhäti, a notorious Brahmin became the chief of the Kágonanda tribe of the Vindhya forest (34.37). Brāhmana Indhana and Pallava are mentioned to be following the pursuits of a farmer (58.4). Madhupingala, a Purohita son, after having eloped with a princess lived on the profession of a wood-gatherer (26. 9). All these instance indicate that the Brāhmaṇas followed other pursuits also. Mere receiving of gifts and begging alms would not have fulfilled the necessities of the Brahmins, hence they took to other professions also. These types of Brahmins are called as Ksatra-brahmins and Vaisya-brahmins in the Dharmaśāstrasi and Manu has openly sanctioned that Brahmins can, if the circumstances so require, live by the means of a Kşatriya or Krşigorakşam (10. 81-83).
Ātmaśreyas, a gļhapati's son ( i. e. Vaisya) was on account of his idleness expelled from his house. He obtained a medical ring and with the help of it he earned his livelihood. He cured a queen and acquired great favour from the king (48. 90). Arka whose caste is not mentioned (but not Brāhmin or Kșatriya) was expelled from his home town by the people. He then lived on the profession of a wood-gatherer but later on his friend king Acala made him the ruler of Śrávasti 88. 18; 22, 34).
These are the literary evidences which indicate flexibility in following the professions of other castes. How far it was true in actual life of the society of our period can be corroborated by the inscriptional evidences of the Vākātaka-Cupta-age. It is recorded that Brāhmaṇas became rulers, entered army, followed trade, worked as architects and goverment servants. Kşatriyas followed commercial and industrial pursuits also. These are the cases of accepting those professions
1. Histary of Dharmasastras, Vol. II, Pt. VI, p 130

Page #360

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
331 which were inferior to those of their own caste. The same was true vice-versa. Gupta rulers were Vaisyas. Vaisyas and Sūdras took to military career and became even captains and generals (VGA, pp. 316-218).
Thus what the PCV reveals can be actually observed in the life of the people as evidenced in the incriptions. Similarly intercaste and inter-racial marriages (See Section on Marriage) were prevalent in those days and therefore there can exist no doubt about inter-caste dining.
c. Stages of Life. According to the Jaina concept, the life was divided into two categories, viz. layman's life and monk's life (gļhastha & muni). Generally the kings and the queens are referred to be accepting monkhood in their old age. Accepting monkhood is called as entering Tapovana also (113.69). But the factor of age was not very important. It was the inclination or the strong feeling of aversion towards the worldly life that impelled one to renounce the householder's life and to get initiated into the ascetic life. It did not matter whether a male or a female was young in age (80.26), or of marriageable age (106.46; 39.97; 41.63; 103.102), or recently married (21.72), or was not still blessed with a son (20.21-22), or was of middle age (30.70; 88.13; 105.110).
According to the Brahmanical concept the life was divided into four stages on the factor of age. There are references to the Tapasas (8.159; 41.48) in the PCV. Brahmin Brahmaruci and his wife Varakūrmi are said to be following Tāpasadharma, residing in a hermitage (tāvasanilaya 11.51). The Tāpasas are mentioned to be wearing the barks of trees and huge lockets of hair (39.75, 84). At 32.2-3 it is said that the Tāpasas used to collect fruits (for their food), 'samidhā' (the sticks of wood for sacrificial purposes) and received the guests with due respect, All these descriptions about Tāpasas indicate that they were the followers of third stage of life i.e. Vanaprastha as defined by Manu (6.2-22). There is a single reference to a Parivrājaka (41.27). This word is never used for a Jaina monk in the PCV. It means that he was a mendicant who was detached from all the wordly things. He is further said to be jealous of the Jaina monks. Therefore, he should be a non-Jaina ascetic. He can be taken as a Sanyasin of the Brahmanical order-i.e.
1. 5.238-241; 9.6-7; 29.34; 30.66; 32.27-28; 108.47; 114.15, 18, 20. 2. 75.82-84; 83.12; 102.46.

Page #361

332
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
one who followed the fourth stage of life. Manu states that a Sanyasin should wander from place to place (nirapeksaḥ parivrajet 6.33). The other two stages, which preceded the above mentioned stages, were those of studentship and householder (Brahmacarya & Garhasthya). These were the four stages of life as defined by the Brahmanical works.
But still the orthodoxy or the strictness in observing the four stages of life is not evidenced in the PCV. Prince Anuddhara (39.84) became a Tāpasa without marrying and Purohita Agniketu (41.48) became so before attaining the prescribed age for entering the third stage. Further each and every non-Jaina Vipra is not mentioned to be regularly entering all the four stages of life. Hence the observations of B.S. Upadhyaya (IK, p. 174) are correct when he says that the four-stages of life were actually not observed in practice. So it can be surmised that one's inclination to renounce the world was more important than the mere consideration of the factor of age.
SECTION 2. FAMILY AND RELATIONSHIP
A. Family The family, the fundamental unit of society is denoted by kuțumba (99.8; 5.184), parivāra (6.36; 66.16), and kula (53.17; 14.145). All the members of a family bore affection for one another, performed their respective duties, helped in strengthening social bonds and thus paved the way for the advancement and happiness of one another. The family was paternal in constitution and therefore, the father was the master and all in all of the whole family. His orders were obeyed by all, so he has been called 'grhapati' (48.77). His wife was the mistress of the house. She is called 'gļhini' (gļhiņi 45.33 or ghariņi 71.1). She remained faithful to her husband.
Father the sole authority:-The father had full control over his sons and daughters. He selected their life partners (27.41; 15.35-39; 8.1-21; 12.1-8; 38.28). He saw to the utmost well-being of his daughter while selecting her husband (10.1-8). Ther is a case of a mother (Kaikeyi) who took initiative and got her son (Bharata) married to the girl (Subhadra) of her choice through the consent of her husband (28.130). The word of father were binding on his son in the matters relating to marriage and the latter did not violate them (15.89-91). The father was the final authority in distributing his property to his sons (48.77-80). A father could expel his sons from home if thay behaved contrary to the social custom (25.17; 82.79;

Page #362

333
SOCIAL CONDITIONS
88.19). On the death of the father and in absence of a major son, the mother became the head guardian of the family (17.82-84).
It was the sole concern of the father to appoint his political heir. Dasaratha had to instal Bharata though Rama and Lakṣmana were elder to him (31.73-75).
Faithfulness of wife:-The wife was a faithful follower of her husband. Sītā preferred following her husband to the forest to remaining at home to pass a comfortable life. Aparajita did not oppose her husband from installing of Bharata (31.99) as the king of Ayodhya. Though Añjana was abandoned by Pavanañjaya still she remained faithful to her husband despite of various sufferings (15-18). Sita had to carry out the orders of Rama and had to suffer exile. When a recently married husband renounced the world nothing was left for a young wife except following her husband and becoming a nun (21. 72-73). Co-operation and living together affectionately of co-wives was necessary. Kaikeyi caused affliction for his co-wives. When Aparajita and Sumitra could not bear the separation from their sons, Kaikeyi's heart melted and she made her best efforts to recall Rama for the well-being of her son, herself and the whole family 32. 36-53).
It was the son who maintained the continuity of the family therefore his necessity was ever felt by the parents (91. 122). Mother consulted monks for the birth of sons (41.41-42) and kings postponed the renunciation of the world till a son was born (21. 28). Janaka and his wife got afflicted when their son, Bhāmaṇḍala was kidnapped by Candragati. Candragati had kinnapped him to adopt him as his own son because his wife was issueless (26. 82-88).
Responsibilities of parents :-It was the duty of the parents to nourish, educate and marry their sons and daughters properly. Fostermothers were engaged for children (26.98; 97.11). Añjana (17.91-122) did not forget to take proper care of her son though she was in great. distress. At the proper time parents duly arranged for the education of their sons and daughters1. Sītā though abandoned by Rama yet she duly When the daughters arranged for the education of her sons (97.22). attained puberty the parents got worried for their marriage and it was only after their marriage that they got relieved of the responsibility2.
The sufferings of the sons brought about. great anxiety to their parents (31.97; 18.20; 63.4-6; 5.88). occasion of great joy
It was an
1. 25.23; 39.88; 24.4-9.
2. 15.13-14; 36.39; 24.9; 12,1-8.

Page #363

334
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
for the parents when their separated sons met them again". The natural affection of the parents gushed forth and they celebrated such occasions with great enthusiasm.
Duties of sons and daughters :--The daughters and sons showed due modesty and obedience to their parents. It was the duty of the sons to keep their parents happy and give them due assistance in their old age. As far as the daughters are concerned, they remained with their parents only up to the time of their marriage and there is no instance that any girl would have disobeyed her parents in marrying the person selected by them. The greatest responsibility lay on the sons and they were always obedient to their parents and elders. Rāvana on being advised by his mother, started acquiring great powers for rejuvenating his ancestral glory. He determined to recapture Laikā as soon as he was advised to do so by his grandfather (7.158-172). Rāma forwent the crown of Ayodhyā because he did not like to cause slightest agony to his father and he did not want to blacken the repute of his father, Laksmana did not interfere because he thought that whatever the elders had done, must he proper (31.109). Pavanañjaya obeyed his father and decided not to refuse his marriage with Añjanā (15.91). Non-obeyance of a father who was considered to be socially and politically a ripe person, brought about adverse results. On that account Indra got humiliated in a battle with Rāvana (12.75-82, 139-140). One who followed his mother's advice won glory and kingdom (77.8288). A loyal son suffered himself than angering even her step-mother (8.143-210). A faithful son never tolerated any undue insult and humiliation of his mother at the hand of even his elders (50.2-14; 99.20-23). It should be noted that in both the cases the sons ultimately pay their due respects to their elders after taking revenge upon them. This is a sign of their due modesty towards their elders. A son duly revenged himself by killing the murderer of his father (39.46). Whenever the sons departed from their home they paid their due respects to their parents and took their due permission. In exchange they received blessings from their parents. It was the sacred duty of the sons to assist their fathers in their old age. When the princes attained full youth, they prevented their fathers from entering the battle and prepared themselves to fight against the enemies (27.16-21;
1.8.206; 18.42; 30.94-95, 97.29-32. v 2. na ya bhogakāraṇam me tujjha akittie logammi, jáeņa suena pahu cinte
yavvam hiyam niyayakālam, jeņa piya na ya sogam gacchai egam pi ya
muhuttam 31.76-77. 3. 31.93-100; 16.35; 19.13; 27 21; 86.14-23; 98.24.

Page #364

SOCIAL CONCITIONS
335
16.30-34; 19.3-12). It was a general desire of the sons that their father should take rest and remain at ease while they themselves should shoulder the works of greater responsibilities and risk.
Elder brother's responsibility :-On the death of the father, the responsibility befell on the eldest brother. At the time the eldest brother acquired the responsibility of a father and he looked after the wellbeing of the whole family. Thus he became the head of the family. According to the rule of primogeniture, the eldest son became the king. It was the eldest son who was married first and thereafter followed the marriages of the younger ones. The elder brother was obeyed as the guardian (9.27-50; 38. 17). In accordance with Rāma's wishes after his return from exile Lakşmaņa accepted the rulership of Ayodhyā (85. 14-20).
Mutual affection between Brothers and Sisters : --Brothers had unbound love for one another. Bharata did not like to trangress the right of his elder brother, Rāma to the throne of Ayodhyā but he had to accept the crown when Rāma completely refused to becme the king and accepted voluntary exile (31. 90-92; 82.44-53). It was Lakşmana's unfettered affection for his elder brother that he accompanied Rāma in exile and fought for him against Rāvana. As a younger brother Lakşmana considered it his duty to prevent Rāma from exiling Sita but his efforts did not prevail (94. 5-20). It was the affection of Rāma for Satrughna that Rāma installed the latter as the king of the city of the latter's preference (86. I). Vibhīşaņa wanted good of his brother Rāvana. Therefore. he often advised the latter to release Sita but Rāvana's own misconduct brought about his own end (See 7. 15-35; 103. 10-15 also).
Brothers and sisters bore deep affection for each other. Brothers were prepared to take any risk for the safety and well-being of their sisters. (54.46; 55. 47). It was out of regard for his sister that Bhāmandala immediately ran to the assistance of Lavana and Arkuša fighting with Rāma (99. 35-44). Whenever a sister was kipnapped, abducted or seduced, her brother took immediate measures for her safety, security and well-being'. In distress a brother hoped to get shelter under his sister (77. 90). Similarly a sister sought help from her brother (64. 19-20). Sister's affection for her brother always remained alive. Sītā knew that her brother was kidnapped but when she suddenly heard of his presence she could not believe it and wept on remembering the unfortunate incident (30.33-35). It was an occasion of great
1. 9. 10-19; 77. 85-87.

Page #365

336
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
happiness for her when she met her brother (30. 80). Simhendu's sister prevented her husband from attacking her brother and thus paved the way for the safety of her brother?
Place of daughter-in-law:-A daughter-in-law duly observed the customs of the family and a mother-in-law duly endeared the former. Sītā first bowed to her father-in-law, then to her mother-in-law and after having obtained their permission, she accompanied Rama in exile (31.103-104). Aparajitā did not forget Sitā when she made a sorrowful review of the possible sufferings of Rāma (78.5). Añjanā duly obeyed her mother-in-law and left home when she was blamed and exiled by the latter (17.8). Vimuci and his wife got duly distressed with the kidnapping of their daughter-in-law (30.63).
Thus the Paumacariyan reveals that the members of the family constituted the nucleus of the society in which all were bound by mutual affection and love. The safe running of the family depended upon the fact how the members discharged their duties and remained sincere to their responsibilities. This primary unit of society i.e. the family trained its members to make them play active part in society for their social and political welfare. It was here that the members learned discipline, and formed their character, shaped their conduct and made their life beneficial. The individual saw himself as a son, a brother, a husband and a father or a daughter, a sister, a wife and a mother. Every one gained knowledge by his own experiences and thus could see to his and his fellow's advancement. Further the individual contributed towards the welfare of society by developing the qualities of affection, love, friendship, respect, reverence, faithfulness, sincerity, liberality, spendthriftness, modesty, courage, temperance and freedom. Here one suffered and enjoyed, fell down and rose up and thus prepared for developing himself into a complete social and political personality.
Joint family-system:-The joint family was the characteristic feature of the ancient Indian society. The PCV reveals that Dasaratha's family consisted of his wives, sons and daughters-in-law and they lived together. After the return of Rāma from Larkā, he and his brothers, lived together with their sons and daughters-in-law. All the members shared jointly the weal and woe of their family on different occasions.
B. Relationship. The following family relationships are referred to in the Paumacariya:
Whenever there is an opportunity of joy or sorrow in the family on occasion of some social function or religious festivity or political
1. 77, 96-98.

Page #366

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
337
occasion, the PCV refers to some combined relationship taking part in them1. That relationship is denoted by 'Svajana' kinship relations, 'Parijana' or 'Parivarga'-dependent members of the family, Bandhujana' or 'Bandhuvarga' brethren in general and 'Pariyara=Paricara' (28. 105) attendants and servants.
A wide sphere of various individual family-relations mentioned in the PCV are as follows:
Relations:-Mother - Maya (Mata 50.20) Mai (99. 41), Japani (Janani 45. 44); Father-Vitta (Pita 50. 20), Pii (45. 44), Piu (99. 41), Taya (Tāta 110. 32), Piyara (Pita 53. 17; 34. 56; 31. 110); Parents= Piyara (Pitā 99.39); Grandfather - Piyamaha (Pitāmaha 7.152); Son= Putta (Putra 4.5.9), Suya (Suta 50. 11), Nandana (Nandana 45. 40); the elder son as Jetthaputta (Jyeṣṭhaputra 77. 104) and the younger one as Kaniṭṭha (Kaniṣṭha 47. 43); Daughter = Duhiya (Duhita 95. 18), Tanaya (Tanaya 80. 54), Dhuya (Duhita 98. 20), Nandiņi (Nandini 63. 7), Suya (Sutā 95.16); Brother=Bhāī (Bhrātā 45. 44), Bhāyā (21. 45); Bandhu (46. 14), Bandhava (111. 1), Bhāyara (99. 40); the uterine brother as Ekkoyara (Ekkodara 11.23) or Sahoyara (Sahodara (49.7); the elder one as Jeṭṭha (38. 48; 45. 17; 63. 9) or Gurava (Guru 45.23); Sister Bahiņī (Bhaginī 99.42), Bhaiņī (10.80), the uterine sister as Ekkoyară (Ekkodara 30. 55) or Sahoyari (Sahodari 9.10); Husband= Bhattara (Bhartă 8.33; 31. 125), Kanta (Kanta 10 38), Daia (Dayită 49. 4; 80. 56), Piya (Priya 77. 93; 56.14), Dhaniya (Dhanika 42.22); Wife Patti (Patni 14.14), Bhajja (Bharya 21.43), Kantā (Kantā 45. 9), Daia (Dayita 68. 37), Piya. (Priya 77. 99), Gehiņi (Grhini 45. 33), Ghariņi (77. 1), Mahiliya (Mahila 45. 23); Father-in-law = Sasura (Śvasura 71.45; Son-in-law = Jāmāuya (Jāmātṛ 24. 20); Daughter-inlaw Supha (Snușă 95.20); Wife's brother-Sala (Śyala 77. 98; 88. 29); Husband's brother= the younger as Deyara (Devara 63.12); Mother's father Māyāmaha (Mātāmaha 50.14); Ajjaa (Aryaka 50. 2); Mother's parents Māyamaha-juvalaya (99.46); Mother's brother Mama (99.46), Mamaya (Mamaka 63.28); Father-in-law also addressed as Mama (24. 22); and Sister's son = Bhaiņejja (Bhagineya 99. 30).
Friends :-The winder social circle included the friends also as relations. They are called Mitta-Mitra (12.10; 15.52) and Sahi= Sakhi (48.21) or Sahiya Sakhikā (31.104; 17,8), as female-friend.
1. sayana 17. 27, pariyana 4-10, 94-95, pasumantisayana pariyaṇa 63. 27, māyāpiyāputtasayana parivaggam 3. 135, pariyan asāmantabandhujana 38. 51, sesabandhavajana 30, 81, bandhuvagga 6. 235.
22

Page #367

338
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Guest (Atihi ):-They included the guests and the strangers to whom hospitality was to be accorded in a befitting manner. Hospitality is prescribed to be one of the religious duties of a householder (14.115). Providing seat, wishing of one's good health and arranging for the bath and meals were the traditional manners that a host was required to show to a guest (15.34, 35; 19.17,18; 33.3; 91; 34.8, 13; 36.38).
SEC. 3. CEREMONIES OF BIRTH, CHILDHOOD AND
MARRIAGE
A. Birth and Childhood. Care of the Expectant Mother :- The birth of a child was an occasion of great joy and merriment for the parents, because it was the child who maintained the continuity of the family. Therefore it became necessary for the elders to look after and take proper care of the expectant mother for the safety of the foetus. Thus it was the duty of the husband to see that her pregnant wife remained cheerful and healthy. The pregnancy of a woman was known by certain physical changes in her body. Besides that some psychological developments were also marked in her. Thus the PCV reveals that with the conception of the embryo of Rāvana in the womb of Kekasī, her speech became harsh and her body turned stiff. She did not fear battle, she liked to command the lord of the Suras and preferred to look her image in a dagger in spite of the presence of a mirror (7.86). The nature of the psychological developments depicted the nature of the would-be child. Thus the PCV tells us that in the case of Kekasí a cruel son was born to her, in the form of Rāvana. One important psychological development was the pregnancy-craving of the expectant mother. It was the duty of the husband to satiate that longing of his wife otherwise it might have brought about adverse effects on the health of the woman and the child. Thus the PCV states that the pregnancy longings of Sītā, Kekasī and Mānasasundari were duly fulfilled by their husbands Rāma (92.14; 94.27), Ratnāśrava (7.89) and Vidyādhara Sahasrára (7.6) respectively.
Besides the mental care, the physical care was also duly taken of a pregnant woman. Thus we are told that pregnant Añjanāsundari was supported physically by her friend and taken to the cave for the protection of the unborn child from miscarriage (gabbhassa māvivatti hoi 17.39). Various references to 'sūyahara'='sūtikāgsha (7.91; 26.85;30. 34) indicate that a special apartment i.e. the lying-in-chamber was
1. See Su. San, 3.15-16. It further states that the nature of the longing
considered the type, a child would be born of.

Page #368

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
339
provided for the pregnant woman who was confined to it during the last days of her pregnancy. The Sušrutasaṁhit a gives directions for it (10.2). It was considered to be essential for the security and the welfare of the foetus and the pregnant woman.
Curiosity for the Birth of a Son :-The parents always had a great desire to be blessed with son (41.41). The joy of the parents started even before the actual birth of a son. Mere prediction that a son would be born to them (3.66) was enough for their joy, not to talk of the actual birth. Thus the PCV reveals that Nabhi was in mirth when Rşabha was born (3.70). The son used to receive immense love and caress from his parents. Videhā regarded her son as her very eyes and a valuable treasure (26.89). The sudden kindnappiyg of her son was considered to be a great misfortune (26.89). Añjanasundari considered her son as the very source of her existence in her woeful days (17.93). Amsumati was not living cheerfully because she had no son (26.83). For Ambumati and her husband it was a day of great joy when they adopted a son (26.84). The relatives also felt happy on the occasion of the birth of a male child (7.89). The father as far as possible never liked to send his son to war (27.18; 16. 32) and killing one's own son was considered to be a great sin (14. 14).
Birth Ceremonies and other Rites :-With so much importance attached to a son it was natnral that with the birth of a male child the happiness of the parents grew immensely. Various functions were performed in connection with the cermonies of the birth and gradual growth of the child and due care was taken for his healthy nourishment. The first thing to be noted was the day and the time of the birth of a son and to get the planetary postiion recorded to asceratain the future happiness of the son (25. 7. 97; 7; 17. 106-112).
Then the birth ceremony was performed with great pomp and show accompanied by the playing of musical instruments (3. 70; 7. 90; 17. 119; 25. 8-14; 97. 8). Thereafter the name of the son was christened according to his physical qualities(Padma--because he was lotus-eyed 25.8) or intrinsic merits (Lakhkaņa=Lakşmaņa-because he was possessed of many qualities 25. 11) or in association with some incident' (Dasamukha-because his face reflected in the nine jewels of his necklace 7. 96) or in association with the particular con dit tons developed by
1. 97.9. 2. 2. 26; 63. 29 3. 3. 68; 9 78; 17, 120; 22, 56; 26, 87; 3, 106; 21 21.

Page #369

340
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
the mother during her preganancy (Indra-because his mother longed to see the paraphernalia of Indra 7.8).
Some rites were performed for the safety of the child. Sitā is said to have thrown mustard seeds and put round the necks of her sons strings of the nails of tiger, embedded with gold (97.10). It might have been performed to ward off the effects of evil spirits.
The PCV mentions that Padma and Lakşmaņa (25. 12) as well as Lavana and Ankuśa were growing gradually through the stage of crawling and walking (rinkhanacañkamaņayāi kuņamāņā 97. 11). No ceremony is referred to here in this connection. The Bhagavati Sūtra tells us that the ceremonies of crawling (parangāmaņam) and walking (payacarikamanam) were held in connection with prince Mahābala (11. 11. 429). i Nurses:--The parents paid due attention to the proper growth and nourishment of their children. For that purpose nurses were appointed in case of the noble and royal children. (dehasuha-lālaņațțhe 26.88). There is a reference to five foster-mothers of Lavana and Ankusa (pañcasu dhaisu sannahiyā 97.11). They should have been the wet-nurse (khīradhai), bath-nurse (majjanadhāi), toilet-nurse (mandana dhai), play-nurse (kīlāvana-dhai) and the lap-nurse (arkadhāi). The PCV refers to a well educated Dhãi (Dhātri) of princess Srimāla (savvatthasatthakusala 6.165). It indicates that a female child was not ignored and the nurses were well educated so that they could look after the mental development of the children properly. Thus they can be called the first teachers of the children. The nurses were accorded due respect of a mother (22.8) by the children.
Thereafter at due time the children were educated and after the completion of their education the occasion arrived for their marriage.
B. Marriage The marriage was an important event in the life of a person, With it com nenced the 'gārhasthya' life, the foundation of the family life. Therefore, necessary consultations as regards the 'kula', 'carita', 'yaya' and 'rūpa' i. e. family, conduct, age and charming physique were made before contracting a marital alliance, but rigidity in the field of inter-caste and inter-racial marriage was not observed.
1. Nāyā, I, P. 20. 2. Bhag. Süt, 11. 11.529. (Abhaya.) See AP, 14.165. It mentions majjana,
mandana, stanya samiskāra and kridana nurses, 3. See Infra.

Page #370

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
341
Guardian's Responsibility:-The act of marriage is often denoted by the term 'pāņiggahana' (7.75;24.33;98.56). It was a symbol of 'sva-karana'' which entailed the transfer of the authority of the parents over the girl to the husband and for that the offering of the bride to a bride groom is indicated by the word 'dinna' (15.38). Thus the responsibility of marriage lay with the guardians. King Mahendra was worried for the marriage of his daughter, Añjana (15.36). Vanara Sugriva was in anxiety for getting a suitable husband for his daughter Padmaraga (19 37; See also 51.18; 36.11). In these cases the initiative is taken by the fathers of the girls and they get success in negotiations. Sometimes the father of a boy took initiative. Vidyadhara Puspottara had demanded the sister of Vanara Śrīkantha for his son (6.6). In the absence of the father, the elder brother was responsible for the marriage of his younger ones (6.6; 9.28, 50). In the case of Lavana and Ankusa the two sons of Sita, their guardian king Vajrajangha arranged their marriage (98.1). In the absence of any guardian the suitor himself made demand for a bride from her guardian (10.4-8). Thus the PCV reveals that generally the guardians settled the marriage of their sons and daughters. In the case of contest type of 'svayamvara' marriage the father of the bride proposed a feat and in the selection type too it must have depended upon the father of the bride to invite or not a to invite a particular candidate. Further the accompanying of the parents with the promising condidates in a 'svayamvara' indicates that the consent or the wishes of the parents prevailed in the 'svayamvara' marriage also. Kaikeyi's initiative and then Dasaratha's consent to the marriage of their son, Bharata with Subhadra the daughter of Kanaka, the brother of Janaka of Mithila (28.131) indicates that generally the father and the mother both were unitedly responsible for the marriage of their children. One thing is to be noted that though the marriage of the children dependend on the wishes of their parents but in no case the marriage was a failure.
Wishes of the Children :-It is true that the parents settled the marriage of their children but the wishes of the latter ware not altogether neglected. King Mahidhara betrothed his daughter to some other person when he lost all hopes of getting Lakṣmaṇa who was greatly cherished by his daughter. But when Lakṣmaṇa went there per chance Mahidhara gladly gave his consent to his daughter to marry him (36.9-40). Vidyadhara Candragati tried his best to accomplish the wish of his adopted son Bhamandala who wanted to marry Sita (28.9-75),
1. 'Pradanam svämya karaṇam'-Manu, 5.152.

Page #371

342
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
but in vain. Vanara Sugrīva, in accordance with the wishes of his daughter, Padmarāga married her to Hanumat (19.40). It was because of the request of Vidyadhari Padma that her father withdrew from attacking Śrīkantha and allowed her to marry Śrīkantha (6.24-26). There is a single instance when king Acala forcibly married his son to many girls in order to prevent him from renouncing the world (82.69).
Due Consultations:-Guardians of the brides held due consultations and after having considered various factors, they selected bridegroom. King Mahendra took advice of his ministers and on the ground of merits he rejected others and selected Pavanañjaya for his daughter, Añjana (15.14-27). Similarly Maya (8.3) and Ravana counselled with their ministers before settling their daughters' marriage (12.1). Whenever the father was unable to decide for himself, he sought help from others. Thus when Tara was simultaneously demanded by Vidyadhara prince Sahasagati and Sugrīva, her father took advice of a monk. He predicted short span of life of Sahasagati. Then the choice fell to Sugrīva, (10.4-8).
Considerations in Marriage-alliance:-The status of family, conduct. good-looking features and parity in age were the main considerations for contracting marriage-alliances. King Pṛthu was not willing to offer his daughter to Ankuśa, because the former was quite ignorant of the family of the latter (na ya najjai kulavamso 98.8). It was on account of the noble family and noble qualities (sundarakula sambhuo gunehi dūraṁ samuvvahai 8.6) of Ravana that Maya married his daughter Mandodarī to him. King Puspottara was requested by the envoy of Kirtidhavala to marry his daughter to Srikantha because Śrīkantha belonged to 'uttamakula' and possessed 'uttamacarita' (6.17) as well as 'uttamarupa' (6.18). Ravana married his daughter to such a person who belonged to a noble family 'visuddhakulavamsa' (12.2), who was dear to people (vinaya gunadharo logassa ya vallaho 12.4) and possessed decorum as well as good qualities (lakkhanovaveo 12.3). Minister Sumati had advised Mahendra to marry Anjana to Vidyut prabha because he possessed both 'guna' and 'rupa' (15.21). Vajrajangha was in search of such a bride for Ankuśa that she could stand equal to Ankusa in 'rupa' (ruveņa anusariccham 98.3). Pavanañjaya was preferred to others as a bridegroom of Añjana because he surpassed even the cupid in beauty and health (ruvena jovvanena kāmassa sirim vidambei 15.27). Therefore, it is said in the PCV that both the parties should have parity in status, character and physique.1
1. Uttamapurisana jae samjogo hoi uttamehi sam am, ahamana majjhimana ya sariso sarisehi va hojjä-PCV, 6.19,

Page #372

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
343
Among the ruling classes chivalrous qualities, power and other attainments were also considered in selecting a bridegroom (jovvapabalaviriyasattisampaņņo 12.3, vijjāsahassadhari atuliyabalavikkamo 8. 6). The contest type of 'svayamvara' marriages indicate that bold and gallant bridegrooms had their success. Further the PCV reveals that the guardians did not select such candidates who were likely to die (10. 7) or renounce the world at an early age (15. 24). There are instances of suitors who were rejected on account of their being quarrelsome, hostile and polygamous (15. 12-18).
It is corroborated by Jataka No. 200, that candidates having noble birth, sound character, good health and due reverence for elders were considered to be suitable bridegrooms.
Parily in Age :-Parity in age was also an important factor. There. fore, the terms like "donni vi vayasānuruvasohaim eyāņa sa mãoga-6. 21' and 'aņusarisa jovvaņānam sarisjoo 15.22' have been used. No specific age of marriage is mentioned, but the terms like jovvana 90. 3', 'navajovvanujjātão-77.53; 'navajovvana sampannā -8. 2', navajovvana ciñcaiyā-15. 13; 'jovvannāpuņpā 12. l', 'laliyajovvanapuņņā 8. 160'; 'udārakilanajogā 98. 2'; and 'raiguņasāravahantio 77. 53' denote that marriage was performed when the candidates had attained full youth, adolescence and capacity to understand well the various aspects of love. Sitā was betrothed to Rāma when he had already completed his education and also defeated the Mlecchas in a battle (27. 41). Lavaṇa was married after having completed his education (98. 2). Aukuba had already fought a battle when his marriage took place (98. 56). Rāvana married Mandodarī after having acquired many supernatural powers which must have entailed a severe penance on his part (7. 130; 8. 21), and to endure that hardship he must have been a grown young man. Hanu completed his student-career, helped Rāvaņa in defeating Varuna and thereafter he got married (18. 56; 19. 32; 34. 40). Vanik Dhanadatta was betrothed to Guņamati but the latter's mother secretly rebetrothed her to Śrīkānta. At this breach of contract Dhanadatta's younger brother became furious and killed Śrīkānta (103. 15). This incident shows that when Dhanadatta's younger brother was able to kill a man, Dhanadatta must have been an adolescent. Kaikeyi had completed her education and she had exhibitted valorous traits while helping her husband in overpowering the disgruntled candidates before her marriage took place (24,28). All these instances of the people of different races and belonging to different strata prove that marriage was performed when the candidates were quite mature in age and were able to shoulder the responsibilities of household life. However the marriage of Lakşmapa with

Page #373

344
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Manorama was solemnised when a long time had passed after his return from Lanka (Ch.90). It shows that in cases of rulers, the PCV does not refer to any child-marriage.
Other factors-Prophecies and political motives also played an important part in bringing about marital-alliances. Rama's marriage with the daughters of Gandharva (51.15-17), Lakṣmaṇa's with Visalya (64.18) and Cakravartin Hariṣeņa's with Madanāvalī were performed in accordance with the prophecies.
It was on account of political considerations that the defeated kings married their daughters to the conquerors. Thus king Simhodara of Ujjeni married his daughters to Lakṣmana (33 139). Vijayaratha, the son of king Ativīrya married his sisters, Ratimālā and Vijayasundarī to Lakṣmana and Bharata respectively (38.1,7). Similar were the cases of the Vidyadharas, Vanaras and the Rākṣasas. Defeated Vidyadhara king Samudra married his four daughters to Lakṣmaņa (54.42). Discomfited (kṣatriya king), Maruta married his daughter to Rāvana (11.100). Vidyadhara king Indra was advised by his father to marry his daughter to Ravana for the same political reason (12.18). Routed king Varuna married his daughter to Hanumat (19.32). King Vajrakarna of Daśapura offered his daughters to Lakṣmaṇa because he was rescued by Lakṣmaṇa from the tyrrany of king, Simhodara (33.138).
Site of Marriage cermoney:-Generally marriages were solemnised at the residences of the brides. It did not matter whether one hailed from the Aryan (Ksatriya 28.130; 21. 44; 24. 33), Vanara (6.217; 19. 40) or the Rākṣasa family. (8. 56, 62; 12 8). Among the Rākṣasas marriages were performed at the residences of the bridegrooms also (8. 9; 7. 75)1. Sometimes the marriage was performed at quite a different place. The marriage of Añjana and Pavanañjaya took place on the banks of the Manasa lake (15. 40). Rāma and Lakṣmaņa during their exile married various girls at Lanka, though they belonged to different places (77. 51). The PCV reveals that marriages were performed at auspicious time (nakkhatte sohane 5. 27; sunakkhatta-kara palaggammi 15.95),
Other Jaina literary sources corroborate the fact that sometimes marriages were solemnised at the residences of bridegrooms also. Pottila's marriage with Teyaliputta (Naya, 14. p. 149) and that of Mahabala with eight princesses are such examples.
1. This custom is still privalent among the Gonds. Vide Nayaku. Ca, p, xxvii 2. Bhagavati Sutta 11. 11. 430 See Nayaku. Ca, 1. 17. 1 and 5. 2,13-14.

Page #374

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
345
Types of Marriages :-It has been already stated that parents coatracted the marries of their children. Whenever the father offered his daughter to a suitable candidate, it fell under the 'prājāpatya' type of marriage. The betrothal of Sītā with Rāma (27. 41), the marriage of Añjanā with Pavanañjaya (15. 38), that of Mandodari with Rāvana (8. 18) and Kekasi's with Ratnāšrava (7. 72) fall under this group. Marriage alliances made on political considerations can also be put under this head. This type of marriage was widely prevalent in those days.
There were cases when parents were not consulted and on account of mutual love, the concerned candidates formed their own. wedlocks. This type of mrrriage is termed as Gandharval. The wedlocks of Rāvana and many Vidyadhara girls (8.38), Vanara Hanu and Rākşasi Laikāsundari (52.2) and Vidyadhara Srikantha and Padma(6.9) are the instances among the non-Aryans. This form of marriage was prevalent among the Aryans also. The unions of (Brahmin) Airakucchi with the daughter of his teacher (25.22)and that of Purohita Pingala with the princcess of krapura (26.8) come under this type. Rāma and Laksmana also performed love marriages.2 Lakşmaņa performed love wedlocks with princesses Kalyāṇamālā (34.3; 77.48) and Vanamālā (Ch. 36). Padmarāgā, out of many portraits, selected that of Hanumat. Her father Sugriva invited Hanu and married her to him (19.40). This is also a Gandharva-vivāha according to the definition "the father of the girl without consulting his own wishes gives away his daughter to a person whom the daughter likes and who reciprocates her sentiments” given in the Mahābhārata.3 Vanamala and Kalyānamālā were married by their fathers in accodance with their wishes, hence their marriages can be assigned to this class.
There were occasions when girls were forcibly carried away and married. This type of marriage is termed as Raksasavivāha. Rāvana married many girls seizing them by force (akkamiya vikkamenaṁ 9.51). His sister was kidnapped and married by Kharadūşana (9.12). This type of marriage was largely prevalent among the Rākşasas. The Aryans are also found to be following this practice. Brahmin Srivardhita
1. The Kāmsūtra speaks very highly of this type of marriage in which the
basis is mutual love which is the correct foundation and goal of marriage
(3. 5. 29-39). 2. Manu regards this type of marriage legal in the case of Ksatriyas (3,26). 3. MB (Adiparva), 44.10- Vide Hindu Social Organisation, p. 178, by P. N.
Prabhu (1954).

Page #375

346
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
kidnapped a princess (77.85) and made her his wife. The Kṣatriyas demanded girls in marriage and on refusal they defeated the fathers of the girls concerned and forceed them to marry their daughters to them. Such instances can be put under the Rākṣasa type of marriage. Laksmana's marriage with Vidyadharī Manorama (90), Aikusa's with Kanakamālā (98) belong to this type.1
On some pecuniary benefits Ratnābhā, a merchant lady betrothed her daughter, Gunamati to Śreśthin Śrīkānta, though she had been already betrothed to Dhanadatta by her father (103.12). This is an example of Asura-vivaha". But in this case the results were fatal and the marriage could not be performed.
The Jatakas (219 & 458) corroborate this type of marriage in which a wife is purchased. In the Raghuvamsa (11.39) of Kalidasa there is an indirect reference to shis type of custom.
Svayamvara:-The Paumacariyam reveals two forms of 'svayamvara' marriage, viz., the selection-type and the contest-type. In the former case many candidates are invited by the father of the bride and the bride then choses any one of her liking as her husband. Kaikeyi's (24.10) marriage with Dasaratha, Subhadra's (29.136) with Bharata, Khecaris Candramukhi's with Lavapa and Mandakini's with Ankusa (106.9), Vidyadhari Śrīmāla's with Vanara Kişkindha (6.159) and Khecari Ahalya's (Ahalla) with Anandamālin belong On such occasions bitterness was created and the
to
this category.
disgruntled candidates made a row and sometime waged a battle (6.176; 24.19; 106.14). It will not be out of place to mention here that the 'svayamvaras' of two sisters Candramukhi and Mandakini were held simultaneously at the same place and the 'svayamvara' of Subhadra was arranged immediately after that of her cousion sister Sītā. The former was a selection-type and the latter a contest-type. In the contest type candidates had to perform the proposed feat and whoever became successful, won the hand of the bride. In the case of Sita the bow was to be strung up (28.104) while in the case of Jitapadma the 'satti sakti' hurled by the father of the bride was to be withstood (38.25). In the former case many candidates assembled on the proposed day and tried their might while in the latter case one by one came and went away unsuccessful. Days passed and when Lakṣmaṇa happened to come there he emerged successful.
1. Manu approves of this type of marriage for the Ksatriyas -3.24,26.
2, Manu gives his consent to this type of marriage for the Vaisyas and the Śūdras, 3.24.
3. It was a mock 'svayamvara' in the case of Subhadra because it was presettled that Subhadra should choose Bharata.

Page #376

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
347
In the contest type of 'svayaınvara' wishes of the bride did not get any conssderation. It was the father who proposed the test and offered his daughter to the successful candidate. He had the choice of not inviting the candidate who was not liked by him. Therefore, it can be affiliated to the Prājāpatya type of marriage. But in the selection type the bride was free to select the candidate of her own choice and it must have depended on the individual candidate whether to attend the ceremony or not. Thus the willingness of both the parties was the deciding factor and it can be associated with the Gandharva type of marriage!
Marrying Maternal Uncle's Daughter :--There are some instances of sons-in-law who address their fathers-in-law as 'māma' (24. 22; 38. 46). It reminds us of the custom of inarrying the daughter of a maternal uncle and this custom was so widely prevalent that 'mama' became almost a term of address to the father-in-law. Lakşman's wedlock with Višalyā who was the daughter of the brother of Kaikeyi was of this type though Lakşmana was a stepson of Kaikeyi (64. 17, 45 ; See also 41. 56, 59). This type of marriage is corroborated by an instance in the Nayakumaracariu (7. 9. 9). It is still prevalent in South India. This custom is popular among the Gonds. The Avašyakacūrnī (II. p. 81) mentions that this type of marriage was prohibited in the Uttarăpatha. Manu (11. 171) does not approve of this type of marriage but Āpastambais said to have enunciated this custom.
Polygamy and Dawry:- Polygamy was quite sufficiently prevalent among the rulers whether they were the Ksatriyas (10.36; 91. 12, 17; 107. 4; 98. 2), Rākşasas (74. 12) or the Vānaras (108. 49).
There is no reference in the PCV to the custom of demanding dowry.
Inter-caste marriages: - The Paumacariyaṁ clearly reveals that in those days inter-caste marriages did take place.
It has been already discussed that the 'kula', 'carita' (rūpa' and ayu' were the main factors upon which depended the marital-union. There is no instance to show that cnly the Varna was considered as primary factor in forming wedlocks. The following examples of 'anuloma' and 'pratiloma'marriages indicate that inter-castemarriage was prevalent. Purohita Pingal's love marriage with a princess (26. 8) and (Brahmin)
1. See AIU, p. 560. 2, Vidc Nayaku. Ca, p. xxvii. 3. Ibid.

Page #377

348
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Śrīvardhita's Raksasa-marriage with princess Sundarā (77.85) fall under 'anuloma' type. A Brahmin woman though abandoned by her husband was accepted by king Kararuha as his honoured wife (77. 75). King Svayambhū and some princes (103.97) did not hesitate in demanding the hand of the girl of a higher caste (Brahmin girl Gupamati) These two instances are of 'pratiloma' type.
Inter-racial Marriages:-As regards inter-racial marriages there were no restrictions among the non-Aryan people. The Aryans also did form wedlocks with the non-Aryans. Inter-racial marriages were very common with the non-Aryans. Rākṣasa Răvaņa married many Vidyadhara (Mandodari 8.18, and others 8.38;9.51), Khecara (953), and Vänara (Sriprabhā, the sister of Sugrīva 9.50) girls. Khecara or Vānara Hanumat married Vidyādhara (Satyamatī 19.32), Raksasa (Anaügakusuma 19.34 and Lajkasundari 52.21), Vānara (Harimālini 19.36, Padmarāga 19.41) and Kinnara (19.36) girls. Vānara Sugrīva's wife, Tārā was a Khecari (10.2). Vānara Kişkindha was the husband of Vidyādharī Śrīmālā (6.175). Khecara Pavanañjaya formed marital-union with Vidyadhari Añjaná (15.38). The non-Aryans did like to form wedlocks with the Aryan girls. Ravana kidnapped Sitā and requested her to marry him. He himself married the daughter of king Maruta of Rājagļha (11.100) and many other Aryan girls (Vijjāharamaņuyāņam! kannão......parinei Dasāņano 9.51). Vidyadhara Candragati demanded Sītā for his adopted son Bhamandala (28.56). Raksasi Candranakhã wanted to marry Rāma (43.45). The Aryan people did not hesitate in forming wedlocks with the non-Aryan girls and the kings made them even one of their chief queens. Rāma had married three daughters of Vidyadhara Gandharva? (51.25) and one more Vidyadhari, namely Śrīdāma (90.28). Lakşmaņa married four daughters of Khecara Samudra3 (54.42) and also Vidyādharī Manoramă (90.28). Vidyadhari Manorama was one of the eight principal queens of Vasudeva Lakşmaņa (91,16) while Vidyādhari Śrīdāmā was one of four chief queens of Rāma (91.18). Lavana and Alikuśa married Khecara girls in a 'svayamvara' type of marriage (106.9). King Sumitra was married to Vanamālā by the latter's father who was a Bhilla, also called as an Anārya chief of the Mlecchas (12.13-14).
Other literary evidences also corroborate inter-caste marriages. According to the Mahabharata sage Cyavana married princess Sukanya
1. Here the reference to the 'manuyānam is to the Aryan girls. 2. See PCR, 51. 16. 3. Ibid, 54-66.

Page #378

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
(anuloma) and Duşyanta married Śakuntala presumably the daughter of a priest (pratiloma)1. The Buddhist Jataka No. 250 refers to a marital-union between a Brahmin and the chief wife of a king. Shri Gokuldas De observes that caste rigidity was not observed because the term 'sama-jātibhāriyā' is not used in verses and its use in prose betrays its later age in the Jatakas. The word 'sadisi' i.e. 'the same type' denoted age 'tulavaya' and not the caste". The 'varṇāvaraḥ' as mentioned in the Malatimadhava is a reference to an inter-caste marriage". Prince Nagakumāra is said to have married dancing girls and his father supported him saying that a woman-gem could be accepted without any consideration of family (akuliņu vi thīrayaņu laijjai). Certainly these are mere literary evidences, but the actual events of the time of Vākāṭaka-Gupta age show that 'anuloma and pratiloma' marriages took place in the society. A record describes the marriage of a Brahmin groom with a Ksatriya bride as perfectly in consonance with the rules of Śrutis and Smrtis". Vākāṭaka king Rudrasena, a scion of an orthodox Brāhmaṇa family married Prabhavati Gupta of the Vaisya Gupta family. The Kadamba rulers who were Brahmaņas by caste had married their daughters to the Vaisya Guptas.7
349
Manu (3.4) and Vatsyāyana (Kamasutra, 3.1.1) declare that marriage should be performed in the same 'Varņa'. Still we find that caste-flexibility is maintained and therefore the 'anuloma' (Manu, 3.1213) and the 'pratiloma' (Yājña, 1.93) marriages are recognised by the Smrtis also.
As regards the inter-racial marriages we find that the Ikṣvāku Brahmana kings accepted a bride from the Śaka royal family of Ujjayini and the Satavahanas had done the same in an earlier period. The preponderance of inter-racial-marriage-instances in the PCV point out the miscegenation of various tribes going on in those days and certainly since before the Vākāṭaka-Gupta age it has been an important way by which foreign tribes have been absorbed in Indian society.
SECTION 4. POSITION OF WOMEN.
In the Paumacariyam of Vimalasūri there is ample material to determine the position of women of ancient India in various fields of
1. MB, 3.122 f; 1.71,--Vide HAI.
2. SIJ, p. 112.
3. IK, p. 185.
4. Nayakuca. Ch, 3.7.8.
5. VGA, p. 315.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.

Page #379

350
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYA
life. Thus their place in family and society as well as in the political and the religious world will be worth studying for deciding their status which is, in one way, the reflection of the state of civilization of a particular age.
A. Family status or Women inside the House. Normally a woman in the family was treated under three capacities-maiden, wife and mother.
Maiden :-As a maiden she is called 'bāliya' (bālika) 39.109, 'kanna (Kanya) 24.4 or 'kumārī' 15.38. The maiden stage of a woman ended with her marriage when she became a wife. As long as she remained a maiden the whole responsibility of her guardianship fell upon her parents for whom it was necessary to make proper arrangements for her nourishment, growth, education and marriage.
We are told that for the nourishment of the royal sons, fostermothers were engaged (22.5; 96.11). Then why not the same facilities to the royal maidens? The mention of the dhai'=dhātrī of a Vidyadhara princess, śrīmālā (6.165) indicates that the maidens were not neglected in this respect. Śrīmālā's 'dhāi' was not an ordinary nurse. She was well-educated (savvatthasatthakusala==sarvārthaśāstrakusala) so that she could look after the physical as well as the mental development of her ward. This instance shows that the parents had equal consideration for their sons and daughters. In the absence of a son the affection and love of the parents increased for their daughter. Thus it is said that when Bhamandala was kidnapped, his sister Sītā became the sole object of consolation to her parents who gradually annihilated the sorrow of the loss of their son (soyassa moyanattham 26.98). With the advancement of the age of a girl it was necessary that open air, suitable company and proper freedom were allowed to her for her physical growth. The PCV reveals that Añjanā used to play with a ball (kilanti tenduena varabhavane 15.13); Sītā used to play in the company of her girl friends (26.103); and the Vidyādhara girls used to play and enjoy water-sports in gardens (8.31, 37).
Mere physical nourishment is not enough. With it the mental nutrition is also necessary, otherwise a human being cannot develop his personality to its fullness. The PCV refers to princess Atisundară who was getting her education in the house of a teacher (26.5). The education of girls was manifold. Kaikeyi is mentioned to have studied various subjects of both arts and science, viz. literary-scripts, grammar and prosody; fine arts-music, dance, drawing, painting, dressing,

Page #380

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
351
perfumery and modelling of leaves; sciences-arithmetic, domestic, prognosticating and distinguishing of gems, flowers, elephants and horses; and many other secular subjects and arts (24.4-8). Being a Kșatriya girl she must have obtained training in military science otherwise how could have she been able to drive the war-chariot of Dasaratha (24.25). One more example of a girl trained in military science is of queen Simhika who courageously fought and defeated the invaders (22.59). All these references at least suggest that girls were not neglected totally but were suitably educated and trained. It is not that only the princesses were favoured with educa. tion. The above quoted example of a foster-mother who was 'savvatthasatthakusalā'indicates that girls other than the princesses, presumably of other classes were duly educated. Sítā's dance recital before some monks (39.32), Gandharvī Citramala's musical recital to console Añjana in the forest (17.85), the musical and dance recitals by the daughters of Sugrīva to please ditstressed Rāma (48.1) and the musical and dance-performances by the wives of Lakşmaņa (110.1618) sufficiently prove that it was customany to train girls in the art of music and dance. Kaikeyi's educational qualifications indicate that as far as possible a variety of subjects were taught and manifold training was given to the girls. It must have depended upon the parents as to what training and education should be given to their daughters. viz. pertaining to literature or arts or sciences or profession To attain all that, girls are expected to have enjoyed freedom of movement and their education might have lasted for a considerable period of years. Princess Atisundarā's going to the house of her teacher, her co-study there with the son of a Purohita, the development of mutual love between them and finally their elopement--all these things tell us that the girls did not remain closed in the houses and they received education up to a considerable age i. e. up to the age of their marriage.
That the girls were suitably educated can be carroborated by other evidences. The Jaina Kalpasūtra (Su. 209) refers to 64 subjects of study which were thought to the girls. The Brahmanical Apastamba Grhya Satral states that women were provided with instructions in all the branches of studies. References to Kausalya' and Tārā3 as Mantravit while Draupadi as Panditā4 show that
1. 11:19.12.Vide Indra. 2. VR, 2.20.15. 3. VR, (Kiş.), 16.12. 4. MB, 3.27,2,

Page #381

352
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
they were educated in the Vedas and other branches of knowledge.? The Kāmasūtra lays down that the wife of a 'nāgaraka' should keep accounts of daily house-hold and it also speaks of 64 subsidiary sciences meant for women and their knowledge in belles letters, 2 That the girls were permitted to receive education out side their home is evidenced in the Uttara-Rāmacarita which mentions female students studying with brother pupils at the residenee of their teachers, 3
The parents took due care in marrying their daughters to proper persons. The preceding section cn 'marriage' reveals the following facts in this connection parents did their best in selecting a suitable husband for their daughter. The future happiness and well-being of a girl depended solely upon the type of the bridegroom to whom she was wedded. Therefore the parents first considered the family, character, health and the attainments of the candidate and then married their daughter to him. Maturity and full youth were the proper qualifications for a marriage; the wishes of the daughter were respected; and the guardians readily opposed those who wanted to marry their daughters forcibly. .
The parents are referred to be in anxiety for the marriage of their daughters (15.36; 35.11). But this anxiety was for selecting proper candidates and not that they considered the presence of a daughter to be a misfortune The comparison of a daughter with the wealth of wicked person, and the disparaging remarks about her at 6 20 really do not undermine her position and abuse the character of girls but they convey the idea that whatever affection and love one may bestow on his daughter, after all she will become useful and helpful to some other person. Therefore it is said that to serve some other family is the very nature of the women. And it is true that one cannot keep one's daughter with him for ever. One has to marry and send her to some other house. The Raksasa and Asura type of marriage speak of the kidnapping of and selling of girls to other persons. These practices sound indicent on the part of the kidnapper and the seller. Moreover thay belittle the position of girls in the society. But really speaking these were the prevailing customs of marriage in those days
1. See Indra, p. 140F, 2. Chakladar, pp. 175-81, 3. See Indra, p. 134. 4. Sutthu vi rakkhijjanti, thuthukkiyam rakkhiyā pāyattenan/
hohi parasov atthā, khalayanariddhi va varakanā//-6: 22. 5. Paragehasevanaṁ cicya, esa sahāyo mahiliyānam 6, 22

Page #382

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
353
The kidnapping and purchasing of girls were not done for pushing the girls in to slavery or extracting any inhuman service from them. Srīvardhita kidnapped the daughter of Srikānta and married her. She became his dear wife and there was no resentment from her (77.8597). Kharadūşana kidnapped Candranakhā and married her. He gave her the due respect a wife should expect (9.12: 44.9-11). The position of girls is undermined when they are enjoyed and left in lurch. But when they are married and given the rights of legally married wives, they are not the losers. It becomes disparaging when the married girls are intentionally put to sufferings by the behaviour of their husbands or the society. Here it will be interesting to note that in some cases the boys of Ksatriya landlords are still kidnapped and married to the Ksatriya girls to escape the burden of dowry and get good bridegrooms. In that case the marriage is regarded as binding by custom and it is given legality. This is just the opposite of kidnapping a girl and then marrying her. The dowry system of today is just like the purchasing of a bridegroom. Now a days that type of marriage is not regarded as illegal. So to say the importance is of particular custom and not the way in which the marriage is performed.
Generally marriages of girls were happy. There is no case on record in the PCV to note that any girl was forcibly married by her parents or that the marriage of a daughter performed by her parents proved unhappy afterwards on account of dissension, quarrel or disunion between the husband and the wife or culminated into the complete ruining of the life of a girl.
Thus the PCV reveals that a girl enjoyed equal status with a boy in the matters of nourishment, education and marriage. Along with the boys the girls also enjoyed the special privilege of immunity from murder even if they committed some offence.
Wife :--The wife was the mistress of the house (ghariņi 48.64, gehiņi 8.61=grhini). It indicates her highest authority in managing the the domestic affairs. Patti - Patni (14.14) denotes her capacity of partnership with the lord husband and Bhāryā=Bhajjā (103. 7) signifies the right of being maintained by her husband, Pai= Pati (46. 18) means the guardian of the wife and Bhattāra=Bharts (8. 33) denotes the maintainer. These terms indicate that the wife and husband were complementary to each other. The responsibilities of
1. This custom is prevalent in some parts of the Jodhpur Division of Rājasthān. 2. Samaņā ya Bambhaņā vi ya, go pasu itthi ya bālayā vuddha /
Jai vi hu kunanti dosari taha vi ya ee na hantavvā //- 35.15.
23

Page #383

354
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
both were combined. It was the duty of the husband to look after his wife's well-being whereas the wife was required to assist her husband in discharging his duties to the family. Therefore, it was necessary that the husband accorded due respect to his wife. Thus the PCV reveals that when the wife of Vibhīşana requested Rāma to become her guest Vibhisapa immediately consented to her by taking Rama to his residence (77. 19-20). The wife had equal voice in family-matters. When Kaikeyi wanted to marry Bharata to Subhadrā, Dasaratha quickiy favoured her decision (28. 134). Răvapa was ready to kill Kharadūşana who had abducted his sister, Candranakhā, but Mandodarī's request prevailed and the former desisted from killing. (9. 15)
The wife is also called Piyā=Priyă (37. 32). Kanta = Kántā (105. 97) and Vallaha = Vallabha (68. 39) which indicate that she received love and affection from her husband. The duty of the husband was not only to maintain his wife but to keep her happy. In moments of difficulty he was required to sympathise with his wife. For that she is called Daiyā=Dayita (60, 39). It was on account of this relation of love that a husband is found to be fulfilling the pregnancy wishes of his wife (7 3; 92. 12). Rāma readily plays water-sports with Sita when she requests for the same (42. 17). The bond of love were so deep that the husband had to do his best for the safety and happiness of his wife. When Sita is kidnapped Rāma gets distressed in her separation (44.51-66). He undertakes the hazardous task of helping Sugrīva in restoring the latter's wife (47. 30). He does not feel happy in absence of Sita though many other girls come to his rescue (47. 57). He rejects all land and wealth which are offered by Rāvana (65. 16-19). He feels happy only when he gets back his beloved wife (76. 15) and he did not mind all the sufferings and pains that he underwent in his attempt to regain Sitā. The story of Rāma is a theme of the faithful duty of a husband to his wife. Sugrīva's wife was deceptively claimed by a sham Sugrīva. Sugrīva became ready to suffer for Rama the pains of tracing Sītā because it was his duty to take help from Rāma in restoring Tārā and making her happy. Sugrīva undertook to perform the most severe task of fighting Ravana for rescuing Sītā because he was previously helped by Rāma in getting reunited with his own wite. Pavanañjaya was ready to commit suicide in separation from his wife when he could not trace his exiled wife (18. 14). Purohita Madhupingala (26.18) and weaver Viraka (21.5) were greatly pained when their wives were kidnapped by some ones. They did their best to retrieve them,

Page #384

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
355
yshem his
uty w
The wife is further called Baņaiņi=Praņayini (15.76). It indicates the duty of the wife that she should love and keep her husband happy. There are various references to love sports and husbands rejoicing in the company of their wives (10.34-35; 70.48-57). Whenever the husband was away the wife used to await his return with enthusiasm and on his return she happily celebrated the occasion (74.32-33). It was a day of great anxiety for a wife when her husband went out for fighting in a battle. The soldier's duty demanded his departure from home. Therefore his wife's duty was to encourage him. Temporarily she may feel desperate but the ultimate national duty was before her. Hence a soldier's wife considered his departure as a work of nobility and bravery. She encouraged her husband to fight with full life and vigour and considered it better for him to die in the battle than to retreat (56.14-12), In times of difficulty a wife helped her husband. When Simhendu was bitten by a snake in the jungle, his wife carried him on her back and got him cured with the help of a monk (77.92). Lakşmaņa's eight Vidyadhara wives, out of their deep affection for him presented themselves at the battlefield to share the fate of Lakşmapa (72.10). The true affectionate bonds of oneness demanded that the wife should be faithful to her husband. Thus the PCV reveals that Sita despite her persecutions did not like to marry Rāvana. She was ready to die for Rama (46.43) but was not willing at all to accept Rāvana as her husband. In separation from her husband she gave up food (46.14) and even various royal allurements could not seduce her (69.25-28). Añjana was abandoned by Pavanañjaya immediately after marriage on account of some misunderstanding on the part of Pavanañjaya but she never forgot her husband. Ultimately Pavanañjaya realised the mistake and accepted her. Suddenly another misfortune befell Añjana. She was exiled by her mother-in-law when her husband was away. She suffered a lot but here also she remained devoted to her husband and the day came when she got united with him again. On account of this affectionate bond a wife was duly respected and admired by her husband, therefore she is addressed as Devi (29.13) and Sundarī (29.14). Further she is considered to be like a gem (mahila-rayanam 44.62). Here lies the honour of the wife. She enjoyed the special privilege of immunity from being killed by her husband (35.15). It was considered to be a great sin to kill one's wife (candakammakārī 14.14). Not only the wife but the woman-class in general was granted this privilege? (15.75). Thus some sanctity was associated with the wife and the woman-class.
1. Bahudosāna vi dhirā, mahilāņa imam na vähinti.

Page #385

356
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
It was the consideration of equality that the wife was also consecrated when her husband was crowned as king (85.22-23). In religious matters she was equally respected. It was Mandodari who was given. by Ravana the complete responsibility of managing the celebrations of a great religious festival (bharo samappio savvo 66.7).
Polygamy was the prevailing custom among the nobles (82.59) and specially the rulers whether they were the Aryans1, the Rākṣasas2 or the Vanaras. There are many instances of the Aryan and the non-Aryan kings having one wife only. Candragati had one wife only. She was barren still he did not marry any other woman.
In the case of polygamy it was natural that some wives were specially favoured. The chief queen was respected more because she was the most privileged wife. Ravana manifested greater sympathy and consideration for Mandodari than for others before his departure to the battlefield (70. 60). The chief queen used to get coronated (85. 22-23). The multiplicity of wives became the cause of occasional jealousy and rivalry. The elder queen of Dasaratha, on not getting the ablution simultaneously with her cowives, got ready to commit suicide because she thought that she was disrespected (29. 12). There was occasional religious rivalry also. Vapra and Laksmi, the two queens of king Simhadhvaja of Kampilyapura were followers of two different religions. They developed a great controversy over the point of preference in rotating their respective chariots (8. 144f). For that prince Harisena had to leave his house for some time. Kanakodarī could not tolerate her cowife's worshipping of the Jina idol, hence she threw it out (17. 62). The above two instances additionally show that the religion did not become a bar in marrying girls following different faiths and usually the life went on harmoniously.
Sexual urge, political considerations and social prestige were the chief considerations which encouraged polygamy among the noble
classes.
Mother:-Whenever there is a reference to the parents or the members of the family the mother is mentioned first. It indicates that mothers enjoyed great respect in the society. The naming of the
1. 22.106, 108; 28.71; 91. 12-28. 136; 32-95; 88. 15-17: 21.3; 105-95.
2. 74.12.
3. 19.42; 108.49.
4. 74.33; 15.6; 15.11; 26.83.
5. 28. 96.
6. 14. 14.

Page #386

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
357
children after the names of their mothers prove that the mothers held the position of honour (Somitti 22. 108 for Lakşmana; Videhā 46. 65 or Vaidehi 100. 28 for Sita). Whenever the sons went out on some important work or renounced the world, they paid respects to and took due permission of their mothers. The same was the case when they returned. The stepmothers were also accorded the same respect.4 The mother was given the respect of a teacher along with the father (8. 152). It was considered to be a great sin to kill one's mother (14, 14). . A son considered it improper to give slightest pain to his mother or stepmother (8. 152) and for that Harişeņa left his country and after attaining the competent position, he returned home and fulfilled the desires of his mother. Rāma's voluntary exile to the forest was in compliance with fulfilling the wishes of his mother, Kaikeyi, though a stepmother (31. 76). Lavana and Ankusa could not tolerate the humiliation of their mother in the form of her exile at the hands of Rāma. They took rest only after giving a fight to Rama and bringing him to realise his mistake, though they were opposed by their mother (99. 21; 100. 31). Hanu overpowered Mahendra, the father of his mother to take revenge upon him, because Mahendra had not given shelter to his mother when she was wrongfully exiled by her mother-inlaw (50.5). Thus the PCV reveals that the mother held a position of honour and respect in the family and the society.
Widow : --The PCV reveals that widow-remarriage was not permitted. It is said that the life of a woman became graceless and unhappy with the death of her husband. Śrīvardhita's widow-mother is said to be living a miserable and unhappy life (77. 82). Añjana's marriage with Vidyutprabha was not advised, because he was prophesied to be having a short span of life and his early death would have made Añjana's life charmless (pabbhatthalāyanga 15. 69). The Raksasa soldiers were gripped with terror when they saw that they would be killed and their wives would become widows (vihavão 59. 17). Mandodarí prevented Rāvana from killing Kharadūşana because his death would have made Candranakhā's life quite miserable (vigayasoha 9. 17). Thus it is revealed that the position of widows was not good in the society.
This state of widows can be corroborated by other evidences. The Bhagavati Sūtra mentions that the widows were not associated
1. 16. 35; 31.95. 2. 3. 135; 13. 51. 3. 79. 28; 8. 26. 4. 31. 101.

Page #387

358
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
1.
with the marriage ceremony (11. 11. 430). The Kumārasambhava alludes to widows in affliction (4. 1.) Manu does not sanction widowremarriage. He precribas life of complete celebacy for her (9.65; 5. 151, 160) and permits her to earn her livelhood by means of the noble handicraft. Vátsyāyana also does not allow remarriage but permits her to live as a concubine.
Dependency of Women:-Widowhood brought about a great contrast in the life of woman. Similarly permanent separation from husband was also a great misfortune for woman. The PCV reveals that all the queens of Dasaratha were pained to learn that their husband would leave them for ever by renouncing the world (31. 58).
When Añjana was exiled by her mother-in-law on the false allegation of infidelity she went to her parents to seek shelter bu her parents and brother did not show syampathy for her. Being hopelessly afflicted with the sorrow of helplessness, she cried out that at woman was respected by her kith and kin as long as she was not abandoned by her husband; her prosperity, happiness and esteem were great as long as she remained affectionate to her husband; otherwise she became despicable and helplessa. On account of such a position of woman, it was natural that she should regard permanent separation from her husband as the most uuhappy and miserable affair.
With the separation from or the death of her husband the happiness of a woman did not vanish altogether. She saw a ray of hope in her son, because he was considered to be her true support in absence of the husband, Thus the PCV reveals that Añjanā on being neglected by her kith and kin, had to lead a woeful life in the forest, still she saw a ray of consolation in the hope of soon getting a son. On the happy occasion of the birth of a son to her, she could not hold back from saying that she was still living on the earth only with the hope and grace of her son. But a woman's condition becomes pitiable if she loses her son also. Then her very existence becomes burdensome. Thus the PCV reveals that Mandodarī who was already suffering from the sorrow of her husband's death, suddenly swooned to learn that her sons were renouncing the world. She had also cried out "How sinful am I that the sons who are the only support of a mother
1. Chackladar. p. 183 2. Tāva sirisoh age am, tāva ya garuyāu honti mahilão /
Jaya ya pai mahaggham sinehapakkham samuvvahai-17. 34. 3. Tujjha pasāyeņa aham, puttaya jivami natthi sandehoj
paisayaņavippamukkā, jūhapanatthū mai ceva//17. 93.

Page #388

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
359
on the death of her husband are also abandoning me?". The same state of helplessness is evidenced by Aparajita when her son, Rama goes into exile?. Kaikeyi had demanded the coronation of Bharata for the same reason. Bharata wanted to renounce the world along with his father. Kaikeyi could not face this unhappy situation. She got gripped with severe agony. She thought of a plan to avert the situation. She demanded the coronation of Bharata so that she would not be separated at least from her son?. Dasaratha himself told Rāma that Kaikeyi was likely to die in separation from Bharata'. The above evidences prove that women lived in dependency. After the loss of her husband, her son could prevent her from falling victim to a miserable life, but the real happiness of her life depended on her husband, therefore we find that a woman regarded her husband as her lord and address the husband as 'Svāmin' and 'Natha'.
B. Social status or Women outside the House,
Inherent traits of Women :-A very intensive trait of ficklemindedness (capalatā) is associated with the character of woman, Thus Sita though faultless yet at the time of being abandoned in the forest tells Kștäntavadana that women are fickle-minded (94.74). On account of her frailty a woman loses her far-sightedness and becomes the slave of her natural instinct. Kaiheyi's demand of coronating Bharata was of this type. She was promised a boon and it was duly fulfilled by Dasaratha with the consent of Rama and Lakşmaņa. But Kaikeyi had not that wisdom and farsightedness to think in advance as to what would be its consequences. She wanted to keep Bharata along with her and by the pretext o. the boon she became successful. When Rāma and Laksmana went into exile their mothers got distressed and even Kaikeyi could not bear the agony of her co-wives. Therefore, she had to send Bharata and had to proceed herself to call them back. But the promise was promise, the words were words and Rāma did not return inspite of Kaikeyi's en treaties. There she had to admit her fickle-mindedness and lack of foresight.
1. Bhattāravirabiyae, putta alambanam mahiliyže, honti iha jivaloe, cattā tehin
pi pāvāh an-75.so. Puttaya kim me pariccayasi.........hosii puttalambo, pāroho ceva sähãe 31.96,
97; paiputtavirahiyā iha kan saran mahar pavajjāmi 31.99. 3. 31.63-64 4. Tassa viogammi kegai marai 31.75. 5. Mahilā sahāvacavala, adih apehi sahavamăillā, tam me khamahi puttaya, jam
paţikūlam kayain tujjha -32.51.

Page #389

360
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
The instances of rivalry among the queens already quoted above exhibit the trait of jealousy for one another.
The defect of greediness is also found with women. Ratnaprabhā, on account of being allured to the wealth, overrode the decision of her husband a nd secretly betrothed her daughter to another person though she was previously betrothed to Dhana datta by her husband (103,12). It was with the motive of covetiousness that the mother of Ahideva and Mahideva wanted to poison her sons for securing a gem from them (55.41).
Weaknesses :-Certain inherent weaknesses to which the human beings are prone to fall victims are well depicted in connection with the woman-class. Thus the PCV reveals that women fell victims to manifold vices on account of being motivated by sexual urges. There are examples of women who failed or got success in their attempts to commit adultery, but in both the cases the results proved to be dangerous. How a woman, on being overpowered by the sexual urge, falls victim to baser instincts and unholy ways can be evidenced in the character of Candranakhā. She angrily searches for the culprit who killed her son, but as soon as she observes Rama and Lakşmaņa, she gets enamoured of their handsomeness. She forgets her filial love for her son and adopts deceptive ways to win the heart of the princes. She assumes the form of a beautiful girl, fabricates that she is an orphan and invites Rāma to marry her (43,36-44,39). But when her request is rejected, her heart boils with the feeling of revenge. She does not hesitate in reporting false things to her husband alleging that she was man handled by Rāma and Lakşmaņa. Thus she paves the way for the battle of Kharadūşaņa and Laksmana and becomes an in direct cause of the kidnapping of Sītā. Nalakūbara's wife, Uparambhā did not hesitate in bringing about the downfall of her own husband by giving out the secrets of the strategy of war to Rāvana, merely for the sake of establishing sexual relations with Rāvana who was the very enemy of her husband. Ultimately her husband was defeated by Rāvana but she was admonished by the latter for her immoral avertures (12.53-71)." Queen Lalita entrapped an innocent handsome Brahmin for committing adultety with him, but as soon as she was caught by the king, she betrayed the Brahmin and the king inflicted a severe corporal punishment upon the concerned Brahmin (81.11). The wife of a minister failed in seducing a king, but the result was dangerous. The apprehending minister set fire to the palace of the king. The king had to flee away with his family for safety and had to fight a battle to reoccupy his capital (104.120). Sakhā, the

Page #390

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
361
wife of a Vipra could not meet her paramour at the appointed place, but unfortunately the brother of that Vipra was killed, who happened to go to that place (82-47). Śrīdāmā, the queen of Kulankara become successful in establishing illicit connection with a Purohita and for that she become merciless to the extent of causing the murder of her husband (82.37). Queen Kiranamandala, though warned by her husband, did not prevent herself from meeting her paramour again. And for that she was exiled by her husband (101.60). The wife of an envoy caused the death of her husband at the hands of a Vipra who was her paramour. Further she did not hesitate in hatching a plot to get her sons murdered, but the plot was unearthed and the Vipra was killed by her sons (39.42). The wife of a Gșhapati got her husband tied to a tree in the forest at the hands of her Vipra paramour and freely enjoyed with the latter (48.65). In addition to these instances of women who belonged to different strata of the society, there is an allegorical reference to a corrupt woman (padutthamahilā 15.66) who would freely move from house to house. There is a further mention of a harlot (svairiņi 5 105) who became the cause of enmity between two friends.
These evidences support the disparaging remarks made about the character of woman by the author through the mouths? of Rāvana and Rāma.2 But the statements are circumstantial. Rāvaņa invites calamity by his own misconduct. His brother and sons get captured by the enemy, his mission fails in sending back Rāma without Sitā and Sitā also does not like to become his wife. Thus the only course left open to him was that of the war. At such a time Rāvana gets desperate and blames the woman-kind. It was on account of his being motivated by the sexual urge that Rāvana did the ignoble deed of kidnapping Sitā and for that Rāvana is further found to be blaming himself and confessing his guilt (69.32-33). Thus Rāvana being compelled by the situation made such derogatory remarks about women otherwise Sítā was so chaste that she upheld the glorious position of women. Rāma accepts Sita after killing Rāvana. He is not suspicious of her virtue.
1. Narayassa mahāvihi, kadhinā saggaggalā aņayabhūmi, Sariyā vva
kudilahiyayā, vajjeyavvā havai nāri-69.34. Si Padhamaditthasanti amaena va majjha phusai arigāim, Sā paramasattacittā, ucciyanijjā iham jāyā 69.35. Ahavā ko juvainan, jāņai cariyam sahāvakudilānan, Dosāņa āgāro cciya, jāņa sarire vasai kāmo. 93-35. Mulam duccariyānan, havai ya narayassa
vattaņi viula, mokkhassa mahāviggham, vaijeyavvā sayā näri-93.36. 3. Niyayakulam uttamam kaya maliņam...vammahaaniyattacitteņam 69.32.
Dhiddhi aho akajjan...ihäniya mayanamüdhenam--69.33.

Page #391

362
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
It is the public censure which creates in his mind an apprehension about the character of Sita. It is on account of public censure that Rama expresses disparaging words about women. Laksmana on the other hand supports Sītā. He charges people with wickedness and blames them for making situations against women (94.6). Otherwise why should Rama later on admit before Sītā that she is chaste and he abandoned her only to convince the people (101.37; 102.37-38).
It should not be forgotten that the above mentioned human weaknesses are not peculiar to women alone but are found with men also.
Male-Excesses and Women's Lot: --Man's polygamous habits show that he is more unsteady in love. Further the special instances of not only his infidelity but of his excesses over the fair sex can be mentioned as follows. It has been already stated that Ravana abducted Sitā though she was the legitimate wife of Rama. King Kundalamandita snatched away the wife of a Purohita and harassed him (26.12). King Madhu kidnapped treacherously the wife of his vassal (105.94). Brahmin Kayāņa abducted the wife of another Brahmin, Atibhuti (30.61). Sahasagati wanted to estabiish sexual relations with Tārā (47.14-19), the wife of Sugrīva and some Mlecchas forcibly removed away a woman (30.118). These instances clearly indicate how the male-class also fell victim to sexual urges. Further in the cases which are mentioned above in connection with the infidelity of women, the corresponding males also are responsible for the guilt. In those cases there were both the unmarried and the married males and as far as the married males are concerned they can be charged with unfaithfulness to their own wives, Svayambhu forcibly raped a virgin girl despite of her opposition (103.100). We find that the rulers, on being refused by the parents of the girls, attacked them and after defeating them married the girls. These cases are not of infidelity but those of male-excesses from a certain point of view.
Divorce :-Further we find that women are dishonoured, exiled or divorced on mere suspicion. Añjana was exiled by her mother-in-law in absence of her husband. She did not find place even at the house of her parents, because she was suspected to be infidel (17.7-20). A Vanik woman Mitramati was exiled by her father-in-law for the same reason. In the above two cases their husbands were the cause of their pregnancies, hence ultimately Añjana and Mitramati were united with their husbands, but for the time being they had to suffer. Sita was exiled by Rama on a mere doubt that she might not have remained chaste on account of her long association with Ravana. She was accepted

Page #392

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
363
when her chastity was proved before the public. It means that a satisfactory proof was required on the part of the
women to prove her purity and on production of such a proof she was accepted by her husband. The chief queen Simhika was dishonoured by her husband merely on the doubt of her character and that doubt had arisen on account of her open fight in a battle
against the enemy-kings when her husband was away from the capital. When her purity was proved she was restored to her original status (22.62,70).
Those who were proved to be unchaste were permanently divorced by their husbands. Brahmaņi Agnila was abandoned by her husband on account of her unchastity (77.74). Similar was the case with the queen Kiranamaṇḍalā who inspite of being warned by her husband did not give up her bad habits (101.60). The Narada Smrti says that a wife who commits adultery should be divorced (12.90,92). Agnila is said to have been later on accepted by king Kararuha as his wife (77.75). It indicates that the infidel wives were divorced and it was just possible that such women could find place in the harems of kings.
This was the lot of the woman-class but the male-class remained unaccused or undivorced for infidelity. May be it, but the maleclass was equally responsible. Varahamihira has equally blamed men for vices. He in his Byhatsamhita (Ch.74) rebukes males for their sexual urges while praises women for their forbearance. He says that men talk of love to their wives while they go astray outside. He further remarks that women have more qualites than men possess.
Consciousness of Self-Respect :-The PCV further reveals that women were not altogether submissive. They were conscious of their self-respect and on occasions they duly exhibited it. It was due to circumstances or the conditions of the society that even married women were kidnapped and they had to become the wives of the kidnappers. Similarly they had to suffer exile, dishonour and abandonment of the slightest doubt on their character and they were unable to oppose such impositions. But it was not true everytime. There were occasions when their self-respect revolted against these severities and they emphasised that they were not merely the commodities of market. Thus the PCV reveals that Candrabha, the wife of a ruler, who was deceitfully separated from her husband and was forcibly made his wife by an overlord Madhu, did not hesitate and feel shy in rebuking Madhu for enjoying another man's wife

Page #393

364
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
when a similar case of 'paradărika' was referred to her by Madhu (105.105-6). Sītā takes great courage in emphasising her self-respect. In course of her discourse with Vajrajangha she abuses Rāma for his improper act of abandoning her when she was quite innocent (uttamakulassa loe na ya evam khattiyassa anusarisaṁ 95.45). At the time of her ordeal Sítā rebukes Rāma on his face by calling him a cruel, low and vulgar person (natthi nithuro anno pāyayapuriso 101.31). After her being proved as chaste Rāma begs her pardon and is ready to accept her but Sitā who had suffered so many ups and downs in life, considers it quite immaterial to reunite with her husband. She gives up the worldly life and joins the ascetic-order for her spiritual emancipation (102.36-46).
Outdoor Activities :- After examining this general position of woman in the society, a survey of their activities outside the house becomes necessary as the true evaluation of their status can be made after seeing as to how far they were free to take part in the outer circle. The PCV throws fairly good light on this aspect. It reveals that they were not debarred from following the pursuits of the highest status whether social or political.
Servants :-She lowest position of woman is inferred from the word 'dasi' (99. 18) alluding that there were slave women who were dependent on their master. Then there are references to maid-servants who were engaged by the noble and well-to do families for the performance of various types of services. The PCV referes to the ladyattendants in general Kirkaranārī 4.60) of Cakravartin Bharata. Cețīs and Dūtīs are found to be attending upon and carrying the orders of princesses, queens and kings. Cetīs are mentioned to be accompanying the princesses to gardens and carrying messages (6. 11; 88.9). The courtezans also employed Cetis (5.33). Uparambhā's love message was conveyed to Rāvana through a Dūtī (12.53). Dūtis also worked as flatterers to please their masters by performing dances and music. On such occasions they are called as Cāțukāris (46. 78-80). Women Dvārapalis are referred to be working as the guards of the palace of Sītā (28. 4). Women were engaged by the royal house for cooking purposes also (Süyāriņi 77. 109).
Artists: — Then there were the independent professional lady musicians, singers and dancers who catered to the amusement of the public. They used to give perormance on some happpy social occasions (36. 39) or marriage-celebrations (106. 16). They are refered to as coquettish girls (vilāsiņījana). They were the persons of high training in the fine arts of amusement.

Page #394

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
Public Women:-Then there were the public women who (Vesa= Veśya 33. 06) used to entertain the willing citizens. Well-to-do persons. used to visit them aud spend lavishly on them. Sometimes the visitors turned peniless on account of this vice and did not hesitate in committing burglary for fulfilling the desires of their favourite prostitutes. These were the common harlots who would have been accessible to even ordinary citizens. Among them there were some who were called Gapikās (courtezans). They enjoyed higher status and respect in the society on account of their personal attainments. The PCV refers to a courtezan playing dice with a minister (5. 32). The context of the above reference indicates that they occasionally helped in detecting the cases of theft and reported them to the king. Two princes are mentioned to have fought a battle for the possession of a certain courtezan (15. 19). A Brahmin dhūrta (82.87) who was a veritable master of arts and sciences, who was the leader of all the crafty and knavish persons, who lived on royal favour and was invincible in the game of dice and was fabulously wealthy, had connections with two coutezans. Thus noble and highly accomplished persons were the visitors of these courtezans. Kautilya (11. 27) lays down rules for appointing a state Gaņikā, and mentions her rights and duties and the protection the state should give to her. It was her coveted beauty and high accomplishments which won for her such a great position. All harlots could not win the title of Gaņikā. It was conferred on one who was trained and educated in 64 arts and 64 fine manners of
pleasing a lover.1 The Natyasastra reveals that she was a person of great education and culture".
365
Nurses: The profession of higher grade followed by the women was that of serving as foster mothers or nurses (Dhāīs). The noble and royal families used to engage them for the nourishment of their sons and daughters. We are told that five nurses were appointed for Lavana and Ankuśa (77.11). They were treated like mothers and were accorded high respect by the children fondled by them. They were highly educated persons and looked after the proper mental development of the children belonging to noble families. The 'savvatthasatthakusala' adjective used for a Dhai denotes that in one way they were the primary teachers of the children of the noble class (6.165). When the 'svayamvaras' were held they led the princesses in the assembly of the prospective candidates and introduced the latters
1. Chakladar, p. 198.
2. 17.37-38.

Page #395

366
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
to the brides by announcing their respective qualifications and the status of their families (6.165). This function of the Dhāis indicates that they were well informed persons and enjoyed a high social status among the rulers. Their functions suggest that they were employed by those who were financially very sound. Thus they whould have obtained high salaries and privileges from their employers.
Doctors: It seems that the women followed the medical profession also. Visalyā who was a princess was called for to treat Lakşmaņa who had been wounded in the battlefield by the sakti of Rāvana. She seems to be an expert surgeon having a number of lady assistants following her (64.21). It indicates that female physicians and surgeons were available in the society.
c. Political Status. Warriors:- In the political field also women were not neglected. Kaikeyi's expertness in driving the war-chariot of Daśaratha in his battle with the disgruntled candidates on the occasion of her 'svayaỉvara' denotes that women did take part in fighting (24. 23). There is a reference to Rama who along with some soldiers disguised as a dancing and panegyric girl (cāraṇakanna 37. 59) captured the enemy-king in the battlefield. It alludes to the fact that girls were employed for a political-strategy and they probably even knew how to wield weapons. Further the PCV reveals that Larikasundarí in defence of the fort of Laikā fought with Hanumat She drove in a war-chariot and handled various kinds of weapons as an expert fighter (52. 12-15). That the women took part in fighting is corroborated by other evidences. Patañajali uses sāktiki (on Paņini, 4. 1. 15) which denotes female spear-bearers. Kautilya records that the king is received by the women armed with bows at the time of getting up from his bed (1. 21. 1). Megasthenese refers to women in chariots, on horses and elephants and equipped with weapons.
Administrators: — The women worked not only in the military but they worked even as administrators. These were the posts of highest order in the political world and were the most honoured positions in the society. Thus the PCV mentions that king Nahuşa on the occasion of his departure from the capital on a war-campaign handed over the reigns of government to his queen Simhika (22. 57). In the absence of
1. Muñeai sare, pesci satti 52.14; vijjābalasannihiyā moggarasarajhasarabhi
ndamālaim muñeai......vijju va calahattha-52.15. 2- AIU, P, 564.

Page #396

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
367
her husband the country was invaded by enemies but Simhika fought bravely and chased off the invaders and their forces. This incident speaks of the capacity and ability of the woman-class in carrying the administration of the country. Kalyāpamālā, the princess of Kūbaranagara (Kūvvaranayara 77. 48) was ruling the country in the disguise of a prince when the king, her father was kidnapped by some Mlecchas (34. 18-23). All these examples indicate that women were not considered to be unfit for higher responsibilities but whenever the occasion arose they were duly appointed to discharge the functions of the most upgraded post of rulership.
D. Religious Status.
Jainism provides equal opportunities to men and women. There is no distinction as regards the code of rules to be followed by men and women as lay followers and as ascetics. Both the types of womendisciples are evidenced in the PCV. As lay-disciples they are called Śrāvikās (103.96) and as ascetics they are known as Sramanis (108.49) or Sadhvis (108.44). In performing rituals women enjoyed the same privileges as men did. No caste or age distinctions were made between males and females in entering the ascetic order. Women-ascetics i.e. nuns functioned as teachers as well as initiators. From laymen nuns received the same respect as monks did (103.17-173). Nuns were entitled to become the leaders of organisation of nuns. Women are equally said to be attaining heavens and getting liberated. Thus it is clear that the status of women in the religious field Jaina fold) was quite equal with that of men and they were given a very bright and encouraging opportunity for their spiritual uplift. Their position in this field was never despicable on account of their belonging to fair sex.
As regards the Brahmanical fold there is a reference to a woman leading the life of an anchorite with her husband who was also a Tāpasa (11.50). No other evidence is available as regards the religious status of women in the Brahmanical fold. Indra says that in the Upanişads the religious status of women was that of equality with men and certainly not of inferiority which became later on. We do not hear much about the existence of lady Rșis in any other period. The only religious duties alloted to them was faithful obedience and constant devotion to their husbands whether in the household or in the forest retreats practising austerities?. It is to be noted that this (the position of women in Brahmanical order) is really a position of contrast with that
1. Indra, p. 129 ff.

Page #397

368
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
of the women under the Jaina order. On account of this dissimilarity it is well said that in contrast to this Buddhism and Jainism offered a more honourable career to wowen. No wonder a large number of them became nuns and some of them became famous preachers.1
E. Freedom of movement and the system of Purdah.
The Paumacariyam reveals that the women did move freely outside their houses and contacted the male society. It is further interesting to note that there is no reference to the purdah system.
First of all we find that the maidens moved freely in the outer circle. The PCV mentions that when Hariṣeņa reached the city of Sindhunadanagara, many young and grown up girls started gazing at him without a single wink (animisacchio 8.109). Further it refers to many grown up Vidyadhari maidens freely sporting in the gardens. There they met Rāvana and married him by the Gandharva system of marriage (8.31). Rucira, the daughter of a Vanik is referred to have gone to the bank of the Ganges in the afternoon along with many other ladies (41.51). The princess of Cakrapura used to go to the house of her teacher and receive co-education with the son of a Purohita (26.5). There both of them developed love and got married. These instances sufficiently throw light on the freedom of movement allowed to maidens and even the maiden princesses.
Similarly the house-wives were also allowed to move outside the house. They contacted unacquainted males. There is no mention of putting on any veil by them. Sarasa, the daughter-in-law of a certain Brahmin went to the river-side and therefrom she was kidnapped by another Brahmin (30.61). When Sītā was thirsty, Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa went along with her to the house of a Brahmin. There the housewife, in absence of her husband quenched the thirst of Sīta in the presence of Rama and Lakṣmaṇa (35. 6-8). When Rāma was sojourning at Ramapuri, that Brahminī along with her husband went to them and they were welcomed there by Rama (35.64). The pleasure garden of Lanka was often visited by the women of the city (53.75). The Samsatakusuma-udyāna of Laňka had different divisions of which some were meant exclusively for women and some for the males (46.69-70).
Whenever the king or the princes entered the city in a procession, the ladies stood at the windows of their houses and observed the grandeur of the occasion (8.276;100.50). On these ocasions the
1. AIU, p. 565.

Page #398

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
- 369 curious women of Lanka and Ayodhyā are referred to be asking one another to take aside their heads because the braids of their hair obstru. cted the view (8.279; 100.52). It indicates that housewives were bareheaded and thus there arises no question of putting veil on their faces. When Harisena entered Sindhunadanagara, he was observed by many ladies of the city (naranārīsaesu tattha disanto 8.180). It indicates that men and women were moving out side their houses or that women had come outside their house to see him.
The house-ladies are further mentioned to be appearing on the roads and streets, offering and honouring monks with the presents of various kinds and performing sports and dances (105.6-10).
Besides the ladies, we have already mentioned the women working or serving in the houses of others, or following the pursuits of dancing and amusement, and providing entertainment to the public. The medical profession must have demanded their movement in the public. The women who fought the battle and administered the country must have enjoyed the liberty of moving ontside without putting on any veil.
Now let us see how the female members of the royal families lived in their palaces; to what extent they moved outside; and whether they observed purdah or not.
There are several references to the harem 'anteura' of the kings whether Aryan or non-Aryan (Dasaratha's 31.58; Laksmana's 110.21; Rāvana's 70.60). The 'antahpura' was a special apartment meant for the residence of the royal wives. Its significance as revealed in the PCV is merely of a residential apartment in a royal palace. There were no rigid restrictions as regards the entry of other male person in it. Further the movement of the royal wives were not restricted to the harem only. They moved out of doors and contacted other males also. The PCV mentions that when the wives of Laksmana were mourning the death of their husband in their 'antahpura', Rāma entered the harem unrestricted (110.21). Further it is said that at the order of Rāma after his return from Larikā, his wives and the wives of his brothers surrounded Bharata and requested him to play sports with his wives (80.49-54). It indicates that the royal males and females were not prohibited from mixing freely. The same seems to be the case with outsiders. The PCV's reference to one of Daśaratha's chief queen talking with the store-keeper indicates that they did not feel bashful or shy or were not restricted in contacting male-officers of the state (29.11). Similarly the wife of Vibhīşapa called as Mahadevī, personally went to Rāma, bowed down to his feet and requested him to
24

Page #399

370
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYA
visit her house (77.19). There seems to be no rigid restrictions in permitting the royal women to go outside the house. The wives (antahpura) of Rāvana are referred to have gone to the battlefield to mourn the death of their husband (74.6) and there .Rama is said to have consoled them (75.3). Even the wives of Dasaratha visited the temple in the city where Rāma, Laksmana and Sitä had stayed for the night before their departure to the forest. It is said that on that occasion many other people also had gathered there (31.121-122). They are further mentioned to have paid their homage to a monk staying in the garden where many citizens had gone for the same purpose (82.8). Ráma, Lakşmaņa and Sītā meet various persons and kings during their journey. They are welcomed and received by them with respect and honour. But on no occasion there is any slightest clue to maintain that Sitā put veil or felt shy in the prensence of unacquainted males. During her long stay in Laikā, she is never said to have observed purdah whenever Ravana approached her. When Vibhişana met her, she freely talked with him (46.56-47). Sitä сonversed freely with Hanumat. who was quite an unknown and unacquianted person to her (53.12-74). Mandodarī had free discussion and then verbal duel with Hanumat. Further we find that on the Varsagiri hill Rāma played on a flute and Sīta danced there to pay their respects to the monks who were sojourning there (39.22). Thus the PCV reveals that no veil was put on by the ladies. And for that the observations made by Lakşmaņa on the occasion of Rama's decision to abandon Sitā, are noteworthy because they support our conclusion. He tells that women should not be charged with (dosa-dosa) infidelity on account of their being seen by other persons (94.22).
Thus on the whole woman were not rigidly restricted from moving out of doors and there was no custom of putting on veils as far as the PCV reveals.
. This freedom of women can be corroborated by other evidences. Shri Gokuldas De summing up the conditions found in the Jatakas says that women lived under 'seclusion and they were guarded hence they were called Orodha (lit. living in guarded house). But on occasions they were free to move about like men and excursions to public places were also not forbidden The Buddhacarita refers to "antahpura” (8. 19) as well as to women engaged in various works on the royal roads
1. Parapurisadarisaņeņam na ya doso havai näha juvainam. 2. SIJ, p. 117.

Page #400

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
371
(10. 7). Kalidasa refers to women taking bath in a river publicly1 and women going to their fields and singing in chorus. But the other contemporary literature refers to the putting on of veil and confinement to harem too. The Jaina Kalpasūtra refers to the curtain put between Trisala and the interpreter of dreams (4. 69. or 68%). Pāņinī refers to royal ladies as 'asuryampasya' (3. 2. 39) i.e. throwing veil on their faces. The VR (2. 33. 8) refers to Sita's seclusion who was not seen by the people because of her confinemnet to harem. The Pratimänātaka refers to the putting on of veil by Sita (I. v. 28f). It also permits unveiling of face on emergency (I. V. 29). The Raghuvamsa refers to 'avarodha' (1. 32; 4. 68) and 'antaḥpura' (16.59) i. e. restricted harems and the Sakuntalam refers to the putting on of veil (5. 13). These both sided references point out that women were not completely secluded but limited restrictions were imposed on them. Shri B. S. Upadhyaya in this connecion observes that the society at the time of Kalidasa led a free and outdoor life but purdah was not entirely discarded", while it was also true that women were not shut up in Zenana as now. Whatever may be the evidences of other literature but as far as the PCV is concerned there is no mention of putting on of any veil by the women either of ordinary or royal classes.
SECTION 5. GAMES AND AMUSEMENTS.
Sport is denoted by 'kīlā' (krīdā 16. 32) 'kīlaņaya' (4. 107), 'kedda' (khela 8. 37) and 'lila' (103. 43). Tho act of sporting is indicated by 'kilanti' (15. 13). 'lilayanta' (8. 29) and 'ramai' (26, 103; 6. 100; 15. 95). Sports of the young ones are called 'kumāra-lila' (Kumāraliaṁ aņuhavamāņo (103. 43) and they are said to be hundreds. (kilanayasayesu 3. 107) in number.
A. Outdoor-Games.
Ball-play:-The games which have been clearly mentioned are as follows:-Añjanāsundarī is refferd to be playing with a ball (tendueņa 15. 13) and this must have been a very common game for the boys and girls as we know from other sources.
Water sports:-Another popular game for the girls was the watersport (udayakhedda 8. 87) which is mentioned to be played by many
1. Purva Meghaduta, 33.
2. Raghu, 4. 20.
3.
See Naya, I. p 8.
4. Vide IP.
5. IK, p. 180.
6. Ibid, p, 190,

Page #401

372
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
royal girls in the water-reservoirs (vāvi) in garden. These watersports were so common in ancient India that the kings (princes along with their damsels usually took delight in visiting the gardens and sported there in water-reservoirs. Thus the PCV mentions Mahārakṣa sa, the king of Lankā (5. 218) playing water-sports with damsels in a garden. Prince Angada indulged in water-sports with his beloved in a lotus-pond at Laukā (78. 24). Perhaps it did not matter for them whether they were at their home or somewhere in a foreign land. This practice was so deeply cultivated by the kings and the princes that not only the garden-sites but even the rivers were utilised for water-sports. Rāma and Sitā even during their exile journey did not miss to play water-sports. When Sita found that river Kroñcaravā was a good site for water-sport, she took initiative and requested Rāma for the same (jalamajjanam ramāmo 42. 17). Their sport has been compared with that of a pair of elephants (karīvva samayain kareņue 42. 18). The water was used as a tabor (jalamuravam) and it was beaten to produce pleasing sound. They threw lotuses at each other. King Sahasrakirapa of Māheśvara is described to be libidinously playing water-sports with his damsels in the waters of Narmada. So great was his fondness that some mechanical devices were used to swell the stream (10. 34-45). This sport was sometimes used as a devise to allure a person to worldly life when he developed a feeling detachment (80. 54). Gardens were very popular sites where men and women belonging to different strata of life enjoyed sports. Besides the kings, princes and their wives (28. 8; 86. 34; 6. 100); the common people are also mentioned to be enjoying sports in the gardens (17. 48; 8. 169). Further it may be noted that in Larika separate parks were maintained for the male and female citizens (46. 69-70), and many sport houses were provided for them (kilanaharesu-krīdāgļheșu 46. 76).
Boxing :-The reference to the duels of sight and boxing (ditthijujjham mutthijujjhar 4. 43) which ensued between Bharata and Bahubali can be taken as an allusion to these sports which were patronised by the young men. In the former duel the competitors were required to stare constantly at one another's eyes and one who winked first was declared defeated. The other duel consisted of the striking of the first at one another's body. One who was overpowered and made to fall down on the ground was declared defeated. In this game the foreparts of the hands of the fighters were fitted with leather-coverings (4. 46).
Princely Sports or Subduing the elephants and horses :-It seems that the princes of ancient India were trained in the art of subduing agitated and turbulent elephants. The Paumacariyan

Page #402

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
373 reveals that prince Harişeņa sported with an agitated elephant of Sindhunadanagara. He challenged the elephant who while moving his trunk to and fro ran towards him. Harişeņa without missing a single moment climbed over his tusks and sported with him in many ways, clapping his hands together. No sooner was the elephant subdued, he caught hold of his ears and rode over his back. His dexterity was hailed by the public and the king of that town was so much pleased with him that the former offered many girls to him in marriage (8. 168-182). Princes are found to be usually taking delight in challenging such elephants. Rāvana on observing a great elephant in the valley of Sammeta parvata blew his conch and challanged him for a fight. As soon as the elephant ran towards him he took off his Uttariya and threw it before the elephant who got entangled with that cloth and started striking it with his tusks, bending on the ground. When the elephant was engaged in tearing away the Uttariya to pieces, Rāvana struck his temples with his hands. Thus sporting with him he caused him to move in circulations for many times and ultimately when the elephant was overpowered. Rāvaņa climbed over his back and brought hin under his control. The seizing of this elephant, named Tribhuvanāla kāra was celebrated by beating the drums and playing upon other musical instruments (8. 214-224).
It was the hobby of some kings to go to the forest for seizing elephants. Thus king Vajrajargha of Pondariyapura is said to have seized many elephants (94. 103). Janaka's readiness in attempting to seize an elephant (28. 31-34) indicates the fondness of the kings in this noble sport.
Horse-riding was also a pastime of the princes. Sometimes they lost control over the horses because they were so turbulent and the princes were led away in forests by these turbulent horses (5.73;28.34; 116.3). Kings had special interest in subduing the turbulent horses (28.27-28) also.
Hunting :-Kings and princes drived pleasure in hunting and shooting the birds. King Vajrakarņa of Daśapura is described as wandering in the forest for this purpose and he is called 'pāraddhifandio' (hunter-33.30).
B. Indoor-Games.
Dice :-Dice-playing was a very popular game and Gapikas (courtezans) and Veśyās (prostitutes) encouraged this game in their houses. Purohita Satyavādin's theft was caught while he was playing

Page #403

374
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM the game of dice with a courtezan (5.32). Thus this game was helpful in detecting the thefts also. A merchant's son Haridāsa lost all his property in the game of dice and thus was compelled to commit burglary in the royal palace. Thus this game proved to be a great vice. A Brahmin son was addicted to this vice. It was not considered to be a good habit by his parents and so he was expelled from home (82.79). After some time he turned to be a veritable master of this game and became the teacher of knaves (82.86). He enjoyed profusely the company of the courtezans and was accorded respect by the state.
Prostitutes formed an institution of amusement for the rich and the nobles as mentioned else where. A merchant of Kundanagara, who had gone to Ujjeni on a trade-mission was allured by a beautiful prostitute of that place. He enjoyed company with her and within six months he lost all his property worth innumerable coins of money. He was not content with that much. His attachment to her was so deep that he did not consider it bad in attempting to commit theft in the royal house (33.65-73) for procuring the earrings of the queen for that prostitute.
C. Amusements.
Story-telling :-Besides these popular amusements, story-telling was also a sort of recreation during the time of relaxation. These stories or tales were of various kinds (nănākaha 79.31). In the Jaina literature there are regular references to four kinds of stories They are about women, food, country and king and the monks are prohibited from hearing them (Thānā Sec, 282).
Welcome-celebrations :-Other occasions of amusements were associated with the return of the victorious kings and princes from war or with the visit of great persons. Return of kings was greeted with the playing of instrumental music. People flocked on roads to have a Darśana of the king, the buildings were decorated with flags and festoons and other artistic strings of pearls and gems (8 281-283; 74.33; 76.2; 78.50-51). On such occasions pavilions and arches were raised to welcome them (78.48–52). The welcoming ceremony of Sità performed by king Vajrajaugha was celebrated by playing instrumental music and vocal music (95.6). The arrival of monk Rāma in the city of Syandanasthali was greeted by the people by performing sports (ukkīliyautkrīdaņa) such as dance (naccaņa), hopping and jumping (vaggaņāi 115.6).
Madanotsava :--The Paumacariyam mentions that the people of Lanka celebrated the festivity of cupid (mayaņussave 70.50) on the

Page #404

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
preceeding night of the final battle with Rama, The Rākṣasas freely used wine and intoxicated their beloved with it. Thus the intoxicating effect of wine made their wives care free and made their shyness disappear. They took recourse to amorous gestures. Flowers, perfumes, unguents, ointments and aloes as well as betel-leaves were profusely used. The occasion was made graceful by the playing of musical instruments (70.51-61) also.
375
Spectacles:-The Paumacariyam particularly mentions that the people of the country of Magadha used to delight themselves with the performance of acrobats (nada), dancers (naṭṭa), umbrella-players (chatta) and dancers on bamboos (laňkhaya). The people were gay and joyous with the dance and music (2. 5 niccamnaccantagiyasaddālo). Music and dance have been separatey dealt under the section of fine arts. Besides these amusements the junctions of the roads of the towns were the sites where various spectacles could be seen (caccaracaukka mapaharapecchanayamahan tamahuranigghosam 2. 13).
SECTION 6. MANNERS, CUSTOMS AND BELIEFS.
A. Manners.
The society consists of elders, equals and inferiors. In the daily business one has to contact persons of various trades. Therefore the first thing which automatically come out of one's mouth is to address a person in a particular way and to behave with him in a particular manner. Thus the PCV reveals as to how the ancient Indian people behaved with one another on such occasions. It mentions that in addressing one another some particular words were used which denoted either respect, honour and reverence or modesty, sympathy, regard and love. It was followed by a salute to the elders or the superiors and blesings to the younger or inferior ones. Thus the state of affairs proves that the people whether low or high, inferior or superior occupied a worthy position in the civilization of ancient India.
Addresses:-The elders used to address the younger ones as follows. The sons were addressed by their parents as 'kumāra' (99. 21) or 'putta' (putra 31. 81; 98. 21) or 'puttaya' (putraka 31.96; 100. 36). In the endearing terms they were addressed as 'vaccha' (vatsa 31. 73) or 'vacchaya' (100. 37). The maternal grandfather is said to be using the same term for his nephew (50.15). An elder brother would call his younger brother by his name (112. 12) or by endearing terms 'vaccha' or 'vacchaya' (45. 20; 111. 10; 37. 8). Sometimes

Page #405

376
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
honorific word 'deva' (111. 15) and admirative words 'sundara' (111. 18) or 'supurisa' (supuruşa 14. 16) were used. The elder brother's wife addressed her younger brother-in-law by his name (63.11), or by relation 'devara' (80. 54) or used an auspicious term 'bhadda' (bhadra 76. 20).
The younger ones generally addressed their elders as below. The children used to address their father as 'taya' (tāta 31.76), 'mahājasa' (mahāyaśaḥ 27.17), and to their mother as 'ammo' (ambe 31.95; 98.22), the younger brother to his elder brother as 'sami (svāmin 45.18), 'pahu' (prabho 55.5), 'mahājasa' (44.50), to the elder sister as 'devī' (99.42), and to the wife of elder brother as 'bhadde' (bh adre 37.37). The maternal grandfather was addressed as 'ajjaya' (āryaka 50.17) and the maternal-uncle as 'mămaya' (mamaka 99.31). The latter term was used by the son-in-law also in addressing his fatherin-law (24.22; 38.46), on account of marrying the daughter of the meternal-uncle.
In the case of the equals the following terms were used. The husband used to address his wife with an auspicious term 'bhadde' (30.35) or an admiring term 'sundari' (16 74; 26.83; 31.71), while the wife addressed their huband as 'nāha' (natha 16 75; 68.41), 'sāmi' (46.28), 'sāmiya' (94.65), 'pahu' (68.42) or 'mahājasa' (94.66; 31.125). It is noteworthy that a wife did not feel shy in mentioning the name of her husband. Sītā while requesting Răvana to save her husband from being killed, mentions her husband's name-Padma ( 69.27). The young girl-friend was addressed as 'bāle' (17.15) and the woman friend as 'hala' (hale 100.52) or 'bahiņe' (bhagini 100.54).
The king would call the wife of another king by addressing her as 'laacchi' (lakṣmi 95.18) or 'bhadde' (95.60). At the time of showing sympathy to her, the minister of another king is said to have been addressing her as 'vacche' (vatse 95.17).
The person inferior in status addressed their superior as follows. A king was addressed as 'sāmi' 'pahu' or 'deva' by his feudal-lords (45.19; 45.2; 95.5), ministers, warriors (81.8; 81.14), spies (86.23) or messengers (45.33; 27.11; 6.24). The queen was addressed as 'sāmiņi' (svāmini 94.58) or 'devi' (94.62). These terms indicate the authority of the royal pair over the subjects. A woman of very high status was addressed by the king's servants as 'bhadde' (95.6), 'sundari' (95.9), devi' (95. 13) and 'suyaņu' (sutanu 63 13). The members of the royal

Page #406

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
377
family addressed her as 'kallāņi' (kalyāni), 'suhakamme', (subhakarme) and 'mahāpujje' (mahāpūjye 96. 9).
The king used to address his feudal-lord as 'vaccha' (45.4; 45. 24). Reverential persons such as monks etc. were addressed as ‘mahājaśa' (30. 57).
These addresses were used as far as the relations were unrestrained. Otherwise they took an abusive turn and the persons, to whatever status they may belong, were addressed in insulting terms. Añjanā while being censured by her mother-in-law was addressed as "pāve' (pāpe 17. 3), 'dutthasīle' (duşțasile 17. 6), In the battlefield Düşaņa calls Lakşmana as pāva' pāpa (45.9); Bhāmandala to the envoy of Rāvana as "pāvadāya', 'kolhuya', 'duvvayapāvāsa (durvacanāvāsa 65. 26), duttha pasu' (duştapaso) and 'acäritto' (acaritra 65. 27). On the occasion of reproaching anyone the term 'adhama' was used (dhiddhi te Rakkhasāhama 68. 25).
If any male person attempted to force talk with an unwilling woman, then she usually turned her face away and then talked with him (46. 6).
Salutes :-The above mentioned terms were the expressions through speech. Besides these addresses, the expression to one's feeling of reverence, modesty, symathy or love was further manifested by some physical acts. Obeisance was a necessary form of accost on the part of a inferior when he met a superior and on the part of the superior it was necessary to endear or bless the inferior. Thus the PCV reveals that on occasion of any meeting, as inferior paid his respects by bowing his head to the superior whether he was a father (34. 56), mother (79. 28; 98. 71-72), elder brother (79. 14; 38. 50; 94. 2), or elder sister (76, 22). The same manners were displayed when a king was paid respects by his ministers (5. 177), envoys (6.16), messengers (8. 227), or a woman of high status or other inferiors (76. 26). Another method was to raise the joined palms on the head and then to bow to the superior (32. 46), or to prostrate and touch the feet of the superiors (6. 24; 16. 71; 76. 19; 100. 32; 55. 46; 65. 11; 6 23; 63. 18) of various circles.
The younger ones or the inferiors saluted the elders or the superiors by prostrating at their feet and took their due permission (16. 35; 31.93, 101, 103, 104;19.13, 34, 59; 16.89; 71.1; 31.102), before departing from them on any expedition. On the occasion of renouncing the world one used to take formal permission of the relations as well as the servants (3. 135: 5. 57).

Page #407

378
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
On departure of the younger ones, the elder kissed on their forehead (86. 14) and blessed them for the success of the work (16. 34; 86. 15).
The departing person before commencing their journey used to visit the temple to pay their homage to the Jinas (89. 13) or used to recite the Namaskāra-formula (97. 23).
On the occasion of any meeting after a long time, the elders used to embrace the younger ones (30. 88; 32. 49; 98. 72; 30-80; 76. 22; 76. 19; 30. 81) or kissed on their forehead (34. 56; 79. 29; 98. 72; 79. 14). On such occasions the breasts of the mothers let loose some drops of milk when they met their sons (30.94; 79 30). It was quite a natural flow.
The Jaina monks were paid obeisance by circumambulating additionally (3.5, 10; 3.102; 41. 7). The monks on their part blessed the devotees (3. 6). The devotee bowed his head each time he enquired something of him (13. 42). At the time of going back the devotee recircumambulated the religious person (5.40) and then took his leave.
The inferior sometimes hailed some superior of extraordinary merits by expressing 'svasti' (satthim karei 35 62) and by offering a handful of flowers.
B. Customs.
The PCV mentions the following customs which were prevalent in the society of that time.
For the safety of the departing person a handful of flowers were offered in the air by the person who remained behind at home and he uttered 'let the planets be favourable (53.148) to the departed one'.
Whenever a person in trouble approached a superior one and requested him for help, the latter sympathised with the former by putting his hand over the former's head as a mark of protection (45.4).
On getting orders from the master the servants had to perform the work even if it was very cruel. But they prayed for excuse for the 'same after performing their duty. The cart-driver on getting orders from his master abandoned Añjanã in the forest, but he duly begged her to forgive him (17.9). Similarly Kștāntavadana abandoned Sita in a solitary and terrible forest, but he abused himself for that mean work (94.79-84).

Page #408

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
379
It was a practice that the person who received happy news used to offer liberally some presents to the messenger concerned. King
Kirtidhara presented the messenger with the diadem and a village, on receiving from the latter the news of the birth of a son to him, (21.91). Janaka offered ornaments to the persons who brought the news of the restoration of his son (30.85). Rāma gave away his waist-girdle to the person who informed him about the conditions at Ujjeni and Dasapura (33.86).
Hospitality :-To show hospitality to a guest was the sacred duty of an ancient Indian. Thus 'atithisaṁvibhāga' was one of the twelvefold duties prescribed for a lay-follower of Jainism while the follower of Brahmanical faith was required to perform 'pañca-mahāyajñas' of which one was to entertain the guest. Thus the PCV1 reveals that a guest was received with due respect and was duly entertained by the host. First of all the host got up from his seat and welcomed the guest by receiving him cordially (abbhuṭṭhio and kayaviņayapii). Then a suitable seat was Thereafter offered to the guest (dinnāsana). followed the asking of the welfare of the guest (sarirai pucchio kusalam). Then the betel leaves and perfumes were offered the guest (tambola sugandha 78.44), or was honoured in other ways. Due arrangements for the bath aud feeding of the guest were also made by the host. The PCV tells us that it was a prevailing custom among the people of the Magadha country to honour the travellers with flowers and food (2.5). Occasionally when various kings or people were invited to witness any function, the host-king provided the invitees with food, drinks, betel-leaves, flowers, sandal-perfumes and other amentities for their comfort (101.8).
to
he
Even those who had renounced the house-hold life used to receive the guests with honour and respect. Thus the PCV states that the Tapasas living in Asrama had welcomed Hariṣeņa and provided him with a seat as well as fruits and bulbs for his food (dinnasanovaviṭṭho, phalamulai kayāharo 8.155). Rama was similarly received by the Tapasas. He was shown due respect, provided with a seat, and was asked about his welfare ('asaṇaviņaovayārakusalehim' sambhāsiya 33.3). Thus we find that to show hospitality to a guest was the sacred duty of an ancient Indian.
Death-rites: It was a prevailing custom to perform the last rites of the deceased person and to mourn his death. 'peyakamma' (23.
1. 15.34-35; 19.17-18; 28.13; 78,8; 33.91f; 34:12-13; 36.38.

Page #409

380
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
24; 49.1) or 'peyakaranijja' (75.1) denotes the performing of the final rites of a dead person. Before its final disposal, the body of the dead person was consecrated by besmearing in with the gośīrsa, candana, aguru, karpūra and other fragrant substances (75.4). Then it was carried to the 'vappa' which denotes the bank of a lake or a river or some raised ground level or a mound. There are references to 'masāna' (śmaśāna 105.62) and 'ciyā' (citā 105.53) i. e. the cemetery ground where the dead bodies were burnt. The PCV further mentions that the people after disposing of the dead body of Rāvaņa took bath and then went away to their respective places (75.12).
The death of a person was mourned by his relatives by weeping (74.2). The wives of the dead person generally wept bitterly. They are said to be throwing away their ornaments, beating their breasts and bodies and getting fainted on account of the deep sorrow (74.1213, 15; 110.30,36; 65.22). How necessary it was to mourn the death of a person is revealed in the mourning of the artificial death of Dasaratha by his wives just to pretend before Vibhişaņa that Dasaratha was really dead (23.23).
C. Beliefs.
The evidences available in the PCV reveal that the people of ancient India had great faith in astrology, fatalism, prophecies, omens, auguries, portents, dreams and supernatural elements and their life was immensely influenced by these things.
Astrology :- Astrology was based on astronomical calculations. There are references to astronomical terms such as 'tïthi', 'lagna', "karana', 'yoga' and 'muhurta' (25.7; 8.8). They were all calculated on the particular position of planets and naksatras. They played an important part in the daily life of the people. It was the faith of the people that a particular time was either auspicious or inauspicious. The auspicious time was considered to be good and profitable while the inauspicious one was regarded as harmful and disadvantageous. Therefore any new work was started accordingly. Thus PCV mentions that marriages were performed on auspicious occasions (nakkhatte sohape 6.27; sutihisuņakkhattakaraṇalaggammi 15.95). Journey for marriage (subbhalaggakaraṇajoe 8.8) or trade (suhanakkhatte karanajutte 5.84) was commenced on the same consideration. Ráma is said to have marched to Lanka on an auspicious occasion (suhakaranalaggajoe 54.28) and he bacame victorious. On the other hand Ravana commenced his march to the battlefield when the stars were adverse

Page #410

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
381
adverse (nakkhattabalavimukko gahesu accantakudilavantesu 69.54), therefore, he brought about his own doom.
The birth-time i. e. the planetary position of the new-born child was recorded to calculate in advance the future of the child. Thus Rāma is said to have taken birth on 'sohanetithimuhuttel' (25.7) and in the case of the birth of Hanumat, the complete horoscope of his birth time is given in the PCV (17.106-112).
The benedictory remarks also indicated how the people had faith in the efficacy of the position of planets and stars.”
Falalism:--Some painful event or calamity was generally assigned to some divinity or fate by the people. Thus Vaidehi blames divinity (daiva) or fate (vidhi) when her daughter Sita is forcibly demanded in marriage by Candragati for his son (28.89, 91). Añjanāsundari considers that is was on account of her own fate (vidhi) that she was exiled by her mother-in-law (17. 3!). Candranakha attributes the case of the death of her son, Sambūka to fate (pāvavihi 43. 32). Sīta finds fault with fate (vidhi 101. 12) and says that it was the cause of her public censure and exile.
Prophecy :- The prophecies made by the soothsayers and the monks had great influence on the social and political life of the people. Thus the PCV reveals that a certain mother becomes very happy to learn that two sons would be born to her (41. 42). A queen celebrates in advance the occasion of her husband's return (74. 34). Añjana gets some solace when she learns that she would reunite with her separated husband (17. 73). Many marriages are performed in accordance with some prophecies (5. 68; 8.161; 10.64; 51. 16. 8). With a mere apprehension of being reborn in hell, according to a prophecy, one renounced the world and became a monk (11, 12). In the political field it was on account of the belief in prognostications that Ravana reoccupied Laikā (7.169), Lakşmaņa lifted up -kotiśīla' (48. 99) and Vibhişaņa attempted to assassinate Dasaratha (23. 10).
Nimitta and Sakuna : There are regular reference to atthanganimittadhara (51.16) i.e. the interpretors of signs, omens and dreams, who were consulted by the people on various occasions and their predictions were believed by them. These eight nimittas are said to be the
1. See 79.7 also. 2. gahānukulā hotu 53. 148; rakkhantu bhaviyaloyam, surāiyāgahă aparisesa
118. 115. 3. Sce 48, 86 also.
19

Page #411

382
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
earthquake, portentous phenomena, dreams, various colour and forms of the sky, throbbing of the limbs, chirping of the birds, characteristics of the parts of body and the signs of distinction' on body. The PCV records that they were of two types i. e. auspicious (pasattha sauņā 54. 32) or inauspicious (dunnimittaiṁ 70. 5; 94. 36; avasauņa 6. 140; pāvasauņa 44.38; saunayā vivariyā 7.17). If somebody observed auspicious ones, it was considered that they brought success in any undertaking or victory in the battle while the inauspicious ones were the signs of failure, defeat or death. Therefore, the people before undertaking any new work or commencing their journey did not forget to observe whether the omens were favourable or adverse.
These omens and auguries were associated with various factors such as birds, animals, human beings, worldly objects and natural phenomena.
The PCV mentions the following good omens which indicated success and victory.
The crowing of a crow on a resinous tree (khirarukkha) on the left side (34. 37) and flapping its feathers (54. 31) denoted victory and success. The sight of a white horse of good breed and the neighing of a horse was an auspicious augury (54. 29-30)". The sight of a woman wearing ornaments (54. 29) was regarded auspicious. 4 The sigbt of a parasol (chatta), or a pitcher (kalasa) or a new arch (ahinava torana 54. 30) was considered to be favourable. The hearing of the sound of a drum (bheri) or a conch was an auspicious augury (54. 31). The blowing of fragrant breeze? (54. 30) or the sight of the fire without any smoke and its flames bending towards the right side (dahinavatto 54. 29) was considered to be advantageous.
The following have been referred to in the PCV as inauspicious omens.
The crowing of a crow on a dry tree and flapping its wings on the right side (94. 35) was considered to be inauspicious. If a crow made
1. «Bhome uppāte suvine antalikkhe ange sare lakkhane vanjane! Sthānanga,
8. 608. 2. Sec Br-Sanh, 95. 1. 33; 86. 17 and Susruta Sanhita (Sūtrasthānam), 29.
30. 31). 3. By-Sanh, 86. 45; Su-Sanh. (Sut. 29, 27, 28). 4. Su-Samh. (Sut. 29. 26. 5. Ibid, (29. 25). 6. Ibid. 29, 28) & Bța. San. 86. 23). 7. Su-Samh. (Sut. 29 26-28).

Page #412

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
383
sound on a bitter tree (kaduyarukkha) on the Ifeft side, it indicated a quarrel (34. 36).' The sight of a crane (sárasa), a śatapatra bird, a crow, an ass, a horse, a bull or a jackal making noise on the right side indicated defeat (7.16). The crossing of one's path by a black serpent? (70.6) was regarded inauspicious and foreboded defeat. The sight of a weeping women with her hair undressed and looking up at the sun was a bad omen (94.36). The obstruction of one's movement by the strike of another's leg (70.6) or the falling down of upper garment or breaking down of the parasol4 (70.8) of the king were regarded as inauspicious and they indicated defeat. The throbbing of the right eye of a woman prognosticated some trouble" (93.2). In Sita's case this augury came true as she was exiled.
It depended on the mental attitude of a person whether he considered some thing auspicious or inauspicious. Thus the PCV tells that the sight of a Jaina monk was regarded to be auspicious by Rama when he commenced his march to Laikā from Kiskindhipura (54.30), but a hunter who despised Jaina monks considered the seeing of a Jaina monk as inauspicious (6.140). The latter belief is corroborated by the Susruta Samhitā (Sūtrasthānam 29.46). The Bhadrābāhu Samhita observes that the result of seeing a monk depended upon the out look of the person who saw him (13.76).
Besides these the PCV mentions some dreadful phenomenal occu rrences (uppāyādārunā 69.47-53). They were observed on the occasion of Rāvana's final march to the batllefield. These occurrences foreboded defeat and death of a king (desāhivassa maranain) and so Rāvana was killed in this battle. They are indicated below :
1. The sun turned intolerably scorching (akko āuhasariso); 2. The sky was observed to be variegated or a shaggy halo
surrounded the sun (pariveso ambare pharusavanno);? 3. The moon suddenly disappeared; 4. The fire-brands of the hew of blood lighted the eastern
directions ;
1. See Br-Sanh. 95. 56; 95.37 & Su. Samh, (Sut. 29. 32-33). 2. See Bhad-Saṁh, 13.62. 3. See Su-Samh, (Sūt, 29.12). 4: See Bhad-Samh, 14,55. 5, See Sakuntalam, p. 161, vide, IK, p. 330. 6. These occurrences & their efficacy can be corroborated from other works as
follows. 7, Bt-Samh, 34.5-9; Bhad-Sanh, 4.13. 8. I did, 43. 14-10; Bhad-Samh, 3. 16-19.

Page #413

384
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAW
5. There was a shower of blood.1 6. There occurred a sudden earthquake and 7. A terrible storm. 8. Big trees were uprooted; 9. Peaks of mountains were falling down and 10. The lakes were drying up5. 11. The crows were crowing (vāsanti karayararavaṁ) harshly
looking up at the sune; 12. The jackals were howling in the north emitting fire sparks
from their mouth;? 13. The horses were neighing harshly and were trembling their
necks;8 14. The elephants were trumpeting fright-fully and striking the
earth with their trunks and finally, 16. The idols of the deities were shedding tears.10:
Dreams : -Similarly the ancient people had great faith in the efficacy of dreams. The traditional belief was that the birth of a great person was associated with some auspicious dream-visions and the mothers of the sixty-three illustrious persons of the Jaina mythology saw some dream-objects infallibly at the time of conceiving the embryos of those persons.
It is mentioned in the Paumacariyam that Marudevi and Padmavats at the time of conceiving the embryos of Tirthankara Rşabha and Munisuvrata respectively saw fourteen dreams. (caud asasumine 21.1) The objects of those dreams were an elephant (gaya), a bull (vasaha), a lion (sīha), the Lakşmi (abhiseya or varasiri), a flower-garland (dāma), the moon (sasi), the sun (diņayara), a flag (jhaya), a pitcher (kumbha), a lotus-lake (paumasara), the sea (sagara), a heavenly palace (vimāņa-bhavana), a heap of gems (rayanuccaya) and the fire (sihi) (3.62 and 21.13). Aparājita (25.2) at the time of conceiving in her womb, the embryo of Padma (Rāma), the eighth Baladeva, had the dream-visions of four objects viz, a bright-flower
1. Br-Samh, 46, 40, 43. 2. Ibid, 32.32; Bhad-Samh, 13.70; 14, 49. 3. Ibid, 39.2; Ibid, 13.70; 14; 49. 4. Ibid, 46.25; Ibid, 14,42; 5. lbid, 46,50; Ibid, 13.121. 6. Br-Samh, Ch, 95. 7. Ibid, Gh, 90. 8. Ibid, 93. 5; Bhad-Sanh, 14 157. 9. Bhad-Samh, 13, 161, 10' Bx-Sanh, 46, 8,

Page #414

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
385 (varakusumakundavannam), a lion the sun and the moon. Sumitrā (25. 4) on the occasion of conceiving the embryo of Laksmaņa, the eighth Vasudeva, saw in her dream four objects viz. Lakşmi holding lotuses in her hands, the moon, the sun and further found herself seated on the peak of a hill wherefrom she could observe the land stretching up to the sea. Kekasi (7. 78), the mother of Rāvana, the eighth Prativāsudeva saw in her dream-visions a lion entering her belly and the rising moon and the sun.
These accounts of the Paumacariyaṁ are corroborated by the evidences from other Jaina works. The Bhagavatī sūtra (16. 6.579) and the Nājādhammakahão (I. p. 9) mentions that the mothers of Tirthankaras or Cakravartins saw fourteen dreams out of the thirty great dreams (tīsāmahásuviņāpaṁ). The Nāyādhammakaho," the Kalpasūtra and the TSP3 agree with the names of the fourteen objects mentioued in the Paumacariyam as quoted above. But the Digambara tradition holds that sixteen dream-objects were seen by the mothers of the Tirthankaras. Two more objects in addition to the fourteen objects (except a flag for which the Digambara works mention a fish--jhasa) mentioned above are royal seat (semhāsanam) and a palace of the king of snakes (Phanindrabhavanam)".
It has been already stated above that the Paumacariyam (25. 4) mentions four objects in connection with the dream-visions of the mother of a Vasudeva. These objects are-Lakşmī, the moon, the sun and the sea. This number of four does not agree wilh the Bhagavattsūtra (16. 6. 579) and Nayādhammakahão (I. p. 9) which mention seven objects. Hemacandra' also mentions seven objects viz. an elephant, a lion, the sun, the moon, the fire, Śrī and the sea. As regards the Digambara tradition the Uttarapurāna attributes five objects, i. e. a rice-field and a lion in addition to those of the Paumacariyam except Lakşmi. Ravişeņa” refers to five objects viz. a lion being sprinkled by Lakşmi, the sea, the sun and a wheel decked with jewels. Puşpadanta mentions one object only, i. e. a lion while in the case of Tịprstha Vasudeva' two objects viz. the moon and the sun are mentioned.
1. I. p. 9. 2. Kalpa Su 4, & 32-47 or 4. 66-87 ? 3. Vol I, p. 100 & 148 of TSP. 4, AP, 12. 103f; See also MP, 3. 6, for Rşabha and 38. 12 for Ajita. 5. TSP, IV. p. 193. 6. Gunabhadra, 67. 151. 7. PCR, 25. 13. 8. MP. 69. 12. 9. Ibid. 50. 12, 9. & for Dviprstha-54. 8. 7.
25

Page #415

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
The
According to the PCV the mother of Baladeva (Rama) Padma saw four objects viz. a flower, a lion, the sun and the moon. number of objects agree with the Bhagavati sutra1 and the Nayadhammakahão2, but the flower is not mentioned in those works. Hemacandra3 mentions an elephant in place of the flower. The Digambara author Ravişena agrees with the Paumacariyam as regards the number of the objects, but mentions an elephant in place of the flower. Puşpadanta refers to three objects only, viz. the sun and the moon wtih the birth of other Baladevas namely, Vijaya® and Acala".
386
As regards the dream-visions of the mother of a Prativasudeva, the Paumacariyam has mentioned three objects, viz. a lion, the moon, and the sun. These objects also indicated that two more sons would be born, besides Rāvana." Hemacandra9 mentions a lion in the dream-vision of Mandodari. Ravişenalu agrees with the Paumacariyam while Puspadanta11 refers to Laksmi and the sun.
The above evidences prove that the Svetambara and the Digambara works differ as regards the number and the name of the objects of dream-visions. But it can be strongly maintained that the ancient people had their implicit faith in the dream-visions which were believed to be associated with the sixty-three illustrious persons of the Jaina mythology.
Besides the illustrious persons the birth of some other great persons was also indicated by some dreams. Thus it is said in the Paumacariyam that the birth of Kumbhakarna and Vibhiṣaṇa was indicated by the vision of the moon and the sun to Kekasi (7.78f). Sita's beholding of two Sarabhas in her dream indicated that she would give birth to two great handsom sons (92.2). That some dream was associated with the birth of a great person can be corroborated by the Bhagavatisūtra12
1. Bhag. Su, 16. 6. 579.
2. Naya, I. p. 9.
3. TSP, Vol. IV. p. 193.
4. 25. 3.
5. MP, 69, 12.
6. Ibid. 50. 12.9.
7. Ibid. 54. 8. 7.
8, 7.81.
9. TSP, IV.
10. PCR, 7.80.
11. MP, 70. 4: 6.
12. 16. 6. 579.

Page #416

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
387
and the Nayādhammakahão? also which state that the mothers of Mándalikas see one of the fourteen great dreams.
The dream-visions of Marudevī, Padmavati, Aparăjită and Kekasi are called auspicious (pasattha 3.61; pavarasumine 25.1) because they signified the birth of illustrious persons. There were dreams which depicted evil consequences also. For example the dream-objects observed by Kekasī signified that her first son would be a cruel one (kūrakammakārī 7.83). In the case of Sitā the falling of the Sarabhas from the heavely abode was interpreted to be not well and agreeable (na ya sundaram 92.5).
The traditional belief of the people in the dreams can be corroborated by some non-Jaina works also. The Buddhist Jatakatthakathā (Nidana) reveals that Maya saw in her dream a white elephant entering her womb on the occasion of conceiving the embryo of Lord Buddha”. The Mahāsupina (No. 77) Jātaka records that king Pasenadi propitiated to do away with the evil consequences of dream depicting a great danger.
The Hindu Padmapurāņa” refers to the dreams of the queens of Dasaratha. After taking the 'payasa' they saw Hari in their dream (Janārdana pītavāsa) which indicated the birth of great sons. The Raghudaśa4 mentions that the queens of Dasaratha on the occasion of the birth of the parts of Vişnu in the form of embryos in their wombs dreamt that a dwarf holding a lotus, a sword, a mace, a bow and a discus was guarding them; that they were being dragged away in the sky by an eagle, that Lakşmi was serving them with a fan made of lotuses and the Saptarsis were attending upon them. All these visions signified that Vişņu would be born in the form of four sons of Dasaratha.
Other Beliefs :-Some other beliefs which were in vogue at that time can be mentioned as follows :
The placing of a lamp, the bull and the elephant on the occasion of marriage was believed to be supremly auspicious (10.8).
Catching hold of the ancestral magic necklace by a new-born child was considered to be auspicious and it indicated that the child would become a great man (7.194).
1. I. p. 9. 2. I. p. 50ff. Scc Buddhacarila, 1.4. also, 3Uttarakhanda Ch. 269, 4. Raghu, X. 60-63.

Page #417

388
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Mustard seeds were thrown in the four quarters to offset the effect of evil spirits for the protection of the new-born children (97.10). For the same purpose a string of the nails of tigers was worn by the children (97.10). Jaina worship was performed to avert the consequences of a bad augury (93.6). Deities were invoked for the safety of life (63.1).
It was a general belief that some deities spread epidemic (63.68) and it could subside by the mere arrival of pious monks (89.40) in the affected area. The poisonous effect of a snake bite could be nullified by touching the feet of a pious monk possessing some supernatural powers (77.93). Bath water of a woman born with some divine qualities could cure diseases (63.29-31). Fever could be cured by the mere sprinkling of water by a chaste woman (22. 67). It is stated that the effects of snake bite, evil spirits and diseases (gahabhūyoragapisāyavāhio nāsei 48. 85) could be cured by a medicin al bracelet (vejjakadaya). The (mantras) chants were also used as a means of treating the ailing persons (22. 64; 81. 12; 110.27).
It was believed that one possessed some superhuman power on account of the penances performed in his previous life (64.31, 49). Deeds of the past life were considered to be responsible for the consequences of the present life and even the deities could not undo them (45.35).
D. Lucky Physical Characteristics In the PCV (2. 15-18) some lucky physical characteristics of king Śreņika are given. It was believed that great men possessed these characteristics. Rāvana is also said to have 32 such characteristics (battisasulakkhaṇasamaggo PCV, 11. 105-6). Further the residents of Bhogabhūmis are mentioned to be possessing 64 auspicions physical characteristics (Causatthilakkhanadharā PCV, 102.130). The JP (Su. 29) also corroborates it. In the Jivājīvābhigama (Su. 111, 147) one can find details about these characteristics.
SECTION 7. SUPERNATURAL ELEMENTS.
The people of ancient India had great faith in the existence and efficacy of supernatural elements. They are dealt with in this section.
The PCV furnishes ample information as regards the faith of people in supernatural element. It is through these elements that righteousness and moral virtues are glorified by providing attraction for heavenly existence, pleasure, happiness and extraordinary physical

Page #418

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
389
and mental powers. On the other hand misconduct and moral vices are discouraged by associating with them the fear of hellish existence, sufferings and physical debilities. These elements awaken people to develop their divine and virtuous qualities and guide them to subdue their evil and devilish inclinations. Thus the central idea behind these elements is to fortify religion and general morality of people.
These elements can be dealt under four different heads viz : A. Supernatural beings and their abodes. B. Supernatural elements associated with the 63 illustrious
persons of the Jaina faith. Supernatural occurrences effecting day to day life of the
people and D. Superhuman powers of munis and ordinary persons
A. Supernatural Beings
Supernatural beings are said to be of two kinds viz. the infernal or hellish beings and the heavenly beings.
Hellish Beings :--The Paumacariyaṁ states that wrong conduct, killing of living beings (26.58), non-observance of vows (vratas), addiction to greediness (75.46;102.74) and the taking of honey, meat and wine (26.58) cause the souls to trasmigrate into the hellish regions. These causes can be corroborated by the TP which deals with them in detail (2.293-301; 2.356-66).
The hellish regions are told to be seven in number namely, Ratnaprabha, Sarkar, Balukā, Parika, Dhūma, Tama and MahatamaPrabhā (26.43-44; 75.47) which are situated below the Meru mountain (26.42) or in the middle world, one under the other in the Adholaka or the lower world of the Universe (102.64-66). This is the traditional account of the number and the situation of the Narakas. The PCV further informs us about the layers (patalas 102.69) and abodes (bilas 75.48; 102.67-68) in these Narakas and the age of the beings of each Naraka loka (102.83). It is a traditional account.
These hellish abodes are said to be completely dark and devoid of any sun or moon. They smell very filthy and are unagreeable to the sense of touch (24.66). Those who are born in these regions constantly suffer from the tortures of fire, thorns, weapons and mechanical devices. Crows and vultures prick their bodies. Their limbs are maimed. Severe cold, burning heat, thirst and hunger make their life miserable. They are boiled in couldrons. Whenever they run to the Vaitarani river to quench their thirst they find that it is full of blood, marrow,

Page #419

390
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
hair and pus. Whenever they seek shelter under some shade, the Asipatravana with its thorns and weapons cause great pain to them. Thus their life is full of sorrow, pain and innumberable sufferings (26.46 -57; 102.76-85; 118.3-8). This account of suffering can be corroborated by that of the TS (3.3-5) and the TP (2.29-36; 2.308-335).
Heavenly Beings :-Those who perform meritorious deeds in their previous births are said to be re-born as heavenly beings with numerous pleasures at their disposal.
The heavenly beings are divided into four classes-viz. Bhavanavāsīs, Vyantaras, Jyotiskas and Vaimānikas (26.43; 75.32-35 72; 102. 87, 140, 142-146; 105.99). This is the traditional four-fold division.
The Bhavanavāsī gods are said to be occupying the first two of the three parts of the Ratnaprabha Naraka-bhumi which is situated below the Mandara mountain (26.42-43) or the middle world. At 102.87 it is mentioned that they reside in the upper part of the first Naraka (Rayanappabhāe bhāge uvarille). These gods are of ten types, viz. the Asura. Naga, Suparņa, Dvīpa, Samudra, Diśā, Vāta, Agni, Vidyut and Stanitakumāras (75.32). The PCV further mentions the number of their abodes (102.89), It is a traditional account.
The Vyantara gods reside in the Madhya-loka (middle world) which consists of many continents and oceans such as Jambudvipa etc. (102.91). They are of eight types, viz. the Kinnaras, Kimpuruṣas, Garudas (Mahoragas), Gandharvas, Yakṣas, Bhūtas, Pisacas, and Raksasas (75.33; 102.92).
The Jyotişka gods exist up above the Vyantara gods. They reside in the luminous bodies. They are of five types, the Candras, Suryas, Grahas, Nakşatras and Tārakas. They rotate round the Meru mountain and are bustrous by their very nature (75.34; 102. 141).
The Vaimanika gods reside up above the Jyotişka gods (i. e. in the upper world). They are divided into the Kalpavasins and the Kalpātītas. The Kalpavāsins reside in different Kalpas while the Kalpātītas reside in Graiveyakas and five Anuttara Vimanas (or Anudiśas and Anuttaravimānas or four Vimanas in four quarters and one in the centre). Above all of them there is the Rṣiprāgbhārabhūmi (Isipabbhāra-pudhavi 102.147) where the liberated souls reside. This abode is of the shape of an open umbrella.
1. Rayanappabha tisu bhāgesu vihatta, Bhavanavasi deva nivasanti dosu bhagesu taie puna neraiya.

Page #420

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
391
The Kalpas are 12 in number namely, Saudharma, Išana, Sanatkumāra, Māhendra, Brahma, Lāntaka, Mahāśukra, Sahasrāra, Anata, Pranata, Arana and Acyuta (102.143-144). This account is corroborated by the Svetămbara tradition? The Digambara tradition mentions 16 Kalpas, the four more being Brahmottara, Kapiştha, Sukra and Satāra. But the TP (8.120-121, 127-128) records both the traditions and the Sarvārthasidhi (4.19) mentions that there are 12 Indras only. It is in agreement with the Svetāmbara tradition. The PCV though enumerates 12 Kalpas, yet it has a stray reference to Brahmottara (82.76) also.
Above these Kalpas there are situated nine Graiveyakas followed by 4 Anudisa and one Anuttara Vimănas. The four Anudiśas are called Vijaya, Vaijayanta, Jayanta and Aparājita vimānas while the Anuttara is called Sarvārthavimāna (102. 146). These five are said to be Anuttaravimānas in the Svetämbara tradition while the Digambara tradition differentiates them into Anudisa and Anuttaravimānas. But the PCR states them as five Anuttaravimānas (105. 170). At 102. 171 of the PCV also there is no separate mention of the Anudiśavimāna but the Anuttaras are mentioned just after the Graiveyakas." At 2.84 the Anuttaravimāna is referi ed to in plural. Thus it is clear that four vimānas are called Anudiśas because they are situated in four different quarters and the fifth one is situated above them in the middle. Thus to call all those five as Anuttaravimānas or separately as Anudiśas and Anuttaravimāna makes no difference, because beyond them there is no more vimāna.
The PCV further gives the number of vimānas in each Kalpa (102.152). The Graiveyakas have in all 318 vimānas (102.153) and then there are the separate five Anuttara or four Anudisa and one Anuttara (Sarvārtha) vimānas (102.146). The TP (8.153-154) also mentions that the Graiveyakas, Anudiśas and Anuttara have in all 323 vimānas.
The PCV mentions in general that the span of life of the gods increases from 2, 7, 10, 14, 17, 18, 20, to 22 Sāgaras successively
1. Uttajā, 36.209-210; TS, 4. 20. 2. TS, 4. 19. 3 Uttara, 36.215; TS, (Bhāşya)-4. 20. 4. TP, 8. 117f. 5. "Gevejjagāņa tatto ahiyam tu anuttarāņa devāṇam,
Sokkham anantyan puņa siddhāņa sivālayatthänin.'

Page #421

392
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
and it further increases by one Sāgara in every successive Graiveyaka (i. e. 22+9=31 Sagaras) and the rest (Anudisa and Anuttara) have 32 & 33 Sagaropama years of age (102.165). It can be clarified with the help of other works. The Uttaradhyayana (36.221-243) mentions that the first two Kalpavasin have 2 Sagaropama of age, the next two have 7 Sāgaropama, the fifth to eight have 10, 14, 17 and 18 Sāgaropama years respectively. Then the next two have 20 while the last two have 22 Sagaropama years. In every suecessive Graiveyaka the age is from 23 to 31 Sāgaropama respectiveiy and the rest have 33 Sāgaropama years. The Bhāşya on Tattvārthasūtra (4. 33-37) agrees with the Uttärädhyayana, but it elucidates that in the four Anuttaravimānas the age is 32 while in the Sarvărtha it is 33 Sāgaropama years. The TP (8. 458) mentions 16 Sāgaropamas in place of the 17 as mentioned in the PCV.
There is a contrast between the conditions of the infernal (Nārakīya) and heavenly beings (Devas). The former suffer innumerable pains as already stated above, but the latter enjoy many pleasures. They have very decent buildings. They have all the comforts and luxuries at their disposal. They lavishly enjoy music and dance being performed by the nymphs or Amaravadhús (14. 89-98). The pleasures of the Devas increase with their position (102. 179.171) in the higher Devalokas. The objective happiness lessens with the upper vimānas while the internal and natural happiness increase (14. 99-100; 102).
B. Supernatural elements associated with the 63
illustrious persons of the Jaina faith The PCV reveals that some particular supernatural occurrences, qualities and objects are associated with the Tirthaikaras, Cakravartins, Vasudevas, Prativāsudevas and Baladevas of the Jaina faith. The Kevalins are also mentioned to have been associated with these elements. In the following lines an account of the same as recorded in the PCV has been given.
(1) Tirtha nkaras: -The PCV states that the Tirtharkaras are graced with some supernatural events on the occasion of five important incidents of their life viz. conception of the embryo, birth, renouncement of the world, attainment of Kevelajñāna and emancipation. This is a traditional account.
1. See TS 4. 33-38 (Svet).

Page #422

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
393
Conception :-The PCV (3.59-67; 21.15-17) mentions that at the time of the conception of the embryo of a Jina various goddesses serve his mother and there is a shower of gems in his house?
Birth :- The celestial beings take the new-born child to the Meru mountain and perform his ablution ceremony (3. 71-103; 21.18) called Abhişeka (5. 54).
Renouncement:- This occasion is called Nikkhamanamahā mahima (3. 138). The Lokāntika gods strengthen the inclination of a Jina to renounce the world (3. 127-130). Celestial beings carry him in a divine litter when he renounces the world (3.132). They further immerse his five-handfulls of hair extracted by himself from his head into the Kşirodadhi (3. 137). The AP calls the ceremony Pariniskrāntimahakalyāņaka (17. 74)?
Omniscience:-When a Jina attains omniscience, the Indra, the Suras and the Asuras pay homage to him, sign in his praise (2. 47; 4. 20), listens to his first sermon and then returns to their respective places.
Other monks who attain omniscience are also said to have been hailed by the celestial beings (39.34; 101.69). At that time the quarter appear to be red-bright and divine music is heard (14. 1-7).
Emancipation :- In the case of the Jinas the ceremony associated with this event is not mentioned in the PCV. But the occasion of monk Kosala's emancipation is said to have been graced by the Devas by making a worship of and offering perfumes and flowers to the body of that monk. This ceremony is called Nirvāṇagamanam ahimā (22. 46).
The AP calls these five occasions 'Kalyāņakas' i. e. auspicious occasions? The TS (4. 22)* also refers to these auspicious occasions and the work of the Devas on these occasions.
Pärapä-The occasion of breaking a fast by a Tirthařkara or a great muni is hailed by five Atisayas (21. 25 supernatural occurrences) viz. flow of cold breeze, downpour of precious stones and flowers,
1. See AP, 12. 84, 97; 163-211; TSP, I. pp. 105-130. 2. See AP. 13. 176, 213; TSP, I, p. 109-130. 3. See T SP, I. P; 159.6 6; AP, 17. 47-209. 4. See AP 22. 18, 74f; 23. 191-194; TSP, I. p. '88f. 5. AP, 20; 269 f; UP, 48. 79-80. 6. Sce, AP, 47. 343; TSP, I. p. 360, 363. 7. AP, 25. 222. 8. See the Bhāşya also.

Page #423

394
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
sound of divine drums and hailing words of Devas (4. 12-14).1 These are called Aścaryas2 also.
Samavasarņa:-When a Tirthankara after having attained omniscience delivers a Sermon, a divine assembly hall (Samosarana) is erected by the Devas. His religious discourse is listened to by the gods, monks, human beings and animals all alike. The PCV (2. 47f) further gives the details of the assembly hall with its three ramparts, big gates (Gopuras) banners etc. At every entrance eight dance-dramas (atthaṭṭhanadayaim) are performed. The Tirthankara seated in the centre is attended by some Pratihāryas (see infra). The twelve divisions of the hall (aha? daha? doņņi ya vakkhārā) are occupied by the monks, nuns, goddesses, gods, nobles, men, women and even animals. This description of the Samosarana can be corroborated by other works with certain details and minor differences. The TSP mentions three ramparts, but the TP (4. 733) and the AP (22. 81 f) refer to one more rampart which is made of mud (dhūlisala). Both these works mentions dance and music performances, not dramas.
Atisayas and Pratihāryas:-The PCV further associates 34 Atisayas and 8 Pratihāryas (cottisaṁ ca aisaya aṭṭhamahāpaḍihera ya 5. 60) with the Tirthankaras. The eight Pratihāryas which appear when a Tīrthankara attains omniscience are:-a divine throne, a parasol, a high parosal, a chowry, a halo of light, a sacred tree, the sound of divine drum and the shower of flowers (Uppannammi ya nāņe uppajjai asanam jipindassa/Chattaichattacāmara taheva bhāmaṇḍalam vimalaṁ// Kappaddumo ya divvo dunduhighosam ca pupphavarisam ca 4. 18-19). The PCR refers categorically to 34 Atiśayas and eight Pratihāryas at 5. 72, but at 4. 23-29 it enumerates only seven Pratihāryas by omitting 'atichatra'. Further in place of 'chatra' it mentions 'chatratrayam' i. e. three umbrellas, The 'atichatra' is not mentioned in the Samavayanga, the TP5 and the AC6. The Samavayanga mentions one umbrella (āgāsagayaṁ chattam), but the TP and the AC mention three (chatra trayam). The PCR (4. 27) mentions two chowries, while the TP mentions 64 chowries. The Samavayanga and the AC refer to the chowry in plural. Further the TP mentions the Ganas attending upon the
1. TP, 4. 672-674; AP, 20, 102-105; TS, P. I, p. 181.
2. UP, 48. 41.
3. TP, 4. 710-895; AP, 22 & 33. 72-112; TSP, I. p. 190-193.
4. Su. 34.
5. 4. 915-927.
6. Abhidhanacintamanikoşa by Hemacandra (1-57-64). In the VH, (I. p. 5) there is a reference to 'chattaich atta'.

Page #424

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
395 Jina in place of the 'Atichatra'. The Samavāyānga and the AC do not mention eight 'Pratihāryas' separately. They are included in the 34
Atisayas', therefore the substitute for the 'Atichatra' cannot be marked out. It is to be noted that on the one hand some of the Atisayas mentioned in the Samavāyā nga and the AC do not agree between themselves and on the other hand some of them mentioned in both the works differ from those of the TP. Further sometimes two and some times three Atibayas of the TP are grouped together and they are counted as one in the Samavāyānga and the AC. Some of the groups of the Atiśays mentioned in the Samavāyānga vary with those of the AC.
The PCV does not enumerate all the 34 'Atisayas'. It mentions some of them and those also at different places. Most of them are mentioned in association with Lord Mahāvīra (Ch. 2) while a few are referred to in connection with Lord Rşabha (Ch.4). A general reference to them is also made (Ch. 75). Thus the Atisayas enumerated in the PCV (2.31-37) can be given as follows :
(1) The blood of a Tirthaukara is like milk (ruhirarkhirasavannam); His body is free from (2) dirt, (3) perspiration and is (4) full of fragrance (malaseyavivajjiyaṁ surabhigandham deham); His body bears (5) auspicious marks and (6) qualities (7) and it is lustrous like the sun-(salakkhaņaguņam ravippabhar ceva aivimalar); (8) His eyelids are motionless (nayaņā phandanarahiya); (9) His nails and hair are smooth and growthless (nahakcsavațțhiyā ya niddha ya); His surroundings up to one hundred Yojaņas (10) are free from any pestilence (joyaņasayam samantā māriivivajjig deso), (11) sickness etc; That much region (12) is free from any enmity between kings, (13) there the sky is bright (14) the blowing of the wind is pleasant (15) and the land is free from any phenomenal upheaval (75. 25-26)2; (16) Wherever the Jina wanders that area assumes heavenly 3 form; (17) A Jina walks on lotuses (jatto ţhavei calane tatto jāyanti sahasapattain); (18) The trees bend with the heaviness of the fruits appearing on them, (19) the land becomes prosperous with fresh crops (phalabhāranamiyā ya dumā sāsasamiddha mahi hoi) and (20) it shines like a mirror (āyarisasama dharani jāyai, (21) The quarters look bright and dustless (sarae va nimmalão disão rayarep urahiyão and (22)
1, Rogādivivajjio rammo' 4.34. %. Joyanasayam anūņam jatth aceh ai kevali samuddesa/
Verānubandh arahiya havanti niyayam naravarindall Gayanan jahā aruvam calo ya väū thira havaibhūm/
Taha Kevalissa niyamā esa sahāyo ya loyahioll 3. Viharai jattha Jinindo so deso saggasanniho hoi -4.34.

Page #425

396
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
The Ardhamāgadhi language emerges from his mouth (iha Addhamāgah i vāni). Further at 2,61 it is said that the Ardhamāgadhi language is understandable to all the kinds of living beings (To Addhamāgahie) bhāsāe savvajivahiyajanņam).
These 'Atisayas' can be corroborated by the Samavāyanga, the TP and the AC. The latter two works arrange them under three different heads. Thus the TP associates ten 'Atisayas' with the birth and eleven with the attainment of omniscience by the Tirthaikara. Then the rest of the thirteen are mentioned. The AC associates four with the birth, eleven with the omniscience and then the remaining nineteen are mentioned. Before a comparison of these 'Atisayas' with those mentioned in other works, it should be noted that the names of the 'Atibayas' are generally not in literal agreement. The terminology is not specific but general, hence a 'Atiśaya' of one work can be accomodated under one or the other of another work. Further there are differences as regards their details in all the three works.
The TP mentions all these 'Atisayas' (4.896-914) of the PCV except two i. e. No. 6 'qualities' which are not specifically referred to in the TP. the PCR refers to it (aparameya gunāgāram 2.90) and No. 17 i. e. (walking on flowers' which is also not mentioned in the TP, the PCR refers to it (2.98). The TP does not only mention one language (i. e. Ardhamagadhi-bhāṣā-No 22) but it refers to eighteen Mahābhāşās, 700 Ksudrabháşās and many other languages of all the creatures with the faculty of mind. It describes the speech of Tirthankara as divvabhāsitar and divvajhuņi (4.902, 903-905) whereas in the PCV there is no reference to the divine speech. The PCR does not refer to any language at the time of describing the 'Atisayas' of Lord Mahāvīra. But with Ajitanātha it associates the Ardhamăgadhi language (5.190).
The Samavāyānga does not refer to No. 5. 6 and 8 of the PCV specifically whereas the AC does not refer to No. 5, 6, 8 and 15 specifically. The Samavāyānga refers to Ardhamāgadhi-bhāṣā and further says that it is understandable by all kinds of living beings (Addhamāgahībhāsā bhāsijjamāpi tesim savvesir*****appappanohiyasivasuhadāyabhāsattae! pariņamai). The AC does not refer to Ardhamägadhi. It mentions in general that the language of the Tirtha karas is understandable by all kinds of living beings.
The PCV states, as already mentioned above, that the effect of certain occurrences spread over 100 Yojanas. But in the TP some of
1. Compare 'appappanoniya......' with 'savvajivahiyajanaanii' of the PCV.

Page #426

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
397 those occurreeces have been associated with numerous Yojanas (4.907), in the Samarāyanga with twenty-five Yojanas and in the AC with 200 Gavyūtis.
(2) Cakravartins:- The Cakravartin kings are said to be the masters of fourteen great gems or excellent things and nine treasures (coddasa ya mahārayapanava nihao 461, 8.201).
(3) Baladevas :-The PCV states that Baladeva Rāma possessed three divine weapons, namely, a bow, a ploughshare and a pestle (100.8). It also mentions the presenting of a chariot to him by Garudadhipati (59.85). It is not counted as a Ratna. The TP (4. 1435) associates with the Baladevas four gems but mentions a string of gems (Ratnāvali) in place of a bow. The UP (57.93) refers to a mace and a string of gems in place of a bow and a chariot in the case of Rāma.
(4) Vasudevas:-The PCV mentions that Vasudeva Lakşmana was the master of seven gems (divvaraṇāim 91. 8). They are mentioned as a disc, a parasol, a bow, a spear, a mace, a precious stone and a sword (cakkam chattam ca dhanum satti ya gayā maņi asi ceva). The TP mentions a conch and a staff in place of a parasol and a precious stone (4. 1434). The Uttarapurāna (57. 92) follows the TP.
(5) Prativasudevas :--The PCV refers to the Sudarśanacakra (10.24) and a staff (19.44) of Rāvana. He is killed by Vasudeva Lakşmaņa with the cakra (72. 36; 73. 27). The TP mentions that Prativāsudevas are killed by Vasudevas with the former's disc (4. 1423).
The PCV further mentions that Cakravartins are immune from the effects of any Vidyā operated against them by any other person (68. 48). Similarly Vasudevas are not at all harmed by the Cakra hurled at them by the Prativāsudevas (72.36)” and the divine weapons of Cakravartins or Vasudevas and Baladevas do not harm their own kith and kin (4. 48; 100.8, 19-21)3.
(C) Supernatural occurrences The PCV reveals that supernatural occurrences affected the day to day life of the people. They can be dealt under four heads-viz. (1) Supernatural occurrences connected with the life of great persons; (2) Favourable or unfavourable disposition of celestial beings towards
1. See for details Thānanga, 7. 558; TP, 4. 1.77-86 and JP, (3. 66). 2. See UP (58, 59. 115). 3. See AP (36. 66).

Page #427

398
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
the righteous and the wicked respectively; (3) Celestial being's assistance to their friends or their causing obstruction to their enemies of this life or the previous life and (4) work of the evil spirits.
1. Supernatural occurrences connected with the life of great persons :The PCV reveals that many incidents in the life of great persons are hailed with some supernatural occrrences or with the pouring of flowers and the beating of divine drums by the celestial beings.
Hanu's birth (17.90) was hailed with favourable phenomenal occurrences. On the occasion of Rāma's success in stringing the bow (28. 106-121) there occurred many phenomenal changes such as the trembling of mountains, agitating of the sea, reversing of the currents of the rivers etc.
Celestial beings then poured flowers and beat divine drums. Similarly the occasions like the battle between Ráma and Rāvana (71.20), the reunion of Rama and Sita at Lanka (71.20), the triumph of Muni Vali in subduing Ravana (9.80) on the Kailasa mountain, Lakṣmaṇa's success in withstanding the Saktis hurled by king Aridamana (38.42), queen Simhika's success in proving that she was chaste (22.69), Bharata's intiation into monkkood (83.7) and the success of monks in observing meditation (50,3,7) or penances (117.2) were graced with pouring of flowers, sounding of divine drums and hailing words from celestial beings.
2. Disposition of celestial beings towards righteous and wicked persons :The PCV reveals that those who were righteous or of irreproa chable conduct or were devoted to the religion of the Jina were assisted by the celestial beings in critical times. The converting of the fire-pit into a pond of water on the occasion of Sītā's fireordeal (102.19.33), the advance information given to Satrughna about the coming calamity on Mathurā (87.17), the conjuring up of Rāmapuri for Rāma in the forest (35.25-36), sentinels guarding the temple in which Rāvana was meditating (67.49f) and saving a mónk from a calamity (5.231) were the works of divine beings for assisting the righteous persons.
Those who were wicked and disrespectful to the righteous ones and the true religion were punished by the celestial beings or some untoward phenomenal occurrences damaged their life. The absorption of king Vasu by the earth on account of telling a lie (11.34) and the paralysing of two Brahmins (105.65) who wanted to kill monks are such examples.

Page #428

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
399
. (3) The assistance and the intimidation of the celestial beings:- The Paumacariyaṁ reveals that the celestial beings, in various ways, helped those human beings who were the benefactors of the former or their relatives in this or the previous birth. Rāma and Lakşmana had saved two monks from the tortures of a celestial being (39.98), hence the Garudādhipati (Sura) who was the father of those two monks in his previous birth helped Rāma and Lakşmaņa with many divine weapons (59.78; 60.2) to set free Bhamandala and Sugrīva from the enemy, When some Raksasa princes attacked the country of Rāma, two celestial beings (Jațāyu and Kệtantavadana) who were associated with Rama in their previous life, chased off the enemies and thus helped their master (113.22). Camara, a celestial being favoured king Madhu with a very powerful divine weapon, because in their previous birth the latter had helped the former (12.7-34).
On the other hand the celestial beings harassed and punished their enemies. Analaprabha, a Jyotișika god who in his previous birth was killed by Kulabhūşana and Deśabhūşana, created scorpions and snakes to frighten and obsruct the latter from attaining Kevala (39. 1617; 46.119). Similarly Dharanendra snatched away the Vidyās from a king who was his enemy in his previous birth (5. 25-38). Rākşasī Vidyunmukhí oppressed Muni Sakalabhūşaņa falsely charging him with theft and causing various disturbances to him (101. 54-68) because she was expelled by him, his husband in her previous birth. A Bhavanavāsin Deva tortured a king because he as a monkey in his previous birth was killed by that king (6. 102-111). Celestial Camara spread epidemic and caused many deaths to oppress Satrughna, because the latter had killed the former's friend king Madhu (87.17).
(4) The work of evil spirits :--Evil spirits such as the Grahas, Bhūtas the Pisacas, the Vanavyantaras, the Dakinīs, the Brahmarākşasas are said to be frightening and obstructing persons acquiring supernatural powers (7.66) or the monks devoted in meditation (105.33) by conjuring dreadful animals and terrorising scenes (39.24-28). Those who did not get disturbed by them emerged successful.
(D) Superhuman powers The PCV reveals that the people of ancient India had great faith in the efficacy of superhuman powers. These powers are called Rddhis and Vidyās. The former were the potentialities of the souls spiritually advanced. The latter were supernatural powers which could be acquired even by ordinary persons. The possessors of the Rddhis and the Vidyās performed miracles and affected the day to day life of the people.

Page #429

400
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Rddhis:-Tha PCV mentions that various types of supernatural powers could be attained by practising proper penances and meditation (napaladdhisu settisampannā 86.7). Monks are said to have acquired (soul powers) Ṛddhis on account of self-contemplation, selfdiscipline and austerities (uppanna riddhivihava 14.82) and with their help they performed miracles (abbhuyakammāņi kuvvanti). Some Ṛddhis have been specifically named in the PCV while in some cases merely their efficacy is described. They can be mentioned as follows:
(1) The Ṛddhis of Koşṭhabuddhi, Padānusārī and Sambhinna śrotṛtva (14.85). (2) The Vikriyalabdhi (70.29), the powers of making the sun lustreless, covering the moon, causing rain (14.83) and shaking the Mandara mountain (14.84). (3) The power of faring into the sky (15.84), and the Caraṇa (3.156) or the Caturangula Carapa Śramaņas' who moved speedily from place to place (84.9). (4) The power of produ cing fire (41.34). (5) The power of curing a disease by the mere touch of dust of the foot. (14 84) and (6) the madhu-Kṣīrasarpis-amṛtasraviRiddhis (14, 45). These various spiritual powers can be compared with the Riddhis mentioned in the Titoyapannatti which (4.967-1091) associates with the Ganadharas of the Tirthankaras eight classes of Rddhis with their 64 sub-kinds. These eight classes of Ṛddhis are described as follows: (1) buddhi (learning and enlightment). (2) Vikriya (capacity to change physical body at one's will), (3) Kriya (capcity to move in the sky. water, fire, smoke, air etc.), (4) Tapa (power of austerites), (5) Oşadhi (capacity of healing disease). Rasa (capacity to change the elements in to liquids (7) Bala (capacity of exhibiting miraculous strength) and (8) Kṣiti (capacity to make a thing inexhaustible). The powers quoted above from the PCV fall under the first six classes of Ṛddhis the TP respectively.
Vidyas:-Vidyas are mentioned to have been mastered by men (7.73) and women (5.1.8) alike to get fulfilled their desire which entailed performance of extrordinary feats on the part of the desirous one. They are said to be presided over by some female deities (7.73.130; 47.43; 64.27; 68.46). These deities presented themselves before their masters whenever the latter remembered them and then the deities helped their masters in accomplishing their works.
These Vidyas are said to have been mastered by performing meditation in solitary places such as caves (10. 13). forests (51. 14;
Jañghācāraṇa Śraman as in the
1. The Caturangula-caranas are called TP, (4.1037).

Page #430

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
401
43. 19-22; 7. 104). groves (7. 65) or temples (66. 31). Thousands of 'japas' were chanted (7. 107, 88; 66. 31) and an undisturbed meditation on the Vidyas was essential to accomplish the desired object. At times such meditators were disturbed by evil spirits (7. 115-129) or human beings (68. 44-45) but the formers' success lay in not getting perturbed at all. When the course of meditation was completed, the presiding deity of the Vidya appeared before the meditator and promised him to help whenever he desired (68. 47-49).
Occasionally these Vidyas are said to have been bestowed upon some persons by some superhuman beings (Devas) as a pleasure gift (3149; 11.65) or in recognition of the latters' devotion to the Jinas (9.101; 64.27) or in acknowledgement of the latters' services to the monks (39.130; 59.84). In such cases no meditation or penance was performed by the recipient.
A large number of Vidyas have been mentioned in the PCV. They were possessed by various persons. A number of them which were mastered by Ravana are as follows :
Āgāsagāmiņī (Ākāśagāmini)1, Kāmadāiņī (Kāmadāminī), Kāmagāmī (Kāyagāminī). Duppivārā (Durnivārā), Jayakammā (Jagat kampa), Pannatti (Prajñapti), Bhānumāliņī (Bhānumālinī), Anima, Laghima, Manathambhaņi, Akhoha (Kṣobhya), Saṁvāhiņi, (Samvahini), Suraddhamsi (Suradhvaṁsi) Komārī (Kaumārī), Vahakārī (Vadhakariņi). Suvihāņā (Suvidhānā), Tamoruvā (Taporupā); Viulaari (Vipulodari). Dahaņi (Dahani), Suhadaiņi (Subhaprada), Raoruva (Rajorupā), Dinarayaņikarī (Dinarātrividhāyinī), Vajjoyarī (Vajrodari), Samadiṭṭhi (Samadṛṣṭi), Ajarāmarā, Visannā (Adarśani), Jalathambhiņi (Toyastambhani), Aggitthambhanī (Analastambhanī), Giridāriņi (Giridaraņi), Avalovaņī (Avalokanī), Arividdhaṁsī (Aridhvams). Ghora, Vīrā (Dhira), Bhuyangiņi (Bhujangini,, Varuņi (Vāruņi), Bhuvana (Bhuvana), Daruņi (Daruņa), Mayanāsaņī (Madanāsiņi) Raviteya (Bhaskari), Bhayajanani (Bhayasambhuti), Īsāņi (Aiśānī). Jaya. Vijaya. Bandhani, Vārāhī, Kudilākitti (Kuțilakṛti), Vaubbhava (Cittodbhavakarī), Satti (Śanti), Koberi (Kauveri), Sankari (Vaśakāriņī), Jogesī (Yogeśvari). Balamahani (Valotsādī) Candali (Canda) and Varisiņi (Pravarșini PCV. 7. 143. Ravana had mastered Bahurupāvidya also (64.46). Then Savvaruha (Sarvahā), Raividdhi (Ratisamvardhani, Agasagāmā (Vyomagāminī), Jambhani (Jṛmbhiņi). Niddāņi (Nidrānī) and Siddhattha (Siddharthā); Aridamaņi (Śatrudamani), Nivvāghāyā (Nirvyāghātā) and Khagāmiņī
1.
In the brackets the names are from the PCR. Generally they are Sanskrit equivalents, occasionally they are quite different Vidyas.
26

Page #431

402
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
(Khagāmini) are said to have been mastered by Kumbhakarna and Vibhișana respectively (7.144-145). Sahasagati mastered Ruvaparivattaņakari (Rupaparivartanakari) (10. 13) or Veyāli (Vaitali) Vidya. (47. 43) Ratnaśrava acquired Mānasasundarividyā (7. 73). Three daughters of king Gandharva mastered Managāmiņi (Manasagāmini) Vidya (51. 19).
Besides these, the Vidyas which were bestowed by some persons are as follows:
Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa were bestowed with Simhavāhins and Garuda Vidyās by celestial Garudādhipati (59.84). Rāvana was bestowed with Asăliya (Āsālikā) Vidyā by Uparambhā, the wife of Nalakūbara (12. 64). Nārada was bestowed with the Āgăsagāmiņi Vijjā (11 65) by some celestial beings. Nami and Vinami were bestowed with several Vidyās by celestial Nagarāja (3. 149). Nami and Vinami possessed various Vidyās hence their dynasty was known as Vidyadhara Vamsa.
Some of the above mentioned Vidyās can be compared with the Vidyas which were attained by Jitaśatru and then assigned over by him to prince Nāgakumāra.
The Rddhis and Vidyās are said to be playing an important part in the social and political life of the people.
With the help of these powers monks fared in the sky (17. 74; 41. 5; 89.1; 97.13). They could cure snake bites (77. 91), press down the peak of a mountain (9. 76) and could burn towns to ashes (41. 34).
By the power of these Vidyās even layinen brought about miracles. Vidyadhara Indra created the paraphernalia of the celestial lord (7.6); Rāvana raised a peak, the Kailasa mountain (9. 67-69), conjured up ferocious animals, demons, hobgoblins and snakes (46.52-53), and became invisible (9. 12-13); Sahasagati changed his form (43. 38); Vali circumambulated the whole world daily (9. 3); Hanu warded off the calamity of fire (51. 6); Rāvana conjured up many counterfeits of himself, produced sun-heat, moonlight, fire, and rain (8. 26-29) and Ratnaśrava created a city of his liking (7. 74). girls also could move to the place of their liking within no time (51. 8).
The following are the political events which were influenced by the Vidyās. Sāhasagati by the power of his Rupaparivartanakari (10.
I
ce Nāyaku. Ca, VI. 6.

Page #432

SOCIAL CONDITIONS
403 13) or Vetali (47.43) Vidyā assumed the form of Sugriva to establish sexual relations with the latter's wife. This incident forced Sugriva to seek the help of Rama and Lakşmaņa. Thus Sugrīva became a strong and prominent ally of Rama and helped the latter in rescuing Sīta from the clutches of Rāvana. It was with the help of the Avalokani Vidya that Rāvana could ascertain the identity of Rāma, Lakşmaņa and Sītā in the Dandakāranya and then he could also know Lakşmana's secret signal of a lion's roar. By the help of that signal he managed to kidnap Sita (44.22-39), Sita-haraṇa is the main incident of the theme of the Rama-story. Rāma and Lakşmaņa by the help of their Simhavahini and Garuda Vidyās got Bhāmandala and Sugrīva released from the captivity of Rāvana (59.84; 60.2). Rāvana created many heads and limbs on his person by the help of Bahurūpā mahāvidya as a result of which Lakşmapa, for some time remained unsuccessful in slaying Ravana (72.15-24).

Page #433

CHAPTER VIII
EDUCATION, LITERATURE, SCIENCES, ARTS
AND ARCHITECTURE. SECTION I. EDUCATION AND LITERATURE In the PCV there are very general statements about the system of education. It lacks details about the various aspects of the educational system. Even then a treatment of the data available in it will provide us with sufficient information about the educational activities in those days.
A. Teacher and Pupil. Teacher : The teacher is called Guru in general sense (12.11; 25.26; 77.83; 82.45). The other terms used for the teacher are Uvajjhāya=Upadhyāya and Ayariya-Ācārya. Manu (2.141) tells us that an Upādhyāya took to the profession of teaching for his livelihood and taught only a portion of the Vedas and Vedāngas, whereas, an Ācārya did not charge fees and taught the Vedas along with Kalpasūtras and Upanişads (2.140). In the PCV the terms are used without any such distinction. Here the teacher of the Aranyakas (11.10), or Vidyās (traditional learning) (39.90) or archery (14.20) is equally called Upadhyāya and even the teacher of medical science or spells is called Ācārya (48.84).
The student is called 'Sisa - Śişya' or Antavāsī=Antevāsin (11. 10; 25.19; 25.20). Great respect was accorded to teachers by their pupils. An indirect reference to that effect is found in the PCV. Harişena says that the parents are also 'gurus' and they should not be pained even slightly (8.152). The teacher is mentioned as being always agreeable and affectionate to the pupils. A teacher should not cause even slightest anxiety to his pupil as the sun glitters without giving any pain to the eyes. To good pupils a teacher is very useful, while to bad ones he is like a scorching sun to the owls (97.23-24).
Remuneration of teachers: — There is no mention of fixing any remunera. tion for a teacher whether he was appointed by the parents of the pupils or he belonged to some distant place where the pupils went for their studies. The only remuneration paid to the teacher was to present him with gifts and to accord due reverence to him at the time of completo ing the education (sammāņa dāņa vihaveņa gurussa pūyam karei

Page #434

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
405
25.26; sampūio 39.90). Manu lays down that a pupil should not pay any fees to his teacher before he finishes his education (2.245) and teachers charging fees are condemned (3.156) by him. It is further said that a pupil should give to his teacher such presents as he can afford-such as field, gold, cow, horse, umbrella, shoes, grain, vegetables or cloths (2.246).
Age of studentship :-It is said that when boys became capable of grasping and retaining the meaning of subjects or became able to learn arts, they were entrusted to a teacher for their studies (Kalagahanadharanasahe 25.15; 97.12). Their education got completed when they attained full youth (sampatto jovvanam savva kalásu sāhiyavijjo puņo jayo balavīriya sampanno (18.56). The ancient literature reveals that the education commenced at the age ranging from five to eight years. The full youth indicates the marriageable age and on the attainment of that age the education got completed (24.9; 97.25; 98.1).
As regards the education of girls it will be sufficient to recapitulate that they were suitably educated in literature, arts and sciences. There are glimpses that co-education also prevailed and girls were sent out to the residence of the teacher for their studies.
Places of study:- The PCV reveals that the boys received their education at home town or were sent out to some other places. Rāma and his brothers (25. 23) and Lavaņa and Arkuša (97.22) received their education at their home towns at the feet of the teacher specially appointed for them. A princess of Cakrapura and a son of a purohita of the same place studied together at the residence of a common teacher (25. 4, 6). Kbirakadamba tought a prince, his son and a Brahmin boy in the forest (II. 9) in the vicinity of their home town. Princes Deśabhūşana and Kulabhūşaņa 'went to a place which was far away from their birth-place. They were completely entrusted to the teacher and when they returned after completing their education, they could not recognise even their kith and kin (39. 87-95). There were also renowned places where students flocked to from various parts of the country for their education. At Rājagļha Vaivasvat was training no less than 1000 pupils in archery. The teacher of Rāma had been trained there (25. 18). Śrīvardhita went to Vyāghrapura for learning sciences and arts (77.84). Kusumapura seems to be alluded to as a
1. See AIU, P, 582. 2, See Bhag Su, 11 11. 429. 3. See E AI pp 266, 274. 4. See Supra The position of Woman.

Page #435

406
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
good centre of learning medical science or spells (48.83-85). Vipra Ramana of Rajagrha is mentioned to have gone to some other place for his studies and he returned home after a long time (82. 44-46),
Other agencies :-No less part was played by the wandering mendicants who regularly gave sermons to the public on religion and indoctrinated the principles of morality and righteousness. They were the mobile teachers and roaming libraries. There were occasions when religious debates were held and on such occasions people got good opportunities to learn many things about religion, philosophy and ethics (11.25; 105.26).
Besides that the society was based on Jati or Varna i. e. the professional classes hence the respective families would have been good schools of training in different learnings, professions and crafts.
B. Subjects of study and Literature. The general references in connection with the education of children indicate that the education was manifold. Instructions were imparted in the Sastras, Vijñānas, Kalās and the Silpas. In support of the above the following general references can be quoted :
Satthāņi sikkhaveuń 11.65, savvasatthavisārao 25.3, nāņā vihai satthaim 97.22, bahusattha pandio 74.29; bahuvihavinnāņaladdhamhappa 25.25, vinnānasipparahiya 3.112; sikkhanti kalāgamam sayalam 12.11, savvakalāgama kusalā 97.25, kalāsu kusalā 25.26, savvam kalaga. magupaṁ sikkhai 77.84, savva kalasu sāhiyavijjo 18.56; sayaṁ ca sippāņa uvaittham 3.114. The reference to Šāstra is not necessarily to the sacred scriptures. It means also treatises on various secular subjects. Thus the PCV mentions 'nayasattha (8-5)=nyāyaśāstra. Further a Dūta= envoy is stated to have learned various Sastras (39.39). Here Sastras denote treatises on polity. Šāstras can be taken as works relating to arts and sciences also. The military science or archery is also called Isattha (25.24) or Isatthāgama (77.83)=Işuśāstra.
The following were the subjects which were studied in those days:-Script, Grammar, Prosody (livisattham, saddalakkhanań, chandar 24. 6), Jinaśāsanaśruti (Jiņavarasāsaņammisuipunnā 1. 19), Vedas (4. 80), Vedāngas, Upārgas (saigovalge vee 82. 45), Aranyakas (11. 10), Rāmāyaṇa (2. 116), Bhārata i. e. the great epic (105. 16), treatises on polity (nayasattha 8. 5) and Dhanurveda (12. 125; 25 18).
The Jinaśruti denotes the Jaina canonical literature which consists of 45 Agamas i. e. 12 Augas, 12 Upāägas etc. There is a specific reference to the Purvas and Augas which were studied by the monks

Page #436

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
407
(114. 23). The Vedas which are four in number are well-known as Rgveda, Yajurveda, Samaveda and Atharvaveda. The Vedangas are six1 in number. They are Siksa (phonetics). Kalpa (ritual), Vyakarana (grammar), Nirukta (exegesis), Chanda (metres) and Jyotis (astronomy). The Upangas are the supplementary or additional works such as the Puranas, the Nyāya, Mimāṁsā and the Dharmasastras2.
In connection with the education of Kaikeyī it is mentioned that she was educated and trained in Laukikajñāna (loyaṁ nāņaṁ 24. 8). It is also called as loiyasui (58 6) and loyasattha (2 107). As regards the popular learning (laukika śruta) the Anuyogadvarasutra and the Nandisutra mention the following works: Bharaha, Rāmāyaṇa, Bhīmāsurukka," Kodillaya (Kautilya), Ghodayamuha (mentioned as a politician in Arthas a stra and Kamasutra), Sagaḍibhaddiau, Kappasia, Nagasuhuma, Kanagasattari (according to H. R Kapadia it is the same as Sankhyakarika of Isvarakṛṣṇa), Vesiya, Vaisesiya, Buddhasasana, Kavila, Logayata, Saṭṭhiyanta, Madhara, Purana, Vāgaraṇa, Nadaga, seventy two arts, four Vedas with Angas and Upangas. The Nandisutra adds to them Teräsiya, Bhagava, Payañjali and Pussadeva.'
the
The references to Akkhāņa Akhyāna (48. 77), Jinindaniggan thakaha (32 97), Dhammakahā (96. 10), Parihāsakahā (74. 20) and Gandhavvakaha (53.20) denote the existence of narrative literature of various kinds. Some sciences and arts which have been specifically mentioned in the PCV (24.5-8). are:
=
Sciences -Writing and Scripts (livisattham), Military science (Dhanuvveda or Isattha already mentioned). Arithmetic (Ganiyam), Astronomy and Astrology, Medical science, Domestic sciences such as Cooking (Bhoyanavihi), the science of Prognostication (Nimittam or Atthanganimitta (7.80) which included eight branches relating to earthquake, portentous phenomena, dreams, various colours and forms of the sky, movement of limbs, voice of the birds, marks of the body and signs of distinction) and the sciences of dintinguishing
1. See Pradipa Tika on Patanjala Mahabhagya by Kaiyața-Ahnika I, p. 25 (Nirnayasagara press-1951).
2. MWSED, p. 213. See also Nandi. Su, 42; Anuyoga, Su, 41. Vide p. 29 of the Canonical literature of the Jainas by H. R. Kapadia.
3. Asurakkha in the Mulacara at 5. 60.
4. Vide LAI, p. 171.
5. The reference to Vaidyas is enough to establish that medical science was studied (see the section-Diseases and their cure).
See Sthananga, 8.608 and TP, 4,1002-1016.
6.

Page #437

408
A CRÍTICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
gems, flowers, elephants and horses (rayanavisesam kusumavisesam, gayaturayalakkhanam). There is a reference to the Garuḍaśāstra (15.45-48). It dealt with charms against snake bites.
Arts-Dressing and ornamentation (Aharanavihi), Music, Dance and Drama (Gandhavvam, Naṭṭam and Nadaya); Drawing, Painting. Plastering (Alekkham, leppamayam) and Sculpture; Architecture; Perfumery and Modelling of leaves (Gandhajjutti and Pattacchejjam).
Further general statements are made about other Kalās (annasu kalāsu 24.8). The Kalpasutra refers to 72 and 64 subjects of learning or arts for men and women respectively.1
SECTION 2. SCIENCES
A. Writing.
The PCV clearly mentions that writing (livi sattha 24.6) was taught to the students. A princess is referred to be learning alphabets with a pen in her hand (sā paḍhai akhharāiṁ lehanihattha payatteņam 26.5). Kings are said to be sending written messages (leha 26.94; 98.13-14). King Ativīrya sent a long letter to king Mahidhara calling him for his assistance with his forces. The letter is spread over 12 (gāthās) lines of the PCV (37. 3-14). Private and confidential letters (lehe sähinnāņe 77.45) are said to have been sent by Rama and Lakṣmaṇa to call for the girls offered to them (77.53) in marriage.
B. Astronomy.
A fair glimpse, in the PCV, of the division of time and the components of the solar system speaks of the developed stage of the science of astronomy. The time in general is denoted by the words 'kāla' (3.33, 8.10; 15.99; 20.66) and 'samaya' (16.50) and in particular as 'vela' (14.128) and its division is called 'kālavibhāga' (3.17). The time is divided into ratri (rattimdivam 75.85. rayani 8.154, nisă 12.19 rai 14.116) 'dina' (aha 22.74, diyaha 14.30, dina 7.138, divasa 14.55); fortnight (pakkha 42.4), the dark (bahula 10.107) and the bright (suddhapakkha 6.27 or sukka 20.68); month (māsa 15.96) which was based on lunar cycle as it is stated that the moon wanes and waxes in the dark and the bright fortnight respectively (bahulasukkapakkhe osarai pavadḍhai cando 20 68); and year (varisa 14.24, vasa 20.71, samvacchara 107.8; 114.27).
1. For their details see Sukhabodhika Tiku, p. 146-147 and LAI, p. 172-173. See Samavayanga for 72 Kalas.

Page #438

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
409
The middle of the day is called 'majjhanha (22.1) which indicates that the day was further divided into forenoon and afternoon. The division of a full day into eight Yamas can be inferred from the reference to the last Yama of night (pacchimajāma 25.1). Time of the union of day and night i. e. the dusk is referred to as 'sañjhāsamaya' (16.50). Besides that, the time of the union of night and day i. e. the dawn as well as the middle of the day i. e. the noon are also mentioned as 'sandhya' (tippisañjhão 7.14). Viyāla = vikala indicates the time after the sun-set (141.41), during that a Jaina is prohibited to take meals. Pradoșa-samaya is also mentioned (paosasamaa 70.50) in the sense of the night. The division of the day into 'muhurtas' was also known (14.125)
The fortnight consisted of nearly fifteen days and some of the 'tithis' are specifically mentioned in the Paumacariyam. They are viz. 'Pancamīdivasa' -54.28; Malasattami -89. 31, Bahulaatthami17.107 Dhavalaṭṭhami' -29 1; 66.14; Egarasi-73.34 and Pañcayasî65.14 or Pañcadasi 97.7. The Purnimanta basis of reckoning the lunar was prevalent. Thus there is mentioned that the day on which the moon entered the Śravana-nakṣatra, was called as Sravanapañcadasī (Savanasangae cande savaṇapancadasie 96. 7) The names of the following months have occurred in the Paumacariyam:-Cetta 6. 36; 17. 107; Jettha- 73.34; Asadha-29.1; Savana-97. 7: Kattigi-89.30 (i. e. Kartika Purnima) and Maggasira-6. 28; 54. 28. As far as the seven days are concerned only one of them i. e. Sunday is menioned (diyaho vibhāvasū=ravi-vasara 17. 107).
The year was divided into six seasons. They were Nidaha 11. 111 or Gimha 29. 21; Jalaya 22. 31 or Ghana 35. 28. or Pausa-29 40; Saraya-43, 1; Hemanta-31. 41; Sisira 26. 21 and Vasanta21. 46.
The knowledge of the people about solar astronomy was well advanced as it is testified by the evidences available in the Paumacariyam. There are categorical references to the planets (savve gaha 17. 110); contellations nakṣatras (nakkhattā 69. 54) and stars (tāragā 75. 34).
"
The solar bodies which have been specifically mentioned are: Planets :-Sura-14.115 or Ravi-17.108; Canda-12.137 or Sasi-17. 108; Ara (Mangala)-17.108; Buha-17.109; Gura-12.109; Bhaggava (Śukra) 17. 108; Sani-17. 109; and Rāhu-12.137. There is reference to the lunar eclipse when the moon is devoured by Rahu (Cando iva Rahugahanammi 12. 137).

Page #439

410
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Constellations:-The following nakṣatras are mentioned. Assiņi (Aśvini) 20. 55, Bharani 20. 42, Kittiya (Kṛttikā) 20. 43, Rohiņi 20. 44, Punavvasu (Punarvasu)-20. 30; Pussa (Puśya 20. 41;) Magha 20. 31, Hatta (Hasta) 20. 50. Cittă 20. 32, Visahā (Viśākhā-20.49), Apuraha (Anuradha 20. 34), Inda (Aindra or Jyeṣṭhā) 20. 29, Müla 20. 35, Puvvāsāḍha and Uttara asādha 20.36; 20. 27; 97. 7; Samana Savana (Śrāvana) 17.107; 97. 7; Sayabhisa (Satabhisaj) 20. 38; Uttarabhaddavaya 20. 39 and Revai (Revati) 20. 40. Thus nineteen of the twenty-seven nakṣatras have been mentioned. Some of the months are specifically mentioned. They themselves indicate the corresponding nahṣatras-viz. Maggasira for Mrgaśiras, Phagguna for Phalgunis and Jettha for Jyeṣṭhā (6.27; 66. 14; 74. 34).
Zodiacs -The zodiacs which have been referred to specifically are Meşa (Mesa-17.108), Vrsa (Vasabha-17.108), Karka (Kulira and 17.108), Kanya (Kaņņā 17.109), Makara (Mayara 17.108) Mina (Miņa 17.109).
C. Astrology.
The art of judging the influence of stars upon human affairs is called astrology. The PCV reveals that people had great faith in astrology. On various social and political occasions people took into consideration the timely planetary position to find out whether the particular time was auspicious or inauspicious. This subject has already been dealt under popular beliefs. Here it is to be noted that astrologers (ganiyaņu 17,107 or nakkhastapāḍhaya 17.112) were consulted on various occasions. The PCV states that on the occasion of the birth of Hanu, an astrologer read out the planetary position and foretold after calculation that Hanu would be a great person (balabhogarajja sāmiddhi) and would attain liberation (17.111-118). Thus the PCV reveals that astrology had developed greatly and it had become a pseudo. science.
D. Medical Science.
Diseases and their cure :-The act of curing or healing the deseases was called Tigiccham (Cikitsam 110.27. The physician was called Vaidya (Vejja 22.64). Roga or Vähi (Vyadhi) denoted the general desease (3.124; 13.33). Osahi (Oṣadhi 3.158) denoted the herb while Osaha (Auşadha 22.46) meant the medicine compounded of several ingredients. The engaging of Vaidyas for making a diagnosis of the disease of an elephant indicates that veterinary doctors were also available (81.12).

Page #440

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
411
The PCV refers to Jvara (22.63), the fever (63.36); Dāhajvara=the hot fever or inflammatory fever (63.26); Pittajvara = the bilious fever (37.22); Kuştha vyādhi = the leprosy (77.101); Upaghāta=the morbid affection; weakness or mental sickness (63.26); Sphoțaka=the swelling, boil or tumour (63.26); Aruci=the want of appetite (63.26); Śūla=the shooting of acute or sharp pain in the body (63.26); and Māri (2.7.32)=the epidemic or pestilence which is fatal in form. The reference to vāūpa vilanghiyāl 109.2 (vāyunā vasiksta PCR, 114.2) indicates the disease of rheumatism or paralysis.
On the occasion of a break of epidemic there were large scale death. It is said that an epidemic spread due to the air which was infected with (germs of) diseases (bahurogasamubbhavam vāur 65.68).
Disabled persons such as the blind (andha), the deaf (badhira), the dumb (mūka), the lame (paigu), men having one arm withered (Kuņi 2.77), the dwarf (vāmaņa) and the hunch-backed (khujja= kubja) 14.31 are referred to in the PCV.
Patients were cured by administering drugs (81.12). Taste of medicines differed. There is a reference to Kaduosaham (70.10), the pungent drug.
Sandal-wood was very commonly used for curing men who fell in swoon. Its water was sprinkled (30.14) or its paste was applied on the body (64.37) for the same.
The very name of Višalyā indicates that surgery was prevalent in those days. Višalyā cured Lakşmana who was wounded in the battlefield. Many other wounded soldiers also were healed by her treatment (64.63). .
On the sudden death of Lakşmaņa, Rāma became quite mad. He used to do incoherent work just as carrying the dead body of Lakşmaņa on hls shoulders, feeding him etc. This madness was cured by showing to him the same type of incoherent works. This is an instance of psychological treatment. (Ch. 113).
Besides the administering of drugs, two other practices were in vogue for curing the diseased persons. One was the enchanting of some spell or charm (manta-mantra 32.64; 81.12; 110.27). There is a reference to the charmers who used to acquire charms on the cemetery ground. They are called Janguliyātāra (105.57). The

Page #441

412
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Sthānanga1 mentions that the Jangoli was one of the eight branches of Ayurveda. It was a charm for undoing the poisonous effect. It is alluded that snake-bites were cured by charms (15. 45-48). The other practice was the common belief in the efficacy of the superhuman powers or the divine qualities of human beings. (22. 67; 77. 93, 94; 14. 84). There is a reference to a Vejjakaḍaya or Osahivalaya (48. 84, 85, 90) which was powerful enough to cure various diseases or the abnormal conditions caused by the attack of infernal beings such as a Graha, Bhuta, Uraga or a Pisaca (gahabhūoragapisāyavāhio). It seems to be a magic ring which was used for medical purposes. Austerity was also considered to be an effective method of curing the diseases (20. 131, 132).
It would not be out of way to mention here the 'Halahala', a deadly poison referred to in the PCV (70. 17).
E. Cooking (Food and Drinks).
Cooking formed one of the important subjects of women's education (24. 7). Under this head we can treat Food and Drinks.
The desire for food is one of the primary instincts of life, which manifests itself in hunger and thirst. What religion is for the spirit or soul, eating (solid food) and drinking (liquid food) are for hunger and thirst. The spirit resides in a physical body and it is necessary that the body is properly maintained. Growth and nourishment are the two aspects of maintenance and it is well referred to in the PCV, that they depend on food." Thus the PCV reveals that the people were well aware of the importance and the functions of food.
The food in general is denoted by 'Ahara' and 'Bhoyana'. It consisted of two kinds of articles viz. solid (khāna) and liquid (Pāna). Solid food is indicated by 'Bhatta' also (asaņāieņa bhattaṁ laddham jaha pāņiyaṁ ca tisieņam (35. 42); jam bhunjanti kubhattam (20. 166). Sometimes 'Bhatta' indicated general food (nisibhattam 14. 138). The
1. Abhayadeva's commentary, 8. Su.6:1. 'Viṣavighatatantram'.
2. Asanaiena bhattam laddham jaha piniyam ca tisienam/
taha tujjha pasāenam sahava dhammo mae laddho'-35. 42.
3. 'Dhanneņa vadḍhiyam ciya mahisikhirena posiyam deham-26. 41.
4. bhuñjai paramāhāram 53. 59; 'sauņam aharakaraṇatthae 39. 69; pattaphalaharo 65. 40; ikkhurasacciya ähāro 3. 111; ähāramandava 81- 6.
5. 'bhoyanam bhuttam 77.33; 'bhoyanamandava' 69. 13 and 'nisibhoyana, 14.147.
6. 'bahukhāṇapānabhoyanasaesu' 14. 94; hahupaṇakhan abhoyaṇa-26; ahārakhanapāņavihim 14. 139.

Page #442

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
413
term "Āhāra' is used also in the sense of solid food (ahārapāņa 3. 60, 110; 81. 13).
Categories of food :—The two categories of food-solid and liquid, are further subdivided into four kinds (cauvihāhāram 5.241: 14.125). They are termed as 'Asaņa, Pāņa, Khāima and Saima'. (asana=rice etc. pāņa=gruel etc; Khaima=fruits etc: and saima=betel leaf etc). The commentary of Vasunandi Śramaņa on the Mülācāra (1.20) mentions bhaktādi=rice etc; dugdhādi = milk etc; laddukadi=sweets etc; and ailādi=cardamom etc. as the articles of four different categories respectively. The Ratnakarandaśrāvakācāra mentions 'anna' i. e. food of grains under Asaņa and 'lehyam' i. e. articles to be licked, under Sãimam! The Mülācāra at 9.54 calls 'lehyam' and 'svădyam' as the same but adds two inore categories, viz. bhojaṁ=bhojyam and pejjam =peyam, Bhojyam is explained as 'bhakşyam=i. e to be chewed while 'peyam' is said to be 'stokabhaktapānabahulam' i, e, a mixture of less solid and more liquid. In the Sanskrit literatures five categories are referred to. They are 'Bhakşya' (to be chewed and eaten i. e. flour preparations), 'Bhojya' (eaten without chewing, i. e. rice etc.) 'Lehya' (to be licked i. e. liquid condiments), 'Cūşya' (to be sucked i. e. mango pickles etc). and 'Peya' (to be drunk i. e. milk, wine etc). The PCR (24.53-55) mentions that 'Bhakşya' is 'Āsvādya' i. e. for taste, 'Bhojya' meant for quenching the hunger (kşudhā) and it consisted of eatables such as Yavāgu and rice; Peyam included cool-drinks, water and wine, the other two categories were Lehya and Cūşya.
Cereals:-The following cereals are mentioned in the PCV. The corns in general are denoted by dhanna=dhanya? (3.158;5.163;26.41). Sali (99.29), Vrihi (4.76), Tandula" (33 16), and Kodrava (103.11) the different varieties of rice. The reference to 'dhannam'at 41.4 (dhaņņam ca rannajāyam) is to the wild corn growing in the forest. Java 4.76;11.25) is the barley, Canaka (gram), (Mudga-kidneybean) and Māsa (horse-bean) are the pulses (33.16). Tila (sesame) and Sarsapa (mustard) are the oil seeds (33.16;97.10).
Spices :— There is a reference to the Lavanga (6. 41 )and it must have been used as an ingredient of spices.
1, Sthānāäga, 4.295 with Abhayadevaguri's commentary; Bhag. Sü, 3.1.134. 2. Vide Jaina 7caryo ka Saşanabheda by J. K. Mukhtira p. 26. Sam, 1985, 3. India in Kalidasa, pp. 165-6. 4. See Sthānanga, 3,155; Tiloya pannatti, 4,500, 5. Bt-Sanh, 77.2. 6. Ibid.

Page #443

414
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
- Milk: -The Milk (khira=kşīra 3.46: 26.1 or dugdha 115.8) of cows and buffaloes is said to be very nutritive article of food. Payasa ( 115.8 rice gruel), Dadhi (115.8. curd). Sappi=Sarpis ( 14.85 clarified butter) and Ghaa (3.158 Ghsta=ghee) were the different preparations of milk.
Sugar:-The sugar and jaggery are called Sayara or Sakkara (Sarkarā) and Gula (115.8,9) respectively. Modaka (115.9) and Ladduga (84.4) are the sweets. Manda (Māņda 84.4) seems to be the rice-g ruel or a sort of pastry or baked flour. Madhu (honey 3.158;14.85) is also referred to. The use of sugarcane-juice (Ikkhurasa=Ikşurasa 3.111;41. 31) was very common.
Fruits :-The use of fruits was very common specially with those who lived in forest (33.10). At times leaves were also used for food (pattaphalahariņi 63 45;65.40). Recluses depended on fruits and roots (phalamulai kayā hāro 8.155). The following fruits have been mentioned: mango (42.7), pomegranate (42.6), rose-apple (20.39), wood-apple (42.6), and grapes (53.79). Relishing rice-gruel prepared with the chips of orange, bread-fruit, terminatia catappa, bannana, datefruits and coconut (41.9) hase also been referred to.
The betel leaves were chewed fondly by the people (46, 72; 70. 50; 80.30),
Kitchen, Cook and Food preparations : -Well-to-do and noble families engaged cooks for the management of their kitchen (Sūvayāra=Sūpakāra 113. 7). Süvayāravai denotes that under him many assistants worked 22. 73). These food specialists prepared testeful, fragrant and relishing plates (miusurahisaukaliyam 77. 33). It is further said that the preparations were pleasant and agreeable to the five senses and the mind (pañcanham irdiyatthāņam itțarn suham maņojjam 77. 33). Thus it reveals that the food was made as pleasant as possible so that it provided wholesome satisfaction to the mind and body. Even the water used for drinking was saturated with fragrance (surabhigandhajala 115. 11). There are categorical references to various kinds of food preparations (nāņāviha bhattar 77. 32; bhoyaņāṁ bahuviyappam 69. 15). Thus the PCV refers to 108 kinds of preparations of eatables (atthasayakhajjayajuttam 69.16), 64 varieties of dainties (causațțhivañjanaviyappan 99.16) and 16 kinds of rice preparations (solasa oyana bheyam 69. 16).
1. See Tiloyapannatti, 4 347 also.

Page #444

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
415
Utensils :-Generally the utensils were called bhāyaṇas=bhājanas (3. 37; 115. 13). Utensils of gold or set with jewels are mentioned (sovaņņiyabhāyabhāyaṇesu 20. 165; kañcanarayanamayāim 102.20). The PCV refers to the following specific utensils : Bhingāra (Bhịågāra 69.14; 102. 120) was the small pitcher with a slender neck and a spout attached to it. It was water receptacle used at the time of dining. Thāla (sthala 102; 120; 115. 10) was a big plate. A small plate or dish was called Thalliyā (sthālikā 20. 166). Pidhara is referred to in the sense of an earthen plate (Pithara 33. 85). Vațţaa (102.120; 115. 10) was a round cup type vessel. Patti (Pātri 115. 10) was a round and deep vessel Then there was the bowl (Khappara = Karpara 20. 166). Vaddhamāņaya (Vardhamānka 102. 120) was a saucer. Kaccolya (Kaccolaka) 102.120) was a kind of vessel round and deep. Kandu (118. 6) was the cauldron, a boiling vessel. The earthen pot was called Ghața (20.166) or Kumbha (69. 8). The Kalasa was the pitcher. Golden pitcher is also referred to (kapaya kalasa 115.11). In forests the purpose of utensils was served by leaves and bamboos.
Dining : The royal families are referred to be maintaining separate dining halls (bhoyaņa-mandava 69.13, Bhoyanaghara 77.32 or Āhāramapdava 81. 6). It is often mentioned that the lunch was taken after taking a bath (69.11-13; 77.31-32; 34.13). The procedure of dining is worth noting. The PCV reveals that as soon as Rāvana entered the dining hall, he was provided with a seat. The warriors accompanying him also duly occupied their respective seats. Their seats consisted of low couches of cane shining with gold-work. They were equipped with cushions and coverings of cloth sheet (attharayavaramasūraya? -vettasaņakañcanamaesu 69.14). First of all they were provided with pitchers or jugs of water (bhingäravihi) and then they were served with food-articles of various kinds. Thus the procedure indicates that the people had developed good aesthetic sense.
Meat :--The PCV refers to taking of meat by lower classes and the Mlecchas. Meat-takers are referred to be attaining hell (26.36). This non-vegetarian diet is called Amişāhāra (3.15). The meat is called Māṁsa (26.37; 22.74). It refers to Pisita' - Pisita, flesh also. It means the meat which is cut up or prepared. The life killed for obtaining the flesh consisted of animals, birds, and fishes. The taking of the flesh of bull (5,100) and sheep (41.55) is referred to. The PCV further
1. Masūraka is explained as a linted i.c. thin piece of timber or stone that
covers an opening and supports a weight above it (EHAP, 414). In the PCV it may mean a support for holding dining plates.

Page #445

416
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
mentions another work which mentioned that the elephants and buffaloes were used for the food of the Raksasas (2.111,116). In the same context it refers to the taking of marrow and blood of animals. The acquatic animals and birds were killed for food (26.40; 39.60). The slaughtering of Sumsumāra=Sisumára is mentioned. It is further stated that in the Atiduşşamākāla the reptiles would be also used for food (20.92). King Saudāsa is mentioned to be taking human flesh (22.75). The story of Saudāsa reveals that slaughtering houses were in existence and on religious days they remained closed (22.74).
Drinks :-Eating meat and drinking wine are looked down in the PCV (26.47). Wine is denoted by Surā (26.47), Madira (70.51) and Āsava (11.43). The PCV reveals that the liquors were distilled and saturated with various kinds of fragrant juices for making them pleasant to drink (102 122). Nine sources of distilled spirits referred to in the Carakasaṁhită are paddy, fruits, roots, pith, flowers, stalks, leaves, barks and sugar'. The Carakasaṁhita calls the distilled spirits as Asavas”. The Arthaśāstra mentions Āsava as a variety of wine. 3 The PCV mentions the following varieties of liquors :Kadambari (102.122; 113.10), Prasannā (78.51; 102.122), Madhu, Sidhu (70.53, 34). The Kādambari was prepared out of the fruits of Kādamabara tree. The Prasanna's preparation is described in the Kautilya Arthaśāstra." The Madhu was prepared from the juice of grapes. The Sidhu was a product of the juice of sugarcane.? The Nāya dhammakahao refers to Surā, Maeya, Prasanna and Sidhu as different varieties (16. p. 179). In the works of Kalidasa we find mention of the Madhu, Madira, Kādambari, Sidhu, Madya and the Asava. The wine glass or drinking peg is referred to as Casaka (113.10) in the PCV. It refers to the Raksasa couples who took wine and enjoyed (70.51-36) the night before the final battle. Rāma, in the state of his madness is said to have offered Kadambari to the dead body of Lakşmaņa (113.10).
1. Caraka Samhitā Sūtraşthānam 6.48. Also See its Translation by Avinash acandra
Kaviratna. 2. Ibid. 3 Kautilya, 2. 25. 19. 4. R, L. Mitra, Indo. Aryan, Pt. I. p. 426 Vide J. C. Jain's LAI, p. 125, 5. 2. 25. 18. 6. Ibid. 2. 25. 14. 7. Mallinātha on Raghuvamsa, 16.52. 8. See India in Kalidasa, p. 196-197.

Page #446

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
417
F. Flora and Fauna.
It has already been mentioned that the sciences of distinguishing flowers, horses and elephants formed the subjects of education (24.6. 7). The rich data regarding the flora and the fauna available in the PCV indicates that the author had good knowledge of the various kinds of vegetations and animals found in the country.
Flora :-The general idea conveyed by the Paumacariyam about the richvegetation is that the country was covered with large belts of forests in the north as well as in the south. Rāma is said to have passed through various forests lying through-out the country. The PCV reveals that not only the hilly regions and the southern plateau but even the alluvial plains of today were rich with forests. The towns abounded in gardens and groves and in their vicinity there could be seen woodlands. Today we find that the natural vegetation has been cleared off by the growing population of the country in order to cultivate the land for the supply of food grains and commercial commodities, still the hilly regions and some other areas retain the heredity of natural woodlands.
The forest is called Adavi=Atavi (32.10) and Mahāvana=: Mahāvana (32.42). Mahādavi= Mahātavi meant a big forest. It is also (39.1) called as Raņņa (Aranya). There is no distinction between an Adavi=Atavi and a Raņņa (94.40; 38.21.22). Some of the forests were so terrific that they have been called Ghora (18.28) or Bhima (32.42). In the rainy season when the wild vegetation cropped up abundantly, the sight of the forest became alarming (Uttāsaņaa 22.35) on account of the dense trees and the movement of wild beasts and animals. Sometimes the vegetation was destroyed by conflagration (94.40). Besides these forests, the gardens (Ārāma), parks (Ujjāņa= Udyāna) and groves (Kāņaņa=Kānana) situated outside the towns were also full of rich vegetation (8.267; 15.50; 33.20; 86.33). Sea-shore abounding in vegetation is also referred to (8.261). Then there were the lakes and ponds which abounded in flowery-plants (5.55f ; 15.50).
The general term used for the entire kingdom of vegetation is 'Vanaspati' (102.93) which can be divided into several classes such as, the trees called as Pāyava = Padapa (8.26), Taru (33.148) or Rukkha= Věkşa (21.54); the plants or shrubs (Duma=Druma 15.28) and the creepers (Valli, Layā=Latā 39.1). Duma is not strictly used to denote the plants only but it meant the trees also (20.36,44,47). According to their taste the trees have been divided into Titta=Tikta (punjent), Mahura = Madhura (sweet), Kaduya=Katuka (bitter 14.43) and
27

Page #447

418
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Lonarukkha = Lavaņavşkşa (saltish 42.7). The juicy tree is called Khirarukkha - Kșira-vřkşa (34.37). Various parts of tree are referred to as Vidava=Vitapa (twig or branch); Pallava = leaves (3 50; 33.18); Puşpa=flowers (92.6); Phala (fruits 2.33); Pavāla (Pravāla 92.6); Kisalaya (new shoots).
The vegetable kingdom may be dealt under different heads, namely trees, plants, climbers or creepers, grass, reeds and acquatic plants.
Treis:-A large variety of trees have been mentioned in the PCV. Some of them whose fruits big or small were commonly used as food articles were the Mango: Magnifera Indica (Amba = Amra 42. 7, Sahayāra==Sahakāra 21.49, Sahāra and Caya=Cūta 53.79) which grew richly in Laikā, Dandakāraṇya and on the Vasantagiri; the Bread fruit: Artocarpus Integrifalia (Phaņasa=Panasa) which grew in the Dandaka forest (41. 9), Pariyātra 33. 2 and Lalika (46.74); the Orange (Nāraliga) which grew in the Dandaka (41.9) and Laukā (46. 74); the Pomegranate (Dādima) which grew in the Dandakāraṇya (42. 6) and the Gangetic-highlands (21. 48); the Rose-apple: Eugenia Jambolana (Jambu 20. 39); the Banana: Musa Sapientum (Kayali - Kadali) which grew wildly in the Dandaka (42.9); the Wood-apple: Aegle Marmelos (Villa=Bilva) which was found in the Dandaka (42.6) and Laikā (53. 79); and the Clove-(Lavanga) which grew largely in the Vanaradiva (6. 41).
The trees of the saltish soil which generally grew in the belts of forests lying in the vicinity of the sea-coasts were the different species of the palm-tree; the Coconut tree (Naliera or Nalieri = Nalikera) and the Date: Phoenix sylvestris (Khajjūra or Khajjūri=Kharjūra) grew in the Daņdaka forest (41. 9; 42. 9) and Lalika (53. 79); the Tan-palm:
Borassus flabelliformis or the Palmyra (Tāla) grew richly in the Dandaka forest (42.9); the Areca-catechu: Puyapphali = Pūgaphali grew abundantly in Laikā (53. 79); and the Punnaga, calophyllum grew in Laika and Dandakäranna (6. 101, 53. 79; 46, 74; 42. 6).
The fig-trees belong to the class of the trees having bigger girth. They are resinous and there is a reference to the Khira-rukkha (KșiraVrksa 34. 37) in the PCV. They were the Vada (Vata or Nyagrodha 53. 79; 36. 29; 33. 18)-- Ficus Indica or Banyan tree; the Udumbara: Ficus Glomerata which were very common in the Pāriyātra (33. 2), Avantideśa (33. 18), Dandakāraṇya (42. 6. 7); the Deccan plateau and Laika (36. 29); and the Āsattha (aśvattha): Ficus religiosa which grew in Dandakāraṇya (42. 6). All these trees are mighty and provide abundant shade. They bear fig fruits and their bark yields a resinous

Page #448

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
419
milky juice. They are regarded as sacred and are called Caitya trees in the Indian literature.
Then there was a large number of other trees which grew in wild forests or in the cultivated gardens. They may be dealt with according to the places where they grew in abundance:
The Padmaudyana of Laikā (53. 79) and the Dandaka (42. 6) forest abounded in the Kujjaya (Kubjaka) : Rosa moschato, Campaya (Campaka): Michelia Campaka which bears yellow fragrant flowers, Tilaya (Tilaka): Symplocos recemosa which bears beautiful fragrant flowers during the spring season and Ankolla (Aukotha) : Alangium Hexapetalum.
The Vasantagiri (21.46), the highland of the northern plains situated some where on the route between Hastināpura and Sāketa, abounded in the following trees which blossomed in the spring season Rattāsoya (Raktāśoka): a species of Asoka (Saroea Indica-Jonesia Asoka) called red Asoka; Kimsuya (Kirsuka): Butea frondosa which bears beautiful flowers without smell and is ordinarily the common Palasa", Palasa (Palása 28.109): Butea frondosa which bears beautiful flowers redder than Kimsuka and Ajjuna (Arjuna): Terminalia Arjuna, a species of the teak tree which is also mentioned to be growing in the interior of the Dandaka forest (42. 6) and in the Padmaudyäna of Laikā (53. 79).
The Padmaudyāna of Laikā (58. 79), the slopes of the Vasantagiri (21. 49) and the Vasantatilakaudayāna of Sāketa (3. 134) flourished in the Asoya (Fonesia Asoka) which bears magnificent red flowers; the Punnāga : Rottleria Tinetoria; the Naga : Mesua Roxhurghii, the Baula (Bakula) : mimusaps Elengi; the Tilaya (Tilaka) and the Campaya (Campka).
Further the Padmaudyāna of Lankā (53.70) was richly vegetated with the Kunda trees, which bear white aud delicate flowers; the Mandāra : coral tree, Erythrina Indica, which is referred to in the ancient Indian literature as one of the five trees of paradise; the Ruddakkha (Rudrāksa): Elacocarpus Ganitrus whose berry is used for making rosary; the Devadāru: Pinus Deodara, a gigantic pine tree very common to the Himalayan mountains; the Dhāyai (Dhātaki): Grislea Tomentosa; the Rayani (Rajadāni): Buchanania Latifolia; the Padali (Patala): Bignonia suaveolens; the Vamha (Brahman) Butea
1, The MWSED calls it a plant while the PSM calli it a tree. The PCV
includes it among the trees. 2. Ibid. 3. IK, p. 39,

Page #449

420
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
frondosa or Ficus Glomerata; and the Sattavaņņa (Saphaparna): Alstonia Scholaris which has seven leaves on its stalk.
The interior of the Dandaka forest abounded in (42.6f) the Dhava: Mimosa Hexandra; the Sirisa (Sirisa): Acacia Sirisa; the Khaira: Khadira, Acacia catechu; the Sāga (Sāka): Accasia Sirissa, the teak tree; the Dhammaņa; Grewia Elastica; the Sarala: Pinus Deodara, a variety of pine tree; the Kayamba (Kadamba), Nauclea Cadamba; the Ambādaya (Amrātaka): the Hog Plum, Spondias Mangifera; the Kavittha (Kapittha): Feronia Elephantum; the Tinduga (Tinduka): Diospyros embryopteris; the Nimba: Azadirachta Indica; the Nandi, Anogeissus Latifolia (20.42) and the Aimuttaya (Atimuktaka): the Harimantha, Premna Spinosa.
Stray references are made to the Kimpāga (Kimpāka 33.42;7.10): Trichosanthes Palmata; Kurabaya (Kurabaka): ret Barleria Crila; Kudaya (Kutaja 11.119): Wrightia antidysenterica; Araluga (Arațu:) Colosanthes Indica; Sami (Sami): Mimosa Suma; Bayari (Badari): Jujube tree; Māullingi (Mātulingi): citron-tree; Inguya (Inguda): Terminalia catappa; Candana (21.54): Sandal-tree, richly available in the Malaya region; Kapparukkha (Kalpavšksa 3.35), a desire fulfilling tree; Indataru (Indrataru 20.29): Teriminalia Arjuna; Mallidduma (Mallidruma 20.35) and Dahivanna (Dadhi parņa 20.41) Feroni elephantum.
Plants :- Many species of plants are mentioned in the Paumacariyam. They are as follows:
The Jasmine plants which flourished in the Padmaudyāna of Larikā (53.79) are the Mālai (Malati), Jasminum Grandi florum; Jūhiyā (yüthikā), Jasminum Auriculatum; Malliyā (Mallika), Jasminum Zambac; Sattali (Saptalā or Navamallikā), Arabian Jasmine; Kundalayā (Kundalata), Jasminum species, white and delicate, referred to be growing on the Vasantagiri (21.49) also. Other flower-bearing plants are the Kandali; Sinduvārā: Vitex Negundo; Piyaligu (Priyaugu), Aglaia odorata; and Kujjaya (Kubjaka) which is included among the plants and mentioned to be growing in Laukā, Padmaudyāna and Dandaka (42.8) forest. Keyari (?) (Ketaki) flourished in the Dandaka (42.9). It is Pandanus odoratissimus, a green plant with needle-pointed blades and bears strong smelling flowers.
Creepers : -The followring are creepers Kundalatā referred to in the PCV :-Kundalayā (21.49); Sinduvārā (53.79); Tumba (29.24) or gourd Lagenaria vulgaris; Dakkha (Drākṣā - 53.79), the vine

Page #450

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
421
creeper abundantly growing in the Padmaudyāna of Larkā and Tambollavalli (Tāmbūla 46.72), the betel creeper.
The following are the species of vegetation which have not been identified. Cilla; The PSM calls it a tree. The PCV refers to it as used for worshipping the Jinas (66.19); Kadāhā (Kațāhā); Māyas; Kañcaņārā (Kañcanārā); Korințayā (Koranțaka); and Rattakoriņțayā which grew in the Padmaudyāna of Lankā (53.79). Hila druma growing on the Vasantagiri is referred to at 21.48.
Then the Mallidduma (Mallidruma 23.35), Kaņayalaya (Kanakalatā 36.16), Candanalayā (53.67) and Sirimanjari (27.43) are also referred to.
Grass : -The grass is called Tapa (Trpa) in the general sense. It is said that in the rainy season the land was decked all round with green grass (hariyatana sāmalarigi 11.119). It formed the main fodder of the animals which are mentioned as Tanacārī (N.29). There is an allusion to Kusa grass, here called as Dabbha (Darbha 18.18). It is Poa Cynosuroides whose leaves are very long and sharp pointed. Kása (Kāśa): Saccharum Spontaneum is a kind of long grass which blossoms in the autumn season and bears white flowers. It is used for roofs and mats. Its flowers are compared with the grey hairs of an old person (21.76). The example of lofty grass is the Vamsa (43.21) or Venu (63.39). It is the common bamboo referred to be growing wildly in the Dandaka forest (43.21) and in the Sīhanināda Ațavi (94.44). The Vamśagiri (39.4) situated in the vicinity of the Dandakāranya seems to be very abundantly flourishing in the bamboos.
Flowers :--The PCV mentions two types of flowers (Jaiayathalaya kuśumā 12.37) i. e. of water and of land. The latter variety has already been dealt with in the preceding pages. It may be noted that the flowers of various colours have been referred to. Generally they are mentioned to be of five types (6.20 Kusumapañcavannehi). They are the (siya, dhavala) white (nila) blue, (hariya) green, (rattārupa) red and (yellow) fowers (42.13). Now we take up the account of the flowers of winter or acquatic plants. They are mentioned to be growing abundantly in the inland waters such as rivers (Narmadā 10.39, Jāhnavi 94.50, Karnaravā 42.20), lakes (Mānasa 16.46 and other lakes in the southern plateau land 42.11), ponds, pools and tanks (Dihiyāvāvī, situated in the parks & gardens of the cities 78.54; 5.55).
As a water flower, the lotus has been widely mentioned. Its many names given in the PCV are : Kamala (42.11), Pankaya

Page #451

422
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
(Pankaja 5.55), Uppala (Utpala 78.55), Aravinda (46.3) and Nalini (94.50). It is said that the lotuses closed at the time of sun-set (2.99). There are several references to Pauma (Padma 24.7) which belongs to this type of lotuses. Then there is the Kumuda which belongs to the other variety (43.2) called the water-lily. The species of the former type of lotuses are: Pundaria (Pupdarīka), the white one (78,54); Pauma uppala (24.7), the blue one (Indivara ghana säma 38.30). The species of the other type of lotuses is Kuvalaya (16.38), the blue one which opens at night. The surface of a pond completely covered with lotuses is called either Kamalinivaņa (53.80) or Paumasara (15 50).
Besides the lotus plants, the PCV refers to the Sevāla (Saivāla) which disappeared on the advent of Sarad-kāla (30.2). It is the moss which grows abundantly over the surface of the water during the rainy season.
Fauna :-The author has taken notice of the animal life while describing the forest regions, hilly-tracts, gardens and groves, sea-shores, the banks of the rivers, lakes and other water-pools. While referring to the social aspect of the life of the people, the author has mentioned some domestic animals and pleasing birds. Besides that many animal creatures have found an important place in the narratives dealing with the previous births of the characters of the main story. The Karma-theory which is an indispensable feature of Jainism has connected the previous lives of the characters with the animal creatures and with the working of their passions reared on enmity and affection just on the lines of the human nature. There are occasions when the animals have been referred to in poetic similes?. Further in accordance with the belief of the people, the animals have been mentioned as foreboding good or evil.
The general term used for the whole kingdom of animals is the Tiriya (5.101; 14.28) or Tirikhha (Tirya 2.59), The animal life can be divided into the categories of beasts (Pasuya 11.70; 14.29; or Cauppaya 46.63), birds (Pakkhi 42.15; 117.16 or Sauna 16.50), reptiles (Sarissava 20.92), acquatic animals (Jalayara 26.40) and small creatures (Kida 1.26 or Jantu 6.137). Other mode of classification can also be discerned from the words used in the work. Thus they can be put as the animals feeding upon other creatures (Jivāhāra 14.17) called beasts of prey (Sāvayā 3.82; 17.49; 42.12) or the carnivorous animals
1. 50.9; 82.38, 51; 88.6; 103.18-20. 2.2.16-18; 3.3; 6.175; 8.176; 178; 42,18; 100.58. 3. 7.17; 34.36-37.

Page #452

EDUCATION AND ARCHITEGTURE
423
(Kavvāyasattă 22.35) and those consuming grass (Tanacāri 14.29), called herbivorous animals.
In the following lines the animal life is studied under various heads such as the wild beasts, domestic animals, reptiles, acquatic animals birds and finally the worms and insects.
Wild-Beasts : The wild life is said so be infesting the forests of Pāriyātra (32.10), Citrakūta (33.6f), Dandaka (42.10) and Simhanināda as well as the mountains of Mandara (3.78), Aștāpada (Kailasa 9 53, 57) and other hills (32.15).
Among the wild beasts mentioned in the PCV, Saraha (Sarabha) also called as Sārdūla or Aştāpada is stronger than a lion (17.82) and an elephant (33.6). It is a fabulous animal supposed to have eight legs and to be inhabiting the spowy mountains. The lion is called as Pañcamuha (Pañcamukha 96.14), Siha (Simha 94.47), Hari (32.10), Kesari (Keśarin 42.10), Mayarāya (2.17) or the king of the beasts (Rāyā savvapasavānam 14. 104), and an inherent enemy of dear (2. 116). The lioness (Sihi or Simhini) and her cubs (Kisora) are referred to (78. 28). The tiger (Vaggha = Vyāghra 56.44); the hyaena (Traccha=Taraksa 42.13); the hunting leopard (Cittaya 14. 17); the boar (Varāha 3. 82) or Dadhi (Damstrin 103. 19); Vaya=Vșka (118. 7), the Jackal (Kolhuya 3: 79), Jumbüya (Jambūka 15. 54), Siyāla (Srgāla 22. 81 or Gomāu 71.26); the Yak (Camara 32. 10); a wild variety of buffalo 94.105 or Gavala 88. 6; and the bear (Accha=Rkşa 42. 12, Bhalla 14.17.32.15) or Riccha 94.45 are mentioned. The deer is called Hariņa (33.8), Maya (Mrga 94.41), Kurariga (103.19), Sārauga (82.20), Ruru (103.20 ) or Rohiya (Rohita 42.12). Maya (Mrga) meant also the beasts in general (2.17). The first two are the general terms for the deer whlle the remaining four are the different varieties of deer. Hariņi, the doe is also referred to (16.3), the hare (Sasaya = Saśaka 42.12; 58.9; 82.38) and the monkey (Pavangama = Plavarigama 9.132, Vānara 94.41, Plavaga 14.18 or Hari 3.12) also find references.
Domestic Animals : -The elephatnt is called Hatthi (Hastin 2.17), Māyanga (Matarga 96. 14), Gaya (Gaja 3. 61), Kuñjara (2 111), Kari (Karin 42.18) or Váraņa (4.59). References to both the types of elephant i. e. the wild (94.105; 33.6) and the domestic(4.2.12; 32.10; 9.59) are available The tame elephants were used in war (4.59; 12.113). They formed a separate column of the Caurangabala (Catura gabala 8.242) and were of immense use in the battlefield (46.24; 90.13;). The kings preferred its ride in the battle (10.61, 64) or in the publlc processions (3.2; 77.2). Regular training was given to the princes

Page #453

424
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
in controlling and taming (8.218, 223) the turbulent and wild elephants. It was very common conveyance of the royal persons (16.44; 76. 11). Kings preferred the best species of the elephant (lakkhnapasattha 3.2) and for recognising these qualities of elephants and horses even the princess were given special training (24. 6). The Bhuvanālaukāra elephant of Rāvana (8.215) is said to be seven cubits in height, nine in length and ten in circumference. It was considered to be the best type of elephant. The enclosure or the shed where the elephants were maintained by the kings was called Sālā (80.63). The divine elephant called Erāvana (Airāvata) was the conveyance of Devendra (2.38). It is referred to as having four tusks (71.3). The female elephant is called Karenu (42.18) or Kariņi (80.53) and her young ones as Kalaha (Kalabha 78,28).
Next to the elephant was the horse who was held in high esteem. It is called Turaya (Turaga 3.74), Turaiigama (4 36) or Āsa (Asva 5.73). A horse like an elephant constituted one of the 14 gems of Chakravarti kings (4.36). Horses formed a separate column of the Caurangabala of kings (92.52) and were also yoked to chariots for carrying the passengers (94.34).
The camel is called Utta (Ustra 14.29), Karaha (Karabha 8.272). The ox is called Vasaha (34.35), Balaya (80.13), Bailla (Balivarda 99.24). The bull-stall (Gottha=Goștha 103.40) is referred to. The donkey is called Khara (99.25) and the ass as Gaddabha (Gardabha 77.112) or Rásaha (Rásabha 71.54). She-buffalo is called Mahisi (Mahişi 3.158), and its male as Mahisa (Mahișa 99.25) who was used as a beast of burden. The cow is called Go (14.29), Godheņu (5.95), Dheņuya (3.46), or Gái (3.158). The wild cows (Arapņuya gäviņa khīra 41.8) were found in jungles. The cow pen (Goula= Gokula 5.95) was a place where the cows were kept and sold by the cow-herds (5.95). Mahisī and Utta are specifically referred to as her bivorous animals (Tanacārī 14.29). The cow, she-buffalo and the mare (Govasabhavalava 2.2; 80.13) were of immense utility to the people. They were considered as the harbingers of prosperity and wealth,
There are references to the goat (Aja 11.26) and the sheep (Mesia Meși 41.55). The dog is called Suņaya (Sunaka 22.84) or Sāņa (Švāna 2.116). Its young one Kukkura is also refered to (94.80). The cat (Majjara=Märjära 32.4); the rat (Müsaa=Mūsaka 5.100) and the cock (Kukkuda=Kukkuța 82.41) are also on record.
1. See Kautilya, II. 31.9. also.

Page #454

425
ава
EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE Reptiles :--The snake (Sappa=Sarpa 3.46) is called Uraga (28.106) or Mahoraga (14. 18), Naga (39. 16), Ahi (48.22), Pannaya=Pannaga (28. 108), Bhuyanga (Bhujanga 41. 23). Ghoặasa = Ghonasa (39.17), a kind of serpent is mentioned to be found in the hilly region. The Ayagara=Ajagara (63. 54) a huge snake used to devour even the human beings. The Āsivisa=Āśivisa (70. 16), and Visahara = Vişadhara (50.13) denote the venomous character of reptiles.
Other small creatures which are mentioned in the PCV are scorpion Viñchi (Vrścika 39.17), the bigh lizard (Gohera=Godhera 58. 92) and the mungoose (Naula=Nakula 96. 14).
Acquatic Animals :-The common sites of these creatures were the ocean, lakes and rivers. The Indian ocean (Mahasamudda) and the Gambhīrā river abounded in the rapacious marine animals (Gäha = Grāha 6. 37; 32. 11). The Indian ocean (Lavaņa.jala) is further referred to be abounding in fishes (Jhasa=Jhaşa), sea nonsters (Mayara = Makara) and tortoises (Kacchaha). The water elephant (Jala-hatthi) hastin is referred to be creating nuisance in the Narmadā. The toroise is called Kumma (Kūrma 2. 18). The Dolphin (Simsumāra = śiśumāra 14. 17; 82. 42) and the small fish (Mīpa=Mina 17. 114) are also referred to. The Timi (14. 17) is a kind of Whale or a fabulous fish of enormous size, Besides them the Jalavāha (a watery insect 88.6) and Jalūga, the leech (1. 24) are referred to. Tantuya=Tantuka (14. 17) is an aquatic serpent. The bony-covers of some acquatic insects are mentioned. They are the conch-shell (Saikha=Sarkha 8. 259), snail-shell (Sippi= Sukti 8. 259 or sutti 1. 24) and the oyster-shell (Sambukka = Sambūka 1. 24). The jumping frog could be seen (Daddura=Dardura 82. 38) cropping up in the rainy season (29. 43) at various places.
Birds : The woodlands, gardens and watery-places were the common sites where a variety of birds could be seen.
The Peaocock is called Mora (Mayūra 82. 38), Maūra (29. 34) or Barahiņa (Barbin 28.20) and the cuckoo as Koila=Kokila (15.28). Vappiha? (100.110) or Cā taka is also a kind of cuckoo. The parrot is called Suga (100. 58). Allusions to the taming of birds (pakkhi va pañjarattho 11. 84) and to the Indian falcon or hawk (Seņa = Syena 8. 79) are made. The vulture (Giddha) is referred to as the consumer of flesh (22. 84) and hovering over the dead bodies lying in the battlefield (71. 26). The Garuda (Jadagi = Jațāyu 44. 44, Jațău 10. 40) is a fabulous and mythical bird but here the Giddha and the Garuda are identical. It is called the king of birds (Pakkhiņāņa rāyā 14, 104) and the enemy of

Page #455

426
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
snakes (50.13). The owl (Uluya Uluka 97.24), the crow (Kaa Kāka 82. 40, Vayasa 71. 26); Sayavatta Satapatra (7. 17), a bird of number-less feathers; Vañjula (14. 18); Pingala (105. 59) and Padippavaga (Pariplavaka 14. 18), a kind of birds, are also referred to.
The above mentioned are the birds living on land. The acquatic birds which lived mostly in the vicinity of the water are also referred to. Cakravāka (Cakkaya), the goose (Hamsa) and the crane (Sarasa) are referred to be inhabiting the Manasa lake (16. 47) and the banks of the Narmada (34. 32; 10. 32). The habitual disunion of the pair of Cakravāka birds at the time of the closing of the day is referred to (2. 99). Hamsa and Sarasa were visible on the shore of the Lavana ocean (8. 260). The dragging of the Hamsa to such a hot temperate zone seems to be conventional because it is generally believed to be a native of the Manasa lake. It migrates to the south in the winter season. The Kala-hamsa is the Raja-hamsa (42. 15). The young ones of a swan are mentioned as Hamsapoyaa Hamsapotaka (30. 72). The pleasant gait of the goose is often compared with that of a young lady in the Indian literaure and our poet also has not missed it (6. 175). The crane was considered to be a bird of ill omen (7. 17). Balaya = Balākā (14. 18) is the other name of Sarasa. It is referred to be white in colour (39. 4). The Kurara (82. 38), Kurula (14. 18) or Kurali (female 17. 79) is the osprey, a kind of solitary bird which is considered to be timid. Our poet has referred to it with the same trait (17. 79).
Worms and Insects:-Ali (33. 9) is a smaller variety of the bee. The bigger bee is the Bhamara (Bhramara 16. 47) or the Bhinga (Bhriga 33. 148). The honeybee (Mahuyara= Madhukara 92. 9; 15. 29; 17. 90; 21. 48) and its female species, Mahuyarī Mahukarī are also mentioned (3.81). The flies (Macchi Makṣikā 103.25), the moth (Payanga Patanga 103.25), the mosquitoes (Masaga Maśaka 30.108) are also on the record. Then there are general references to the worms such as Kida - Kita (1.26) of teeth or of latrine (74.38) or Kimikula = Krmikula (39.55) of the body.
Maivaha (Matṛväha 5.211) is a kind of small insect and is referred to have been crushed under the feet of an elephant.
SECTION 3. ARTS
A. Clothing, Ornaments and Toilet.
The art of decorating the body is called 'Aharapavihi'. It is said to be fourfold (cauvviham 24.5). The Thanangal (4.374), tells us that
1. Cvauviha alankare... kesalankare vatthälankäremallalankare abharaṇalankare.

Page #456

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
427
the Alankara-vidhi consisted of (1) clothing, (2) ornamentation, (3) hair-dressing and (4) the use of flowers.
Clothing:-The clothing is denoted by 'Vattha' Vastra (3.135; 64.10), Ambara (49.20), Kappada-Karpata (25.18) and Celiya (99.25).
The dress is indicated by Parihāņa Paridhana (25.18; 30.64), Vesa, Vasa Vesa (34 23; 3.122) and 'Nevattha' Nepathya (94.30.)
The fabrics referred to are 'Khomaya' Kṣauma, Dugulla= Dukūla, Vālaya=Bālaja. Cīņaṁsuya = Cīnāṁśuka and Paṭṭa (102.121). The Kṣauma is linen1. The Duküla is made of the tissues of the inner bark of the Dukula plant. It is also called as a particular type of cloth of the Gauda country. The Balaja is a hairy fabric made of wool or hairs of camel, deer, mouse or other animals". The Cināmsuka is the China-silk and the Pațala is a particular cloth which is interwoven with golden threads (tissues). The Patta is also called as Divyāṁśuka (Divvamsuya 3.99). There are various references to Amśuka (Amsuya 16.4; 68.30; Thanaṁsuya 68.40). The Patta and the Amsuka are described as Kitaja i. e. the varieties of silk made from insects. There is a reference to Tula (Tülinisannaiga 35.24). It is called the fibre of Arka plant or Salmali tree or cotton. The needle is denoted by Sui-Suci (1.13) and the thread by Dora (8.108).
The bark and leaves of the trees as well as the grass were also used for covering the body. Recluses are referred to be using them (vakkalacivaro-kusapattaniyamsana 3.143). In the Buddhist literature CIvara denoted the robe of the Bhiksus, which was made of stitched rags. Here also it may mean the robe prepared of bark or the tattered cloth. The barbarians namely the Kīrātas and the Sabaras called as Mlecchas or Ardhabarbaras (275, 7-8) are mentioned to be putting on bark and leaves (Vakkalapattaniyaccha 27. 33) on their bodies.
Dyed clothes were in use. There are references to white (seyambara 66.30, siyambara 10.46), yellow (piyambara 49.20) blue (nila 3.122) and redochre (kasaya 39.110) clothes. There is a single reference to a Jaina monk robed in white garments (22. 78). Nun
1. Abhidhana Rajendra Koşa,
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4. Anuyoga, 37. vihe LAI, p. 129,
5. Abhidhana Rajendra Koşa.
6. MWSED.

Page #457

428
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN Sită (103.165) and Devarsi Nārada are referred to be putting on white clothes (78.8). On the occasion of performing a worship of the Jinas the laymen used to wear white clothes (10.46; 66.30). Rama is said to be wearing yellow clothes during his exile (49,20). The criminals at night used to put on blue clothes (103.14) so that they might not be perceived easily. The recluses used to wear redochre coloured clothes.
Usually the male dress consisted of two pieces of cloth (dokappadaparihāņo 25.18) namely the Uttarīya (Uttarijja 8.220), the upper garment and the lowar garment (kadiyadapațța 3.29). The upper garment was a scarf which covered the shoulders while the lower garment was tied round the waist and covered the lower part of the body. It was the lion cloth or dhoti. There is a reference to Kañcuka which was put on by Kalyāṇamālā who kept covering her body with a male attire. She removed it off to disclse her identity to Rama and Lakşmaņa (oindhai kancuyam sarirão 34, 15). It is explained as a coat like jacket, full-sleeved and hanging up to the knees. The foot wears are referred to as Pādukās (pāuão 80. 8)."
The female dress consisted or three garments. The Uttariya (10.37; 67.25), the bodice (Kañcua 9.11; Thaņarsuya 68.40) and a lower garment. The last one is not referred to.
A woman in a miserable condition is said to be wearing Círa (30.64) which would denote old, decayed or tattered cloth.
The references to Vicittavattha (53.108) of the warriors of Indrajit and the Cittamsuya (41.51) of a girl indicate that some pictures or designs were printed on the cloth.
The references to Kusumapata (Kusumapadocchāiyapallarike 2.10.1; 16.72) and Kamalāstarana (Kamalottharana 46.84) indicate that bed sheets decorated with the embroidery work of flowers were in use. Costly cloths set with gems were used on religious occasions (Mapipadayala 3.137). A blanket of high class variety is also mentioned (Kambalarayana 42.24).
Ornaments :-The ornaments are denoted by Ābharaṇas (27.33), Vibhūşanas (95.8) and Alarkāras (2.1).
The ornaments worn on the head were called Sirabhûşaņas (68.33). The crown=Mukuța (Mauda 3.1) was worn by a king. The
1. Harşavarla eka Samsakstika Adhyayana, pp. 79 150.

Page #458

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
429
diadem or crest=Kirīța (Tirida 53.108) has been referred to be adoring the heads of warriors. They were studded with pearls. The Cūdāmani, i. e, a precious stone of brilliance was also worn on head (3.98). It is also called Sikhāmaņi i.e. it was fixed on the tuft of the head (7.106). The Santāņayasehara was perhaps a crest of precious stones. It is mentioned to be fixed on the head of Rşabhadeva by the celestial beings on the occasion of his birth-ablution ceremony (3.98). Ears were adorned with ear-rings which were made of gold (kanyakundala 49.30), and sometimes set with gems (manikundala 36.5), or rubies (kundalamāņikka). Ornaments worn on the neck were the gold thread (kanthasutta 56.14), or the chain (kanthiyaı 68.30) of shining jewels (vararayanapajjalanti) or the necklace (hāra 36.4) made of jewels (7.96) and precious stones (5.131). Arms were decorated with armlets (keūra 46. 29; 62.9; 82.71) and bracelets (hemakankaņa 53.107) made of gold or set with rubies (māņikkakadayam 3.98). Rings decorated the fingers and thumbs (arguleyaya 49.35; muddā 33.57). They were made of gold and set with jewels (33.56; 16.88). Sometimes an image was also designed on the gem of a ring (bimbasannihiyam 33.56). Sometimes rings were imprinted with the names of their owners (nāmamuddiyaṁ 16.68; nāmammuddam 5.32). The waist-chain was worn on the cloth tied to the waist (kadisuttar piņaddhain kadiyadapaštammi 3.99). They were very costly (mahagghain 33.86), made of gold (suvannabaddhasuttaya 53.107) and jewels (3.99; 27.33).
Women were very fond of wearing ornaments. They were given special training in this art of decoration (24.5). Except Gadamani no other head ornament is mentioned (49. 35; 36.5;111. 7). Just like men they adorned their bodies with earrings (33.70, 71; 68. 33; 70. 22; 111. 7), necklaces (67. 25; 100. 5, 1; 111. 7), bracelets 16. 4; 67. 25; 100. 51) and waist-chains (16. 4). Besides that Mekhalagirdle (67. 22; 111. 7) studded with jewels has been mentioned. Nupuras (neura 68.33) adorned the ankles of the women.
The PCV refers to a Nakşatramālā (2. 39), decorating the neck of the elephant of Indra. Kautilya (2. 11. 13) describes it as an ornament of 27 strings of pearls. It is called as a garland of stars (EHA, p. 240) also.
Toilet ;-The toilet consisted of several articles of cosmetics such as unguents, powders, pastes, ointments, perfumes, incense and flowers.
The bathing is denoted by majjanavihi (28. 11) or nhānavihi (77. 29). Well-to-do families maintained special apartment for
.5;11, Idama
rings
"chain":100.

Page #459

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
bathing. It was called majjaṇahara (69. 6) which was duly equipped with water-pitchers, bath-stools and fragrant substances. These pitchers were made of gold (kanayakalasa 77. 30) and set with precious stones (rayanakañcaṇamaya, maņimayakumbha 69.8). The bath stools (majjanapīḍha) were-set with Vaidurya gems (veruliyamaya 69.7;veruli. yanhanapiḍha 77. 30). The bath of the royal persocs was made pleasant by the recital of songs and playing of musical instruments (69. 9; 77. 30). Special ladies were appointed for giving bath to the royals and the nobles (69. 10; 77. 29). Cool water agreeable to the body was preferred for bath. It was saturated with odoriferous substances (angasuhasiyaleņam salileņam surahigandha paureņam 69. 11). At the time of taking bath unguents, fine fragrant powders and pastes of different colours were used (surahigandhacun nehim uvvaṭṭanti 3. 86: niddhesu suyandhesu ya uvvaṭṭanesu uvvatțio 80. 57; uvvattanesu surabhim nāṇāvihacunṇavanṇagandhehim majjijjai 69. 10). On festive occasions people used perfumes, ointments and pastes (gandhāiesu dehāpulevanasaesu 70. 59). Sandal paste was applied on the occasion of coronation (Candanakayangaraga 85. 21) also.
430
Hair-dressing:-Ravana is referred to have dressed his hair-lockets (kuntalakayakaraņijjo 69. 11) at the time of taking his bath. This instance indicates that necessary care was taken of the hair in keeping them clear by washing, applying fragrance and combing. The word Cuda of Cuḍāmaņi suggests that men and women tied their tresses in one knot above their head. Sītā is referred to as abaddhakesaveņi which denotes that women used to knit the flock of their hair in a braid. (54, 4). The references to Dhammilla1 (8. 279; 100. 52) of the housewives indicate that the braided and ornamented hair of women were tied round their heads and were adorned with flowers and pearls.
Mirror:-Dappar ayala (Darpana 7. 88) denoted the mirror which was used for looking at one's reflection. It was sometimes set with gems (97.5).
Saffron:-Saffron (kunkuma) was widely used by the people. Men as well as women applied it to their bodies. The celestial beings are referred to have applied it to the body of the Jina on the occasion of his sacramen tal-bath (3. 105). The rich used it as a common article of pleasure (kunkumakayangarāgā 31. 46). The bodies of Rāma and Laksmana were besmeared with saffron when they were welcomed by king Mahidhara (36. 40). Even while fighting, the Raksasa and the Vanara warriors are mentioned to have anointed their bodies with
1- EHR, P. 245,

Page #460

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
431:
saffron (53. 108; 68. 3). The water of the river became coloured by the wash of the saffron besmeared on the bodies of the ladies of the king of Maheśvara, who were plying water-sports in the river with the king (angaparibhogalaggaṁ kunkumadhovan tapiñjararuniyaṁ 10. 44). It was applied to the breasts of women (117. 26) as it gave a cooling effect The Mlecch as have been referred to have applied some mineral powder (dhaukayangaraga 27. 33) on their bodies.
Articles of fragrance and incense:-The PCV mentions the following articles of fragrance and incense : The aloe (aguruya), the olibanum (turukka) and the sandal (candana) were commonly used by the people (Janavayaparibhoyasusuyandham 2.11) for fragrance. The dark and red sandal (gosisa), the black aloe (kālagaru) and the camphor (kappura) were used for incense (surbhidhuvagandhāim 14.92). Articles of fragrance and incense were regularly used for worshipping purposes (66.29).
The betel leaf is mentioned along with the articles of cosmetics (tambolaphullagandhadehāṇulevana 70.59). It gave reddish (80.30) colour to the lips and it was chewed along with other fragrant ingredients, hence it may also be counted as an article of cosmetics.
Flowers Flower was an important article of toilet. The art of decorating the body with wreaths and garlands of flowers was called 'mallavihi' (28.11). The people of ancient India had great love for flowers (gandhakusumatattilla 2.6). Married couples of Lanka are mentioned to be making a profuse use of flowers during the hours of amorous pleasures (tambolaphullagandhāiesu 70.59). The women of Saketapuri are referred to be wearing flowers on their heads (Kusumaunņam sisaṁ 100.52). The lotus flower was used as an ear ornament by women (kanņuppala 70.22). Crests of flowers were worn on the heads by the Rākṣasa warriors (pupphasehara 53.108). The Mlecchas decorated their bodies with the flowers of Śrīmanjari (27.33) in addition to other precious ornaments. Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa wore the garlands of fragrant flowers on the occasion of their coronation (sugandhakusumesu kaymala 85.21).
B. Music, Dance and Drama.
The PCV reveals that the art of music, dance and drama formed an integral part of the education and culture of the society. This art
1, An Encyclopaedia of Hindu Architecture, P.K. Acarya-p. 245.
2. It may be an ear-ring of lotus shape made of precious metal. See p. 154,155 of the Harşacarita eka Samskṛtika Adhy ayana -V.S. Agrawala.
3. 24. 5,

Page #461

432
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
was well cultivated and patronised by the royal persons and the nobles who enjoyed it with great interest and also provided for the entertainment of the public by arranging the performances of professional artists on different social, political and religious occasions.
Music is denoted by 'gandhavva=gandharva' (24,5; 75. 5) and 'sangiya=saiigita' (66. 10). It consisted of two branches, viz. the vocal music 'geya' (39.21), giya-gita' (17. 84; 78.52) and the instrumental music "vāiya'=vāditra (78.52; 97.8) Dance is termed as 'natta'=nștta (24. 5; 78.52). Dramatic performance is indicated by 'nādaya'=nāțaka (2.51; 113.11). According to Kautilya, music in wider sense includes all the four subjects-singing, playing on instruments, dancing and dramatic performance?
Music:- The professional musician is called 'sangiyaa'=sangitaka (64.5) or 'gojja'- gāyaka (85.19). The seven musical notes (svaras) have been specifically referred to (sattasarasam giyam 9. 89; gandhavvam tu paggiyaṁ sattasaragayasañjuttam 37.48). The term ‘saravihattijuttan'=svaravibhaktiyuktam (24.5) denotes the details about forming modulations or melodies and tones.
Musical instruments:-Vaditra has been already explained as a term used for the instruments of music in general. A number of instruments of music have been referred to in the PCV. They can be divided into four classes viz. the stringed, concussion, wind and percussion instruments".
(1) Viņa (9.88), the lute was the stringed instrument. (2) Jhallari (3,19), a kind of cymbal; Ghantā (3.73) a kind of bell; Khinkhiņi (17.114)=kinkiņis, a kind of small bells and Karnsālaya=Kāṁsyatāla (57.23), the cymbal were the instruments made of bell metal and they produced ringing sound. They were the concussion instruments. (3) Saukha (3.72), the conch-shell, Pavaya' (57.23), Vamsa (14.93), the reed pipe and Veņu (102.123), the fife were the wind instruments. (4) Dunduhi (Dundubhi 2.35), a kettle drum; Padaha (Pațaha 3.70), a kind of drum (dhola); Kāhala (Kahalā 61.2), a kind of large drum; Kharamuhi (Kharamukhi 57.23) (Varkakahala); Dhakka and Bhambhā (57.23), a kind of big drum; Bheri (57.23)
1. Kautilya, 2 27 2. Anu yoga, 127 and PCR, 24 8-19 for the details of music 3. Bhag Su (Abhaya), 5.4. 148. 4. A kind of wind instrument (MWSED).

Page #462

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
433
(Mahādhakkā); Panava (3.87), a kind of small drum; Hudukka (57,23), a kind of rattle or small drum; Muinga (3.87)=Mşdanga, a kind of tabor; Muraya or Murava (3.19;7.156 =Muraja, a kind of tabor; and Damaruya=Damaru (57.23), a very small drum were the percussion instruments.
Aiuga (3.87:96.6); Talimā (61.2) Tilimā (57.22); Tisarīya (70.58; 96.44; 103.123); Vavvisa (113.11) and Saccisaya (102.123) are not identified. Talimā and Tilima are called a kind of Túryavādyasa.
The word Tūra=Tūrya has been used in two senses viz, an indi. vidual instrument and a band of instruments. It is said that on the occasion of war the sound of the Tūras was heard (ubhayabalānam rasantatūrāņam 4.42; ubhayabalatūrasaddo 8.92; suņiūņa tūranigghosam 44.15). Here Tūra should mean the war-horn or the trumpetting instrument. Further it is stated that Nanditūra (6.161) was played on the occasion of the 'svayamvara' ceremony. It is explained to be a band of 12 different instruments played simultaneously in harmony. There is a further reference to Vibudhatūra (15.80) which was played as a routine to awaken the sleeping king in the morning. Pahāṇatūra (71.6) is referred to be played on the occasion of the commecing of the march by the army. It is said to consist of Padaha, saikha, kāhalā, muinga, tilamā, and paņava (padupadahasarkhakā halamuingatilamāgahirapaņavāņam pahayam pahāratūraṁ 71.6). Janmabhisekatūra was played on the occassion of the birth-ablution ceremony of Rşabha (3.87). Thus the PCV reveals that some allied instruments were played simultaneously to form a particular band or a concert of players on different instruments There is a reference to a kind of Kalpavřkșa called Tușiyangaduma which bore different kinds of musical instruments (102.123). Tudiya and Turya are synonyms. Here Tudiya= Türya means a band of instruments and Tudi-yarga = Tūryarga denotes individual members of a band. Pāṇini mentions the Tūrya and the Turyanigas in the above senses. Tūrya can be taken as an instrument in general or a war-horn or a type of tone in general
Dance :-The dancing girl is termed as națțiyānartaki (37. 49). Professional dancing girls are called Cāraṇakanyās (37.59)
1. See for the explanation of some of them, Bhag. Su. (Abhaya), 5.4.185 &
Abhidhanarājendra-kosa. 2. Abhidhānarājendra-kosa. 3. Ibid.
Sthānanga, p. 399 with Abhayadeva's Commentary. 5. India as known to Panini, p. 168.
28

Page #463

434
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
and Vilasini girls (36. 39). Kings employed girls for entertainment. These girls are called Cāțukāris (46. 78). Dance was performed with musical accompaniment i. e. singing of songs and playing of instruments (36. 39; 3. 89-92; 39. 21-22). The PCV reveals that dancing had reached a developed stage. It refers to various aspects of dancing. Thus Kaikeyi is said to have been trained in the art of dancing with all its characteristics and qualities (salakkhanaguņam 24. 5). There are reference to the clapping of palms (apphodana 3, 89) on the occasion of a dance recital. It indicates that the 'tāla' and 'laya' were regulated by the clapping of the hands. Display of emotions through gestures and movements of the limbs of body have been mentioned (sabhāvahāvattham 3.91). Dancers have been referred to be producing nice expressions through smile, side glances, movement of eyebrows, breasts, waist, hand and feet (37. 50; 39. 22).
Members of the royal family, especially the women, are regularly referred to as trained in the art of music and dance. The PCV reveals that Kaikeyi was trained in the art of music and dance (245). Sítá danced before the monks on the Varsasthalagiri and in her accompaniment Rāma played on Viņā (39.21-22). The daughters of Sugrīva sang songs and performed dances to entertain Rāma (48.1). Lakşmaņa's wives are referred to have played on Vīņā and danced before Lakşmaņa (11.16-18) Rāvaņa played on Vīņā while eulogising the Jinas on the Kailāśa mountain (9.88-89). Simi. larly Candragati played on Viņā and sang in praise of the Jinas in a temple (28.46). Manicūla Gandharva played on Vinā and his wife sang in his accompaniment to entertain the exiled Añjanasundari in the forest (17.85). The reference to the disguising of Rama, Lakşmaņa and the soldiers as dancing girls and then their dancing in accompaniment of musical performances, to capture king Anantavirya deceptively, indicates that males were also trained in dancing (37.45f). The above description indicates that playing on Viņā was very popular in those days. There is a reference to the greeting of a monk by the public with various performances and dances (115.6). It indicates that the general public also cultivated the art of music and dance.
Music and dance were arranged for individual or public entertainment on various occasions. The PCV reveals that social occasions such as birth ceremony (3.70; 7.90; 97.9), marriage ceremony (6.161; 36.39: 106.16), and happy oceasions of reunion (18.54) were made gay with the performances of music and dance. Royal persons enjoyed music even while taking their bath (7156; 77.130). Noble and wellto-do families enjoyed music and dance very luxuriously (31.45,80.21).

Page #464

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
435
Married couples took great delight in music and dance during the night hours (70.58-61). The arrival or departure of great persons was also greeted with music (78.52; 96.6; 17.118). Thus we find that any happy social event was made colourful by the performances of dance and music. Then there is a reference to public entertainers who used to entertain the public on the Catvaras of public roads with their musical and dance recitals (2.5). The political occasions on which music and dance were performed, were the coronation ceremony (19.5; 85.18), and the occasion of victory of a king (6.235; 76.2). Music was also associated with military and war. Whether the army was ordered to mobilise (70.63; 71 12), or it commenced its march or was on the course of marching (8 02; 44.11; 57.22; 61.2; 7.6) or was on fighting (4.42), the playing of musical instruments was always connected with every occasion to instil the spirit of courage into the hearts of the soldiers. Religious occasions were similary made gay. The consecration ceremony of new born Jinas (3.17), the event of their renouncing the world (3.133), the occasion of offering alms to a Jina (4.14) and the attainment of omniscience by Jina (4.19) were greeted with divine musical performances. Celebration like the worship of Jinas in shrines on religious festivities (5 229; 28.4; 40.10; 66 24,28; 92.22) and the greeting of monks (39.21) done with the performance of music and
a
dance.
Drama-About the staging of dramas it is said that on every door of the Samosarana i.e. the assembly hall of a Tirthankara, eight dramas were danced (aṭṭhaṭṭhanāḍayāim dare dare ya naccanti 2.51). It seems to be a reference to the dance-dramas. One more reference is to the entertaining of dead Lakṣmaṇa by Rama who had become made It is said that Rama was trying to please Lakṣmaṇa through the play of various musical instruments and dramatic performances, (vavvisavamsatisarīyavīņāgandhavvavivihaṇāḍaesu thuvvai avirahiyam so Somitti Rāmavayaṇeņam 11 3.11). It also indicates the playing of dancedramas. The Rayapaseniyasutta mentions thirty-two of dance-dramas1 which were played by celestial before lord Mahāvīra. These performances represented auspicious things. Of them in the first kind of divine dance or drama eight auspicious things-Svastika, Śrīvatsa, Nandyāvarta Vardhamanaka, Bhadrasana, Kalasa, Matsya and Darpana were represented. Tae PCV probably refers to this kind of eightfold drama or dance. The PCV elsewhere (80. 5) refers to a Pecchahara
kinds
beings various
1. Ibid, 22 (Battisaibaddham Bhag. Su, 11.11.429-430.
nattavihim); see
J
also Naya, 1. p, 23

Page #465

436
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAX
of Rāma. In the Rāyapaseni yasutta (Su. 23) the significance of a Picchāgharamandava is that of an audience-hall where musical and dance performances were exhibited. Thus the Peccchahara of the PCV indicates a Theatre.
C. Drawing, Painting, Terracota, Plastic and Sculpture.
Various references to the art of painting indicate that it had made a good progress. Pictures of human beings and animals were drawn and hued in various colours. Walls and floors were given a decorative show by drawing various designs on them. Cloth-painting was widely prevalent. The portraits of brides and bridegrooms were frequently used in negotiating marital alliances. Landscape paintings are also alluded to. Palaces and temples were given decorative show with paintings On the occasions of marriage and worship, paintings were exhibited. Clay or lac modelling is also alluded to. Effigies of animals and human beings perhaps made of terracota or plaster were made so artistic and attractive with the application of colours that one could not recognise whether they were artificial works of art or real person of flesh and bone. References to Jina-idols, small and big indicate that art of sculpture was well known to the people.
Drawing and Painting :-Alekkkan = Ālekkhyam denotes the art of picture making (24. 7). Kaikeyi is said to have been trained in this art. This pursuit is alluded to be a hobby of the noble persons (24. 7; 28.7). The professional picture-drawer is called Citta yāra= Citrakāra (1 21).
It is mentioned that on the occasion of the marriage of Vānara Amaraprabha with Gunamati, reddish brown pictures of monkeys were drawn on the floors with some colour-powder (alihie varakaņayacuņņakavile 6. 70). There are categorical references to the use of five kinds of colour powders (cuņņeņaṁ pañcavaņņeņam 29.2; dasaddhavappena cuņņeņam 40.5). They were employed for decorating the temples on religious festivities. Thus it indicates that some designs were drawn with these powders (Jinaharabhūmi............rarigāvaliniogam 29. 2; sajjiyā bhūmi rangāvali viraiyā 40.5). The gold dust is specifically referred to and other dusts perhaps of some precious minerals were also used (kaņayāiraeņa puņo rangāvali cittiya-talāim 66.21).
Coloth-painting was very common. It is denoted by Cittapada = Citrapața (21. 40). Pictures of princes and princesses were drawn on pieces of cloths and were perhaps duly painted. These pictures were used as a very common device for selecting brides and bridegrooms, (19. 38; 8. 189; 90.9; 28. 9). Jina-temples on the occasion of

Page #466

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
437
religious worship were decorated with cloth-paintings (varacittaya. mmapaurā pasāriyā pațțayā bahave 92.19). Perhaps these paintings depicted some of the episodes of the lives of Jinas and great religious persons. There is a specific reference to a cloth-painting which was hanged in a temple and it depicted an incident of the previous life of prince Vrşa bhadhvaja who was then an old bull. As an old bull he was lying down in a cow-pen. At that time Vanika Padmaruci riding on a horse reached there and recited the Pañca Namaskāra formula for the religious awakening of that bull. The clothpainting is called 'niyayabhavacittiyaṁ padaṁ 103. 45. Thus it indicates that the episode of the life of the bull was painted in various colours (cittapada vivihavaņņam 103. 47. This is an example of group painting. This painting must have contained the human and animal pictures as well as the surroundings. Thus it can be called a landscape painting also. The terms 'nāņāvihacittayakammakayasoham' (68. 18) and 'varakaņayavicittabhattiyam' (77. 3) in connection with the palace of Rāvana and a Jina-temple respectively can be taken as references to frescoes or wall-paintings. The Cittar-pecchāharain = Citramprekşāgpham of Rāma should be a chamber or a drama-hall of pictures artistically painted or an artgallery of protraits and paintings (80. 5).
Terracota and Plastic :-Leppamayam (24.7)=Lepyam denoted clay-modelling i, e, terracotaor plaster decoration. Kaikeyi was trained in this art also. Human effigies were prepared from these materials. The PCV mentions that an effigy or a statue of Dasaratha was prepared to deceive Vibhīşana who was planning to kill Dasaratha (leppamayapadibimbar 23. 17). When Vibhişpa cut off the head of the effigy, the (red coloured) lac-juice flowed out of it and Vibhîşana took it to be a real person of Dasaratha made of flesh and bone. Thus it indicates that the lac also formed an important ingredient of such modellings. Similarly an effigy of a lady is referred to have been installed in the palace of Rāvana. Augada and his soldiers could not recognise that it was a work of art. He took it to be a lady of flesh and bone. He could recognise it when he touched it with his hand (tahākarei phusiyam leppamaya mahila vijānanti 68. 13). There is a reference to a stand still elephant as if he was standing like a statue or an effigy (leppayamao.........cityhai 81. 11). Then there is a reference to the artificial figures (koțțimakayāim 68. 6) of lions and sea monsters which were installed in the courtyard of the palace of Rāvana. Their appearance
1, Gupta Art By V, S. Agrawala, p. 11. (1948). 2. LAI, by J. C. Jain, p. 186.

Page #467

438
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYA M
was as terrible as that of the real beasts. It indicates that they were the clay or plaster models of animals which were so painted that they seemed to be real ferocious beasts (68. 5, 7, 13). Thus these references prove that the clay-modelling and painting had reached a high stage of development.
Sculpture :-Various references to Jina-pratimas indicate that the art of sculpture was known to ancient India. Jina-images of different materials, sizes and colours have been mentioned. The PCV states that the idol of Jina Rṣabha which was worshipped by Vidyadhara Candragati had the lock of hair tied upon its head (dihajaḍāmaudakayasoham 28. 39). Further the reference to savvaŭgasundarão' (40. 11) Jina idols indicates that the idols were carved artistically. Generally the idols would have been carved out of stones or wood. There are
references to the idols of gold, gems (kancanarayanamaiņaṁ paḍimāņam 66. 11; 89. 59) and ruby (paumaraganimmāņā 77. 27). It is stated that on the Vamśagiri various coloured Jina-idols were installed (nāņāvaņņujjala-sirīo 40. 11). The size of the idols must have varied. Rāvana is said to have been carrying a Jina-idol along with him wherever he went (10. 47). It must be a reference to an idol of small size. Idols of the size of a thumb have been referred to (angutthapamāņa 89. 54.) Then it is stated that a gem fixed in the fingerring of king Vajrakarna was carved with an image of Suvratajina (muddiyam............rayanacittam Suvvayajiņabimbasannihiyam 33. 56). It iudicates that very fine and excellently artistic images were made. There are further references to the idols of Siddhas (5.136) and Saptarsis (89.59).
It is stated that the figures of monkey carved on gems were fixed on crowns, arch's, parasols, and banners to represent the emblem of the Vanara dynasty (rayan aghaḍie......pavangame 6.80). This is a reference to carving of animal figures.
The idols were installed on slabs. Slabs are called as phalaas = phalakas (89.59). They might be wooden planks or stone slabs. The reference to the Simhasana (28.39) on which was seated the Jina-idol indicates that the lion-seat was artistically carved out with the figures of lions.
The reference to 'puriso.
..sippiyakayovva 1-27' is perhaps an allusion to a statue of a man of full size and it should have been a sculptural representation.
1. See Infra, Jaina Rituals.

Page #468

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
439
The reference to 'varasālibhañjiyā (16,37)=varasālibhañjika' alludes to the figures of ladies carved on the pillars or on some parts of the buildings. Then there is a specific reference to the palace of Añjanāsundari, which was decorated with sculptural representations of dolls (sālibhañjiyākaliyam bhavanam 15.99).
Sihavāhiņi sejjā, (80. 7)=Simhavāhini Sayyā of Rāma denotes that a sleeping couch was carved with the figures of lions. It must be a couch made of wood. Further the allegorical reference to the dārumayā' (1.9) ears of Vidūşaka indicates that a wood-mask was worn by the jesters. Thus it indicates that sculpturing of wood was prevalent.
SECTION 4. HOUSING AND ARCHITECTURE,
The PCV furnishes a good deal of information about housing and architecture in ancient India. The persons who were engaged in various sorts of constructions are called Silpis (78.48; 102 24) who erected houses, buildings and other architectural things. The word 'Silpi' is used in the general sense of an artisan also (sayam ca sippāna uvaittam 3.114).
A Town Planning: There are scattered references to various constituents of a town. They can be arranged together systematically to have a general view of the planning of a town in ancient India. Thus the PCV reveals that a town was surrounded by a Pāyāra? - Prākára which was fitted with Gopuras, Dāras4 = Dvāras, Toranas and Ațțālayas =Attālakas. The Prākāra was from the outside encircled by a Phalihā®=Parikhā. Inside the Prākāra was situated the real town. There was the Avana'=Apaņa perhaps in the centre. The town was divided by Narindapaha8 = Narendrapatha, Ratthas=Rathyās and Maggā=Margas'. There were a number of Caccaras or Coukkas?o=Catvaras and Tiyasil= Trikas. Big houses 12 were lined on both the sides of the roads. Then there were the Ceiyagharas13 – Caityagrhas and the Rāyapura14 = Rājapura. The town was well laid out with Arāmas, Ujjāņa - Udyānas, Kāņaņas=Kānanas15 and Uvavaņas 16 = Upavanas which abounded in Saras?7. Pukkhariņi18=Puskariņis full of lotuses 19 Vāvisi20 = Vápis and Dihiyās21 =Dirghikās. All these constituents and the surrounding fields (Vappiņa Vapra-2.12) gave a pleasant look to the town.
1. See Harşacarita eka Samskritika Adhyayana, p. 61. 2. See also 6. 174. 3. 2.8; 6.211; 8.264; 33,77. 4. 62.33; 80.2. 5. 5.134. 6, 2.9. 7. 35.28; 80.61. 8. 76.8. 9. 115.7. 10. 2.13. 11. 66.9. 12. 3.157; 76.4. 13. 2.12; 8.267; 80.14. 14. 79.25. 15. 2.12. 16, 35.28. 17. 2.12. 18. 82.267; 80.14. 19. 5.56; 15.50. 20. 2.12. 21. 46.75; 80.14.

Page #469

440
A CRÍTICAL STUDY OF PAUMACAŘIYAN Parikhā (2.9):—The city of Rājagļha is said to be surrounded by a moat. It was a trench dug round the rampart and filled with water to keep the town safe from any attack.
Prākāra :--It is called Sāla also (52.7). It was a wall or a rampart raised round the town for fortification (2.8). The ramparts of Laikā and Sāketa are said to be having beautiful gold work done on them (jambupayakaņagacittapāyāra 5.129, kañcaņaghanapāyāra 55.14 varakanagatungapāyāra 3 113). The walls of the rampart of Rājagsha are said to have cornices carved on their upper part (kavisīsayaKapiśīrşaka 2.19). Rāma's temporary settlement (Sannives a 62.35) at Larkā on the occasion of Lakşmaņa's being wounded by Rāvana is said to be having seven ramparts one following the other (62.27).
Gopuradvāra :-The Sanniveśa of Rāma had three Gopuras (62.27) and many doors. The Copura was the main gate or big entrance with a constructed house on it. The king of Dasapura is said to have observed the fight between Sirihodara and Lakşmaņa from such a Gopura (33. 115). The Nandāvatanivesa of Rāma at Ayodhyā had one Gopura and many other small gates (bahudāram 80.2). The Gopuras' are referred to be facing four quarters while the dvaras were the side doors comparatively small in size. Some times Gopura and Dvāra are synonymous (62.32-33). The main gates of the temporary Rāmapuri are referred to as Dvāras, not Gopuras (35.35). A chief guard (Sälarakkha 52.8) was stationed on the main gate and the door-keepers on the doors (Dāravāla 17.18). During the night and at times of emergency these gates were closed (17.18; 67.17; 86.38). Attacking armies used to break open the gates to enter and seize the city.
Attālaka :- The referenee to it at 5.134 indicates that the rampart had watch towers of military posts” attached to it.
Durga :-There is a reference to the Dugga of Daśapura (nayaram visamaduggapāyāram 33.77). Durga means a fort. It might be a reference to a town fortified with rampart. There are various kinds of Durgas or forttfications such as hill fort, forest-fort, water-fort, clay. fort, chariot-fort, divine-fort and mixed-fort".
Apaņa: - The Āpapa was the market place which remained busy with the activities of merchants coming from various places (2.10).
Rathyā and mărga : --The town had well laid roads and streets. Rathyās or Racchās (67.24) were the roads on which the chariots could
1. The Jatakas reveal that the outer walls of the cities were pierced with four
gates in their middle facing the four quarters - Vide India as known to Panini p. 139. 2. See EHA, p. 5. 3. EHA, p. 5.

Page #470

441
EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE ply. The mārgas were the streets and lanes. There is a reference to perhaps the regular cleaning of the roads and streets of Lanka (13.5).
Catvars and Trikās:- These were places where four and three roads or streets intercepted respectively. Catvaras and Trikas were generally teeming with various kinds of spectacles and performances relating to dance, music, song and acrobatics (2.13).
Narendrapatha:- It is variously called as Rājamārga, (76.3), Narendramărga (16.38), Nệpatimārga (79.19). This was the main road of the town. It was the royal road which led from the main gate to the palace. It extended outside the city and connected other towns of the country.
Houses and mansions could be seen lined on both the sides of the road. They were equipped with windows wherefrom house-wives peeped out to look at the occasional processions (8.276-282;70.19-25).
Types of Buildings:--Ghara=Gșha denoted the common house for residence (3 57). In the PCV the terms Ghara, Bhavana and Pasāya are used indicriminately (23.17;77.23-25). Elsewhere it is explained that Bhavana belonged to kings and Prāsāda to gods. The former's height was less than its width while the latter's height was greater than its width Bhavana is also called as a kind of rectangular building 3 and Prāsāda as a religious or residential building or a royal palace. 4 Attālaka was the apartment on the rool or an upper storeys. Thus the PCV mentions that Ayodhyā (80.1-14; 78.49), Daśapura (33.19), Kiskindhipura (6.45), Laikā (53.85), Mahendranagara (15.10), and Rājagặha (2-9) abounded in these types of buildings. Buildings of seven and eight storeys are mentioned. Daśapura abounded in white buildings of seven storeys (sattataladhavalesu ya päsāyasaesu 33.19). Dasaratha's palace had seven storeys (sattatale bhavanap sãe 23.17). A general reference to eight-storeyed buildings is made in the PCV (102. 116). In Laikā buildings having turrets or spires (sūrei Pavapaputto aneyapāsāyasiharāim 53.85) and having artistic designs carved on them have been referred to (ațțālayavivihacittatungāim).
The roof of the building was generally supported on raised walls. Besides that, pillars (colu i ns) were also constructed to support the
1. Samma jjovalitiā, kāūņa mahi imāe nayarie/
Kusumehi acciyavvā surahisugandhehi divvehim//. 2. Bhag. Su, (Abhaya-5.7); Abhidhunarājen dra-Koşa. 3. EHA, p. 380. 4. Ibid, p. 364. 5. Ibid, p. 12. 6. See 15.61.

Page #471

442
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYA
roof. The PCV refers to a thousand-pillared mansion of Rāvana (niyayabhavanam thambhasahassāular tungam 8.282; 53.144; 77.25) and also a Jina-temple in Laukā (77.3).
The materials of which the houses and buildings were constructed are not referred to. There are references to white buildings (sattataJadhavalesu 33.19, dhavalaattālaya 2.9; 5.134) and to bulldings consisting of more than one storey. Therefore bricks, stones and mortar must have been in use. The works of Kālidāsa refer to the use of stones, bricks, lime and even marble stones. The floors of the palace of Rāvana are referred to be paved with gravel (koțțimatala 68.5,23) and sometimes with saphires (Indanilakottimatalammi 68.7, 11) also. Its walls were beset with crystalline stones (Phalihamayavimalakudde 68.9) and saphires (mahānilamaekudde 68.14). It was equipped with stair cases which were paved with crystalline stones (Phalihamayammi Sovāne 68.12). The buildings of Rajagrha are also said to have floors beset with emerald and rubies (bhavanauacca nesu maragayamāņikkakiranakabburiyaṁ 2.11)
Windows;- The houses were duly equipped with windows. They are referred to as Cumpalayas (26.80), Vatāyanas (39.91) and Gavākşas (8. 280; 76. 4; 79. 20). These windows opened on the road or the garden attached to the building House ladies observed the procession on the road from these windows. Vätāyana was meant for letting in air and the sun. Gavākṣa was of the shape of the eye of a cow, and the jalagavakşa (32. 4) was the latticed window.
Rooms :- The PCV reveals that the houses were fitted with various rooms. Añjana's Bhavana is said to have the following apartments in her building: Aggivaa=Agrimaka 16. 64, Abbhintara=Abhyantara 16. 64, Kacchantara=Kakşyantara 16. 70, Vasabhavana = Vāsabhavana 17. 70, and Kacchantarammibie 16. 73. Here Aggivaa refers to the foremost room of the house where guests and visitors were received. Abhyantara means the inner part of the house, which was fitted with more than one rooms. Kakşyāntara and Kaksyāntaradvitiya refer to two separate rooms and Vasabhavana means a sleeping room or the drawing room. ... Courtyards :--Kakşya meant courtyard or the divisions of the palace also. Angada is said to have passed through three successive Kakşyas (Pavisanti gihaṁ 68.8; annam kacchantaran 68.10; and again, annam kacchantararn 68. 14), to disturb Rāvana who was meditating in a shrine inside the palace. Further Arigada's slodiers are said to have waited at the outer part of the shrine (bahirakacchantare 68. 22).
1. See IK, p. 248.

Page #472

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
443
Kakşyas are explained to be the divisions of palace i. e. courtyards with chambers. The VR also refers to three Kakşyas of Rāma's palace (VR, 2. 5. 5).
B. Royal Palaces: Royal palaces were usually very big buildings which accomodated residential quarters as well as offices for carrying the administration of the state. It is said that a king's palace was divided into two parts, the inner apartment (the antaḥśālā of the Mānasāra) or antaḥpura which was occupied by the royal harem and the outer apartment where courtyards etc. of public business and the buildings for state purposes were situated. The PCV refers to a number of buildings which can be accounted as follows: -
Inner Apartment :- Aateura = Antaḥpura (110.21) or Gabbhaggiha - Garbhagraha (80.5) was the inner apartment which consisted of several quarters meant for the royal ladies (Devinabhavanāim 80.6). Süyahara = Sütikāgļha (7.91; 26.45) was the confinement room meant for pregnant woman. Majjanahara=Snanagļha (69. 6) was the bath room. Ahārmandava = Āhāramaņdapa (69.13; 77.32; 81.5) was the dining hall. Kilanahara = Kridagpha (70.48) was the sports-house and Pecchahara = Prekşāgrha (80.5) was the art-gallery or entertainment hall meant for the pertormances of music, dance and drama. Vitthahara= Viștāgļha (74.38) was the lavatory.
Outer Apartment:-Sabhägrha (37.1; 41.62; 49.1; 80.3) or Atthanimandava-Asthānamandapa (3.1; 40.2; 70.1) was the council hall where the king consulted with his ministers, councillors and dealt with the administrative and judicial matters of the state. This hall had a raised pavilion (Mandava) on which the thrones of the king was placed Auhasālā--Āyudhasala (70.5) and Sannahamandava (12.82) were the weapon or amunition and equipment houses, Cankamana (80.5) Caikramana was the raised pavilion meant for the strolling of the king. Carageha (3. 11) was the prison house. Then there were stables for elephants (Sala 80.60), horses (Mandur ä 28.28) and other animals. The palace was always attached with pleasure resorts and gardens (26.79, 80). Facing the entrance of the palace there was a big open courtyard (anganan 68.5). The palaces were provided with tunnels (Suranga 8.158; Gūdhasuranga 10.4.9) which were meant for the safe and secret exit of the people on the occasion of any danger or war or
1. See Harşacarita eka Sūnskrtika Adhyayana, p. 204, 213. 2. P. K. Acarya-Indian Architec'ure, p. 58 vide India in Kaltdasa, p. 247 3. See Harśacaita era Sanskritka Adhyayana, pp. 126.205.

Page #473

444
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
emergency. A shrine or a place of worship was also attached to a palace (77.2).
The members of the royal family resided in separate houses. Thus there are references to the separate house meant for the various members of royal family viz a king (naravaibhavana 4.8; 38.29; 63.4), a queen (46.14), a prince (77.23; 110.20), wife of a prince (15.99; 18.5) and princess (15.60; 28.2). The whole royal residence was called Rājabhavana = royal buildings (31.112) or King's Palace.
c. Some Architecturul Terms :
While describing the 'Sri = prosperity of Rāma some tech nical architectural terms have been used for various constructions (80.2-14). They are worth noting. It is said that the colony of Rāma and Lakşmana was called Nandvattanivesa (Nandyavarta saṁsthānam PCR, 83.4). It is one of the 8 kinds of villages or towns of varying shapes. Its rampart was called Kşitisara (Khiisāra pāyāra) which towered high like Meru (Merussa cūliyā iva). The royal building was like Surabhavana. The name of the council-hall was Vaijayanti (Sabha Vejayanti). Vaijayanti is a single-storyed building which is furnished with round spire (sirşa), pinnacle (sīraḥ) and neck (grīva”). The central hall (Sālā = Śāla) was called Vipulasobha. It was a hall for special purpose or a storeyed building. There was a Caikamana - Caikaramana called Suvidhi. A lofty palace called Girikūda=Girikūța prāsāda is referred to. It should be a pinnacled building. Then there was a (Pecchāhara=Prekaņāgļha) amphitheatre called Vardhamāna. It is a type of building which has a terrace before the chief entrance extending to the end, then from left to right, there is another beautiful terrace and again a terrace. It was no southern gate'. The Gabbhagiha=Garbhagļha i.e. the harem or the interior residence or central hall was lofty and of the shape of the egg of a hen (kukkudaandāvayavaṁ küdam gabbhaggiham). Anda is explained as a cupola. Thus it seems that the interior hall or central hall had a rounded dome over it. The whole palace was one pillared (egatthambham). It was like Kalpataru. Around it were situated the residences of the queens (savvao ciya ... devina bhavaņāim).
1. EHA, p. 161. 2. Ibid, p. 345. 3. Ibid, p. 484f. 4. Ibid, p. 448. 5. Ibid, p. 13.

Page #474

445
EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
D. Other constructions for shelter etc:
Kudiraya Kutira (33.85) was the cottage or hut which was a residence of the poor. Houses with holes and perforations (chhiddasayamandiesum gharesu 20.162) are mentioned to be the abodes of unlucky persons. Asama Asrama was a hermitage which was meant for recluses (8.155) and monks (89 33). Generally the abodes of the monks cousisted of Guha, Kandara- Kandara, Pabbhāra = Prägbhāra i. e. cavern, cave, or shelter roof of the hill (29. 29) and Ceiyahara Caityagṛha i. e. places of worship or temples.
also
been referred
Granaries for have storing corns (dhannamahantakoṭṭhāro 2.3).
Mañca was the gallery of benches which was erected on the occasion of the ceremonies of 'svayamvaras' (6.159; 24.12) to accomodate the candidates and the public. On the occasion of the fireordeal of Sita similar 'mañcas' were erected to accomodate the public (101.7: 102.24). They are also called as Pecchagihamandavā (101.7) Prekṣa-gṛhamandapāḥ i. e. the sitting arrangement made for visitors and observers. Rama's return from Lanka was welcomed by erecting several canopies (mandavā) which were raised on pillars with golden work (kanayothambhapaura 78.53).
to
Torana was an arch which decorated the entrance. The PCV refers to the Toraņas attached to the ramparts (8.266), palaces (6.46), temples (29.3; 66.6), residential building (53 85) erected independently in various quarters of the town (78.51). They were adorned with banners and flags (8.266). Sometimes they were temporarily erected to receive great persons (78.51). They were also set with gold or jewels and beautified with strings of pearls (78.51).
Setu (Seu 3.11) is referred to. Its context indicates it to be a bridge over a strait.
were
Arama-pleasure gardens, Udyana-parks, Kanana-groves and Upavana planted forests were well laid out in and around the 8.267; These 35.28; 80.14). towns (2.12; 6.137; the places where royal persons and public flocked for pleasure and sports. These places were equipped with ponds, big and small (Sarasi & Sara 2.12), tanks (talāva taḍāga 33.20), reservoirs of water, square (Vavi Vapi 2.12; 46.75) or long and (Dihiya Dirghikā 8.267; 46.75) or circular in shape (Pukkharini Puşkariņi 8.267). Vāpī with steps paved with gems and gold (maņikañcaņaṁ 102 29) has been referred to. Kings played sports with their damsels in these gardens and tanks (5.218). Females also frequently visited these
narrow

Page #475

446
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
places and took their pleasure bath there (46.75). In these gardens special houses were erected to facilitate the pleasure visits of the royal members (81.4). Gardens were resorts for wandering monks (5.224; 6 137). Permanent gardeners looked after these gardens (5.225).
The PCV reveals that the Samastakusumaudyāna of Lanka was systematically planned. It was situated on the Puşpagiri hill (46.66) and extended from the bottom of the hill to its top. It had seven divisions from the bottom to the top. The first two parts were meant for male-citizens (nāyaro ramai) who sported there. The next two parts were for the women fold (kīdai vilāsiņijano). The fifth provided shelter to the monks who devoted themselves to meditation. The sixth was meant for the visitors. Public sports were not allowed there. The seventh part was the best part of the garden. The whole garden flourished with several kinds of trees and plants. It was well laid out with tanks and reserviors full of lotuses. People freely enjoyed their baths. Sport houses for public also were provided. There the cuckoos chanted sweet notes. It was duly provided with flights of steps (46.66-67).
Jina-temples are variously called as Ceiyahara (2 12), Ceiyabhavana (5.134), Deula (8.265), Jinahara (11.3), Jiņabhavana (77 25), Jiņāyaṇa (77.28), Jiņālaya (8.139), and Jipāgāra (108.16). Temples have been referred to be standing in the middle of (31.120) or outside (33.92) the habitation or in the gardens (45.43; 47.51). Further they are said to have been constructed in villages, towns, on river-banks (8.167), confluences of rivers, hills, and at junctions of the roads (59). Larkā is referred to have Jina-temples (8.267). The palaces of Rāvana and Vibhisana are said to have accomodated private Jina temples (77.3,25). The Vamsagiri (40.9) and the Sammeta mountain (9.60) have been mentioned to be abounding with Jina-temples. Jina-temples white in colour (8.136;8.138), kissing the sky (8.265), set with gems (rayaņavicchuriya 8.138) and gold (varakanayabhittiyan 9.60;77.25) and having thousand pillars (66.26;77.25) have been referred to.
Then there were the shrines of Yaksas. A Jakkhahara or Jakkhanilaya (82.46,47) is said to have been situated on the outskirts of Rajagshanagara.
SECTION 5. UTENSILS AND ARTICLE OF FURNITURE &
DECORATION. As the civilisation made progress the amentities of life increased in number. These amenities consisted of utensils and the articles of

Page #476

EDUCATION AND ARCHITECTURE
447
furniture and decoration which were utilised for making the home-life easy, comfortable and pleasant.
Utensils:—They have been dealt with in section 2E of this chapter.
Articles of Furniture:-Furniture was of two kinds, viz. Sayaņa= Sayana and Asaņa = Āsana (3.162), the former for lying dows and the latter for sitting on. Sayaņijja (7.91) denotes the bed. Very costly beds were used by the royal families (sayanijje maharihe 3.61;8 184). Cotton beds have been referred to (tūlinisaņņaigā 35.24). Beautiful bed-sheets were laid on the beds (padasayapaccatthue sayaņijje 94.96 satpracchadapaļāvste"). Bed-sheets were decorated with flower-designs (2.101:16.72). Pallanka=Paryanka (2.10) was the couch. There is mention of the couch set with gems (16.72). Figures of lions were carved on the legs (Sīhavā hiņi sejjā 80 7) of the sleeping couch. Dr. P. K. Acarya notes that there were nine varieties of it ranging from 21 to 37 angulas in width?. In the forest, leaves strewn on the ground served the purpose of a bed (17.15).
Asaņa (3. 60) was the seat. A cane-seat was called VettāsapaVetrāsana (3. 19). Sometimes it was decorated with gold work (69. 14). There is a reference to Bhaddāsaņa=Bhadrāsana (49, 20) which was used by the nobles. It is explained as a kind of a throne, or a chair of state or a great seat. Simhāsana + (Sihāsana 46. 16) was the throne which was used by the kings and naturally it would have been a costly article of furniture. There are references to the thrones set with gems and precious stones (2. 25; 2. 35; 2. 53; 46. 16). T. A. Gopinath Rao explains it as a four-legged seat, circular or rectangular in shape and one hasta or cubit in height. Its four legs are made up of four lions." Vistara (Vitthara 80. 7) was a seat worthy of royal household as the reference indicates. According to B. S. Upadhyaya it was an honoured seat, a high seats while V. S. Agrawala mentions it as an ordinary seat?. Pădapitha (Pāvidha 3. 1) was a small stool to support the feet hanging down while sitting on the throne. Attharaya (69.14) (Astaraka) was the covering to lay on the seats and beds.
1. PCR, 97.173. 2. A Dictionary of Hindu Architecture, p. 349. Vide IK. 3. EHA, p. 380 4. See EHA, P. 252. 5. The Hindu Iconography, Vol. I. Pt. I. p. 21. 6. IK, p. 215. 7. India as known to Panini, p. 144.

Page #477

448
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Masuraya (69. 14-Masuraka) was the pillow to support the head or the cushion placed on seats to feel comfortable while sitting on. It is also explained to be a lintel i. e. a thin piece of timber or stone that covers an opening and supports a weight above it. Its context in the PCV indicates that it was meant for supporting the utensils meant for dining plates.
Majjanapiḍha (Mārjanapīṭha 69. 7) was the seat meant for sitting on while taking bath. The rich had such seats set with lapis lazuli (veruliyamae).
Other articles:-Karandaya (Karandaka) was the basket which is said to be in use for carrying flowers (35. 53). Kamandalu (11. 39) was a wooden or earthen spout used by mendicant Brahmins. Ayavatta Atapatra (8. 130) was the umbrella to ward off the sun and the rain. Chatta (Chatra 70. 8) was the parasol, an insignia of the kings. Its handle is mentioned to be set with lapis lazuli (80, 8). Camara (80. 7) was the fly-whisk, an insignia of royalty. Diva (10. 8) Dipa was the lamp. The nobles and the rich had the lamps set with precious stones (manidīva 2. 101, rayaṇadīviyā 70. 50).
Ganittiya (Gaṇayitikā 11 39) or Akkhamālā (Akşamālā 68, 29) was the rosary which was used for chanting the japas.
The articles which are mentioned to be in use for decoration on the occasions of celebrating some religious function or social festivity are the following:
Dhaya (Dhvaja 92. 20) and Paḍāga (Patākā 8 283) were the flags; Viyana (Vitana 92. 20) was the canopy. Lambūsaya (Lambūṣaka 96. 1; 32. 76) were the festoons. Mottiyaoulla (Moktikavacúla 92. 20) were the deised ornamentations of pearls used for decorating the doors, gates and archs. Adarisa (Adarśa 92, 20) and Dappana (Darpana 96 1) were the reflecting glasses or metals. Cand (Candra 96.1) was a crescent made of some metal or precions stones Cittamsuyus (citramsuka 96.1) were the fine cloth pieces with painted designs. Nakkhattamālā (Nakṣatramālā 1.39) was a garland of stars perhaps made of some bright metal. It was put round the neck of the elephant of Indra to give him a decorative show.
1. EHA, p. 414.

Page #478

CHAPTER IX ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS
CONDITIONS SECTION 1. ECONOMIC CONDITIONS.
The Paumac ariyaṁ furnishes sufficient data about the economic conditions of the people. The conventional description of the Rājagsha (2. 1-14) and references at other places indicate that there was a class of nobles and the rich who lived a prosperous life. They flourished in plenty and abundance. Their big mansions and storeyed building with various rooms beautifully adorned the well-planned towns. The streets looked magnificent with rows of houses on both the sides. There were luxurious gardens as pleasure resorts. Various public displays and exhibits graced the civic life of the people, Reference to sumptuous dishes, costly utensils, confortable articles of furniture, musical performances, dance-recitals and religious festivities indicate the luxurious and happy life of the people. The wealth of precious stones and minerals was no less. Trade piled heavily in big towns. Merchants and caravans are regularly referred to. Cities were noisy with the din and bustle of the markets. Thus there prevailed a happy state of affairs. But there were the poor also who led an unfortunate life. The PCV refers to people who were devoid of any wealth (75.60). Stricken with poverty they led a miserable (88.6) life. Some lived merely on the pursuits of gathering grass and wood (103.30. Some pulled on with begging and remnants of dinner (13.14). The poor satisfied themselves during the winter by sitting around the fire because they could hardly afford anything more than scanty clothing (31.43). In absence of sufficient clothing the skin of their bodies got wrinkled and blustered (31.43). The less fortunate had to be content with his hut. His sole property was an earthen pot and an earthen dish (33.85). Thus we find that the poor and the unhappy people formed not a minor part of the society and there was a great contrast between the life of the rich and the poor.
Generally there was peace but occasional battles ad wars became the cause of distress and a large scale bloodshed. Evil elements like thieves, robbers, dacoits, plunderers and criminals at times tormented the social life. The want of proper medical facilities could not save
29

Page #479

450
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
people from fatal results of widespread epidemics. draughts also brought anxiety to the people.
Famines and
The economic sustenance of the nation depended on various occupations and professions of different grades. The PCV mentions them as follows:
Agriculture :-The profession of agriculture and the farmers are referred to at 14.26; 39.68. In their daily routine farmers used to go to their fields with their implements in the morning and returned in the evening (105.32, 34). The soil was tilled with plough (halakulisa or Kulika 14.51, sīra 113.20) which was drawn by the oxen. People knew it that well cultivated land (sukitṭṭha 3.45) was necessary for the proper growth of seeds while the sandy or salty land (usara 14.59) was unproductive. The richness of crops (sassa 4.26) depended upon the quantity of rainfall. References to Persian-wheel (arahaṭṭaghadijanta 105.40) and well (kuva 35.19) indicate that these were also the sources of irrigation. There are references to lakes (5.56; 15.50; 82.40) and tanks (talaya 3.46) but their application to irrigation is not specifically mentioned.
Many crops were grown and there is a reference to the wild crop = rice which grew abundantly in forest (dhannam ca ranṇajayam 41.4). This wild crop is mentioned as growing in the southern country and Śali (99.29), a superior kind of rice in the Kosala country. Other varities of rice specified in the PCV are Vihi (vrihi 4.76), Tandula (33.6) and Kodrava (103.111). Barley is also referred to (Java 4.76; 11.25). The Avantideśa is said to be flourishing with the crops of gram (Capaya), kidney-bean (Mugga-Munga), horse-bean (Masa-Udada), sesamum (Tila) and Tandula (33.16). Mustard (Sarisava 97.10) seeds are also mentioned. Then there was the sugarcane (Ikkhu 3.111) and a special variety of it, called Punducchu (42.11) which was planted in various parts of the country.
Animal Husbandry :-Cows and buffaloes are stated to be forming the animal-stock of Magadha (2.2), Vijayardha (3.158), Saketapurī (80.11), etc. They supplied milk and ghee. Rama and Baṭuka Kapila are mentioned to have a number of cows (80.11; 35.79). Common Thus there is a people also must have been keeping them. reference to a buffalo of a householder (41.55). A certain Gṛhapati is said to be possessing domestic animal (gihapasukhettāīsu 48.79). Then the professional cowherd (govalaya 5.96) is also mentioned. He kept a huge cow-pen and used to sell cows. Oxen are regularly referred to. They formed an important part of the beasts of burden,

Page #480

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
451
Other Professions:- In addition to agriculture and animal husbandry the economic sustenance of the people depended upon trade and commerce, other independent professions and domestic as well as government service.
Various professionals mentioned in the PCV are preceptors, teachers of archery (77.84;39.88; 26.5, 11;14.20;25.19), interpreters of signs, omens and dreams (51.16;7.80), astrologers (17.112), and physicians (110. 27).
Goldsmiths and ironsmiths are not mentioned directly but their existence can be inferred from various references to gold ornaments, iron implements and weapons. The references to Sivika, Yana, Ratha, Karapatra, Vāsīphala' and Phalaka indicate the existence of carpenters. The weaver (Kuvinda 21.1) and the potter (Kumbhāra 5. 207) are specifically referred to.
Then there were masons (Sippi 78.48-49;102.24) who built houses and mansions. The reference to images reveal the existence of sculptors (28.39;40 11). Painter or picture-drawer is mentioned (1.21). Musicians (64.2), dancers (37.59) and coquettish girls (36.39) are referred to be living on the profession of providing amusement to the people. Națas (acrobats) and umbrella-players (2.5) are referred to as entertaining the people. Then there were the garland-makers (6.175), betel-leaf dealers (Tamboliya) wood and grass-gatherers (31.44;103.30), charcoal-makers (14.15), fishermen (14.15;55.42;82.43), hunters (6.139: 39.69), fowlers (49.26) and trappers (14.15).
Services: -Besides these independent professionals some people were engaged in private or government services. In the private service nurses (Dhāis 97. 11), lady messengers (Dūtis 12.53) and maid servants (Cetis 6.11) are worth mentioning. Then there were the Karmakāras, (17.7), Kinkaras (4.60) and door-keepers (28.4). In the government service there were ministers (5.176;31.52), counsellors (77 77,78), ambassadors (14.19), envoys (65.00), officers (14.19), priests (5.31) chamberlains (93.8), Mahattaras (106.7), generals 37.2), policemen (82.48), C. I. D. (26.95) and soldiers (8.41;12.139). Then there were the Gojjas and Cāranas (2.103; 85.19,24), i.e. the bards and the eulogisers who were associated with the service of kings.
Mineral Products:-The PCV refers to various precious products of mine and sea (jalathalaya 2.10). There are references to Ratnadvipa, the island wherefrom gems were available (14.50; 32.61). The follo
1. PCV, 65.38; vāsi-a carpenter's tool for cutting away the surface of wood,

Page #481

452
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
wing precious stones (maņi 6.29) have been mentioned: diamond (Vajja 3.75), ruby (Paumarāya 6.39); Mapikka (2.11), saphire (Indanila 3.132; 14.90), emerald (Maragaya 3.75;22.23), lapis lazuli (Veruliya 3.75;14.90), sun-crystal (Surakanta 3.75 ; Pusamani 6.39) and moon-stone (Sasikanta 8.265; Candamani 3.132). Then there were the Sphatika (phaliha 2.9, the species of quartz), Kakiniratna (Kāgani 4.78, an illuminating gem) and the Karketana (Kakkeyaņa 3.75). The sea is called a mine of gems (Rayaņāyara 53.51). Precious gems available from the sea were pearls (Mottiya 3.1; 4.5; 53.108;72.27) and corals (Vidduma 28.116, Pavāla 64.10). The shells and conch-shells (Sippi, Sarkha 8.258, 259) are also mentioned. All these precious materials were used in decorating ornaments, utensils, buildings and vehicles of conveyance.
Various metals referred to are Gold (Suvanpa 53.107, Hema 14.53; Kanaya 2.3; 34.58; 64.10; Kañcaņa 3 28; 53.113; Cāmiyara 26.14, Ja mbūņaya 71.9); Purified Gold (niddhanta Kanaya 20.57); dust of gold (Kanayacunna 6.70 or Kanayara 66.21); Silver (Ruppaya 14.141; 64.10; Rayaya 3.150; Hiranna 3.68); Copper (Tamba 27.32); Tin (Tava=Trapu 118.8); Iron (Loha 28.115; 77.70, Āyasa 33.37) and Lead (Sīsaya 26.50). The reference to Darpana (10.5) indicates that the mirror was prepared from some glittering metal or stone.
Mineral powders mentioned in the PCV are Sindūra (red lead 2.39 or vermilion); Geruya (the red chalk 12.106; 71.3) and other powders of different colours (dhaukayangarāga 27.33; vicittadhāūrasenam 29.3; raugāvaliniogam cunneņam pañcavaņņeņam 29.2;40.5)
The specific rocks referred to are Pandukambala-sila (2.25) and Koțisilā (48.103). The former is said to be found on the Meru mountain on which the ablution ceremony of new born Jinas is performed and the latter to have been lifted by Vasudeva Lakşmaņa to prove that he could kill Rāvaņa. Phalihasila or crystalline rock was used in constructing walls (68.9) and staircases (68.12) of palaces.
Forest Yield:-The reference to charcoal-makers (14.15) indicates that the forests were harnessed for making fuel. The wood.gatherers (dárukamma 31.44;103.30) perhaps supplied the wood for fuel and furniture. The references to chariots and carts reveal that timber was largely available. Reeds were used for making cane-seats (vettāsaņa 69. 14). Bamboos and Palāsa trees were used for preparing vessels and utensils (41.4). Elephants were caught from the forests (94.103). They were employed in army and for the ride of the kings. The reference to

Page #482

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS 453 flywhisk (68.39) indicates that the hair of Yak were utilised for it. The lac (23.22) was certainly a forest-produce of fig trees. Then there were the fruits and spices which largely constituted the produce of the foresttrees.
Trade and Commerce :-There are several references to merchants (Vania 2.10;103.9;48.21) and trade (Vāņijja 33.96;3.116). The market is denoted by Avana (80.61;35.29). The dealers in liquids, poison (Rasa 14.26, Visa 14.20) and gems (5.33) are mentioned. Bhanda (63.64) denotes perhaps the manufactured articles of merchandise in general or the vessels of metal. Besides them, no other article of trade is mentioned. The VGA (p. 329) informs us that different varieties of cloth, food-grain, spices, salt, bullion and precious stones were most probably the main articles of internal trade.
The capital cities were generally the centres of great business. Rājagļha (2.10) used to be visited by merchants from various parts of the country. A merchant (Setthi) of Gajapura is referred to have gone to Sāketpura loading his merchandise on he-buffaloes (63.63). Then there is mentioned another merchant of Kundanagara who (33.66) went to Ujjaina on trade-tour.
Trade was carried by two routes viz. land and water. As far as the latter is concerned no specific route is mentioned. There are allusions to water-route in the references to ship (Poa 2.44;3.129) which is called the only saviour of a merchant in the sea. The falling of gems in the sea is also mentioned (94.67;14.106;45.34). Traders travelling by ship are mentioned (5.83;48.21). References to Cīņaṁsuka (102.121), Turukka (2.11)and Dināra(68.32) indicate that India had trade relations with China, Turkey and Rome by sea-routes. Two merchants of Kosambi (55.31) are stated to have gone on trade to the ‘parakūla' by Jāņavatta (ship). They had sold their Bhanda (merchandise) and brought gems in exchange. Here 'parakūla”) should mean the other side of the river Jamunā. It indicates that river were used as an effective water-route.
There are refrerences to Sarthavāhās (Satthāha) who used to go from place to place for trade and sometimes they had to traverse dreadful forests (adavimajjha bihaņayam 14.33).
As regards the land routes there are two specific references, viz. Gajapura to Saketa (63.64) and Kundanagara to Ujjaina (33.66).
Trading Accessories:-Weighing and measurement of quantity are referred to as Tula (2.90;14.26) respectively.
1. The other bank of the Ganges where Sitā was abandoned is referred to as
'parakūla' (94.53).

Page #483

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
The terms referred to for measurement of length are: Aratni (Rayani 20.88), Hasta (Hattha 101.51), Dhanus or Capa (Dhanu 20.96; Cava 118.86), Goruta (Gauya 3.36), Krośa (Kosa 51.4), and Yojana (Joyana 3.24,151). These measurements are explained as follows in the Tiloyapanpatti (1.114-116). Twelve 'angulas' or two 'padas' are equal to one 'Vitasti' and two Vitastis constitute one Hasta. The Arthaśāstra (2.20) adds four Angulas to two Vitastis to make a Hasta and only two Vitastis make one Aratni. Four Hastas make one Capa or Danda. But the Arthas astra states that four Aratnis are equal to one Danda. Two thousand Capas constitute one Krośa. Four Krośas or four Gorutas1 make one Yojana. Thus the Yojana is said to be measuring 4 miles (see Shama.).
454
Molla (Mulya) denotes the price (39.69). The prevalence of money transactions is inferable from the mention of wealth in crores and lacs. The Dīņāras are mentioned in connection with the mock-selling of Ravana by Angada (68.32). The Guptas are said to have struck gold coins called Dināras ond Suvarnas2.
Conveyances -Yana (Jāņa 17.8) or Vahana (71.17) denoted the conveyance of transport. Sakata (Sayada 26.21; 33:15), the cart or the wagon was used for carrying the load of goods from one place to another. Purusa-yana (Purisajāņa 108.43) was the passenger car. Ratha (Raha 32.48) was the chariot. It was also called Syandana (Sandana 71.15; 94.54). Yoking of four horses to a chariot is referred to (Cauturaya samauttaṁ 42.3; 94.34). The PCV mentions it as a good means of river transport also. Kaikeyi went across the Gambhira river in a chariot (32.48-49) and Sītā was also carried across the river Ganges (94.53) in a chariot drawn by horses. The chariots also formed a column of army. The war-chariot of Ravana is called Maharatha (71.4). drawn by a number of elephants (71.2). It was loaded with arms and ammunitions. Chariots were drawn in procession on the occasion of religious ceremonies (8.207). Royal chariots were decorated with gold and jewels (53.113; 42.3-4; 8.207).
It was
Jāņavatta (Yanapatra 5.83) and Poa (Pota 2.44) were the boats or ships which were rowed on water (2.44; 55.30).
It
Then there was the litter or palanquin (Sibiya 96.1). was raised on the shoulders of men who carried noble or royal persons in it (3,132). Gold covering and the setting of precious stones on it indicate that it was a conveyance of the rich.
1. Samavayanga Su. 4 (caugaue joyane).
2. Coins of India, p 45; Vide IK, p. 266.

Page #484

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
455
There are references to Vimanas (aerial cars) supposed to be faring in the sky. They were decorated in gold and equipped with tinkling bells (17.113). They were studded with precious stones (8.128). Añjanā was taken to Hanuruhapura in a Vimāna (17.113). Rāvana took flights in Puşpakavimāna (8.128). Rāma, Lakşmaņa and Sitā returned to Ayodhyā from Lankā in a Vimāna (79.1). Kroñcavimāna of Śrīkaņţha indicates that these Vimānas had various shapes (6.53).
Various beasts were cmployed for carrying loads, drawing vehicles and riding purposes. Elephant was a good conveyance of royal ride (76,11; 79.12; 21.97). The similar was the case with horse (32.40; 5.73; 116.3). Both the animals constituted two separate columns of army (52.4). Soldiers (7. 14; 56.44; 70.66) are mentioned as ridig on bulls (Vasaha), camels (Karaha Or Maya), bisons (Mahisa) and donkeys (Khara). These beasts were used for carrying the load also. Bison was used for carrying merchandise (63.64). Donkeys camels. oxen and bisons are referred to as carrying the provisions of war (99.25).
SECTION 2. POLITY AND ADMINISTRATION
A. State and King. State is denoted by rajja =rājyam (32.26). The constituent elements of the state mentioned in the PCV are : King (rāyā 3.2), Ministers (mantījana 38.59 or amacca 5.176). Territory, Forces, Fort, Treasury (visaya, sahana or bala 7.13, pura & kosa 23.16; 33.81) and Friend or Ally (mitta 7.13). These seven features are considered as the essential components of a state in the works on the Hindu Polity (Kaut, 6.1.1; Manu, 9.294).
King :-King is variously called as Rāyā = Rājā (27,6), one who illuminates or shines; Sāmī=Swamin (37.21), Naha-Nătha (71.1), the commanding authority; Puhaipāla=Pệthvipāla (5.50), Bhūmipala (12.144), Mahīvāla=Mahīpāla (11.2), Patthiva=Pārthiva (38.6), the terrestrial lord; Narinda - Narendra (38.25), Naravara (5.50), Naravasaha=Naravěsabha (38.9), the best among the men; Niva-Nrpa (27.9), the protector of lhe people, Narahiva=Naradhipa (5.48), Naravai= Narapati (27.10), the lord of the people; Pahu=Prabhu (33.101), Deva (102.42), and Paramesara-Parameśvara (61.3), the divine lord. The last epithet of king connects him with divine qualities and in dicates his divine right over the state. Manu (7.3-8) observes that a king is created by God and he should not, though even a boy, be disrespected.

Page #485

456
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Queen :--The PCV reveals that generally kings used to have many wives. Out of them some were granted special privileges. They were called chief queens (Agramahisīs 91.10 or Mahadevis 91.13,18). Daśaratha had three, Rama had four while Lakşmaņa had eight such queens. Ravana had only one chief queen, Mandodari (8.24). On the occasion of the coronation of Rāma and Lakşmana, one of their chief queens namely, Sītā and Viếalyā respectively (85.22,23) were also consecrated. Thus they were specially privileged and so they can be called as prime among the chief queens. But the PCV does not refer to any special distinction bestowed on them. The instance of queen Simhika who was entrusted with the administration of the kingdom when her husband, king Naghuşa went out on war-campaign indicates that a queen shared the responsibility of rulership (22.57).
Polygamy was generally prevalent among kings but there are instances of kings having one wife only?. Occasional rivalry and jealousy among the queens were commona.
In exceptional cases as found in the PCV, some king did not consider it immoral to make abandoned wife of another person as his queen (75.75) or to kidnap and make the queen of another king as his chief queen (105.95). Rāvana also was ready to make Sitā his chief queen (46.41).
King's Paraphernalia: The majestic paraphernalia of a king consisted of the following insignias or emblems : a crown (Mukuta 85.21); a throne (Viştara 80.7 or Simhāsana 65.36); a parasol (Chatra 89.0: or Atapatra 24.31); a pair of fly-whisks (Cámarayugala 12.142); a pair of sandalas (Padukās 80.8); and a foot-stool (Padapitha 3.1).
The assembly hall (Sabha 23.1 or Asthānamandapa 33.99) was always associated with him. Then there were the ladies who fanned the flywhisks (Camaragrāhini 68.39), the panegyrists or bards (Vandījana 2.103; 85.24), the door-keeper (Pratihāra 13.1) etc.
King's Education: Knowledge of warfare and training in military or archery (25.24) were indispensable for a king. He was required to be well-versed in statecraft (nayavihinnu 8.142; niikusala 6.12), allied subjects of rulership (narindavinnānanānamáhappam 2.19, various arts and traditional learnings (vivihakalāgamakusalo 2.20; 18.56).
The art of music, dance and drama was well cultivated by kings (9.88.89; 39.21; 28,46; 113.11). They were trained in subduing agitated
1, See Supra, Position of women. 2. Ibid.

Page #486

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
457
elephants (8.178;218) and turbulent horses (28.27). Capturing of wild elephants was also practised by some kings (94.103).
Personal Qualities:-A king was required to belong to 'utta makula' (6.18; 9.26) and to have superior qualities (naravaiguņehi jutto 2.15).
He was required to possess robust health (2.16,17), strength bala 6.221, sakti 28.127) and majesty (pratapa 7.170). Self confidence (darpa 6,221), courage and qualities of goodness (vīrya & sattva 7.170) were considered to be indispensable for a king. He was required to have modesty (vinaya 3.7; 9.26) and to be virtuous in his thought and deeds (dharmabuddhi 65.1). He was considered to be the root of morality (marayādā 53.4).
A good king is said to be one who has a flawless character, who is affectionate to the people (uttamapii 9.26), helpful and beneficial to his servants and relations (bhiccaņa bandhavāņa uvayāraparo). He should worship all sorts of religious persons (sahūņa devaguru-puyaṇaparo). He should be devoted to the religious duties (dhammuvagaraṇesu sāhīņo). He should consider other's wife as his mother and other's wealth as grass (7.60-62).
Duties:-The PCV mentions that a king should treat his subjects as his children (janavacchala 27.11) and see to their utmost welfare (uvayara 3.7). The protecting of the people was the fundamental duty (3.115) of a Ksatriya. The Sukraniti (14) observes that one who can protect men, who is valorous, restrained and powerful and who is the chastiser of the wicked is called a Kṣatriya i.e. a person capable of ruling over others.
Hospitality: The PCV reveals that on various occasions kings made munificent grants of land to learned persons (77.88; 88.26), their friends (12.12) and well-wishers (88.21,34). Similarly they granted gifts of wealth to several persons1.
Amusements:-Hunting (33.30) was one of the common four addictions of a king. The other three are mentioned in the Arthasastra (8.3.42) as the gambling, drinking and association with women.
Happy bath in accompaniment of the ladies of the harem (69.9-10) was one of the common entertainments of kings. Kings generrally sported with their wives in gardens (6.100; 86.34), enjoyed watersports in reservoirs (5.218) and rivers (10.35; 42.17).
1. See Supra, Ksatriya' under 'Castes'.

Page #487

458
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Music was frequently displayed to please a king when he got up from the bed (2.103; 15.80; 64.5) or took bath (69.9) or did any other work.
Subduing of turbulent elephants (8.176) or horses (28.27-28) and riding on elephants (76.11) and horses (5.73;116.3) were common sports of kings.
Heir: --Generally the eldest son of a king became Yuvarāja and he became king after the death of his father. If a king abdicated the throne by renouncing the world, his eldest son became the natural heir to the throne (6.58; 31. 56). The hereditary kingship was so important that Ikşvāku king Kirtidhara could not renounce the world until a son was born to him (21. 88). Sometimes a child in the womb was declared heir and his father renounced the world (22. 21). If the eldest brother renounced the world and he happened to be issueless, then his younger brother became king (21. 42, 77).
Sometimes an younger brother became a king. Bharata, younger brother of Rāma was made the king of Ayodhya in fulfilment of the boon promised to Kaikeyi by Dasaratha. When Rāma returned from exile he did not accept the crown but he made Lakşmaņa, the king of Ayodhyā (85. 14). Adityarāja made his first son, Vāli as the king of Kiskindhipura and his second son Sugrīva as Yuvarāja (9. 6). When king Vāli renounced the world, he appointed his younger brother Sugriva as the king of Kiskindhipura (9. 6; 9. 45) though he had a son (47.23)?. Similarly Mahāraksasa appointed his first son as king and the third son as Yuvarāja (5 166. 240).
King Balikhilya was kidnapped by the Mlecchas. He had no son. A daughter Kalyāṇamālā was born to him. With the help of the ministers she lived in the disguise of a male and was appointed as the king (34. 18-23). It indicates that princesses did not enjoy the right of heirship to the throne.
There are instances of several princes who on attaining youth did not deem it fit that their father should go to war, so they themselves fought battles (16. 31; 19. 9; 27. 17, 21; 59. 45; 86. 50, 51). It reveals that princes suitably helped their father king in discharging their duties.
Generally a king ruled for the whole of his life. But if he was tyrranous then the subjects revolted against him. They dethroned and banished him, and appointed his son the ruler2 (22. 75).
1. Among the Western Kşatrapas the crown passed from the elder brother to the
younger brother in succession. Vide VG A, pp. 47 & 249. 2. See also Khandahāla Jataka No. 542. Vide PHAI, 176 (1950).

Page #488

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
The PCV reveals that sometimes if a king died issueless, some divine method was used to selcct his heir1. When the king of Mahapura died issueless an elephant was released. He selected king Saudasa who was dethroned and exiled from Ayodhya. was installed as the king of Mahapura (22.91).
He
459
When Lakṣmaṇa became the king of Ayodhya, his brother Śatrughna was granted the rulership of Mathura (Ch 86). It indicates that younger brother of a king were appropriately granted some
towns or lands.
Consecration Ceremony It is a called 'rajjābhiseya = rājyābhiṣeka (80.17) or Paṭṭabandha' (5.41). The latter term indicates the practice of binding of a royal turban which was an emblem of sovereignty.
The work of consecration was assigned to the ministers (19.5). The Purohita (31.57), Samantas (31.50) and the Vassal king (85,16) also played an important part in it. The occasion was celebrated with the performances of music (19.5; 85.18) and dance (85.19). Bards sang panegyrics (85.20). Sacred water brought from sacred places was sprinkled over the body of the installing king (85.20). His body was besmeared with sanda! paste and was decorated with ornaments and garlands (85.21).
Chief queen was also consecrated on this occasion (85.22, 23). Or when some one of the queens was made the chief queen she was also duly consecrated (abhiseyapaṭṭabandhaṁ.........paviyā 105.95)2.
Types of Rulers:
The PCV refers to the following types of rulers :
Cakravartin:-It is stated that Cakravartin Bharata enjoyed Suzerainty over 32,000 kings (4.58). He governed the whole of India (Samatta Bhārahāhivo 5.118) and his rule was 'egachattam' i. e. one umbrella and one ruler (4.56). He was saluted by all the kings under him (āṇāpaņāma 4.38). Thus a Cakravartin was a paramount king whose authority was reeognised by all the other rulers of the country. The Tiloyapannatti corroborates it (1.48). It can be compared with 'Sarvabhauma' type of king the Śukraniti described in
the
1. See also Darimukha Jataka No. 378; Devendragani's Commentary on Uttaradhyayana 3. p. 63a; Karakandacariu, 2. 20.
2. Pattabandha is called as Usnisapatta also. It was a golden band wrapped over the turban of a king. Heir-apparent, queen or armychief also were authorised to wear such royal bands. Mahadevi-patta is also mentioned -Hargacarita cka Simskṛtika Adhyayana, p. 155. See also Varahi Vṛhat Samhita (49. 2.4) which mentions five kinds of Pattas.

Page #489

460
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
(1.185). He is described as the Soverign of all the seven continents of the world. It seems to be a developed form of the status of a Cakravartin when all the seven continents were included into his territory.
Ardhacakravartin - According to the definition of an Ardhacakravartin given in the TP (1.48), Lakşmaņa and Rávaņa of the PCV (91.28, 29; 44.9 & 7.170) who reigned the three divisions of Bhāratavarşa and were suzerain over 16000 rulers, would be called as Ardhacarkavartin.
Mandalika :-The PCV merely refers to him (14.22). The TP (1.46) defines him as the Lord of 4,000 rulers. He is higher in status to that of a Mahārājā. But the Suhranīti (1.183) asigns him a lower status than that of a Mahārāja. It further mentions that his revenue amounted between 4 to 10 lakh of silver Kārşāpaņas.
Mahārājā :-King Ativīrya of Nandyāvartapura (373) and Bhāmandala of Rathanūpura (99.63) are mentioned as Mahārājās to whom tributes were paid by many other rulers. The TP (1.45) defines a Mahārājā as the Lord of 1000 rulers and the Sukraniti (1.184) fixes his revenue between 21 to 50 lac.
Samanta :-Samantas are seen in the PCV in different lights. Śrenika, sovereign king of Magadha (Magahasāmanto 2.49) and an independent Vidyadhara king of Meghapura (Vijjaharasāmanto 6.2) are called Samantas.
Then it is said that various Sāmantas bowed down to the feet of king Śreņika (3.1). Similarly Bharata, Rāma's brother (38.14) and Kişkindharāja (6.213) are said to be receiving tributes from many other kings. Here Sämantas seem to be feudatories.
Further Samantas are told to be accompanying their overlord wherever he went (38.10; 38.51). They helped him with their forces (37.5). They fought for him (59.11). They were consulted on the occasion of the consecration ceremony of his son (31.50). They were entrusted with the mission of envoys (dūta 64. 11) and were given responsible posts in military (26.29). These duties of the Samantas denote that they were dependents and served their ovorlords.
The Sukranī ti defines Samanta as follows. A Samanta was a ruler whose revenue ranged from 1 to 3 lac of silver coins (1.182) or he was the chief who had 100 villages under him (1.190). Those who were the servants of king and were granted some land and were like the above Samantas were called Anusāmantas (1.188). One who was made the headman or chief officer of 100 villages was called an Anusāmanta (1.190). Those who were Samantas but were deprived of their status were called Hinasämantas (1.189). Thus the term Sämanta means a

Page #490

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
sub-ruler or a feudal lord or a headman of some village or a chief officer with some land under him. Thus the Samantas can be called as vassals and feudatories, but the PCV calls Śreņika, historically known as a sovereign ruler, a Samanta.
were
Tributary kings:-Sometimes king of some other states conquered by a powerful king but their territories were not usurped. They were reinstalled as kings of their respective states. They are called Bhiccas Bhrtyas (11.19;33.25; 33.124;37.19;37.64;45.2;46.95;54. 41). Such type of kings were autonomous. The idea was to impose the authority (aņaviya 12.144 - anamita or ajñāpita) of the powerful king and the conqueror over the weaker ones. They were required to pay trubutes to their overlord (37.19) in recognition of his suzerainty over them. If any body violated the authority, he was punished (33.62,80). In their own states they were free to govern their lands as they liked. At the time of the coronation of the imperial lord overlord, the titles of the tributary kings were renewed and they were recognised as king of their respective territories (82.25).
or
461
B. Administration.
King ruled over his state from the capital town called Rajadhānī (88.2) which was well fortified with rampart and ditches (2.8-9). He was the administrative head of the state. He administered his state through ministers and various other officers.
Council of Ministers:
The council of ministers 'sahāmajjheman'inam' (26.16) consisted of many ministers who were called Mantrins (31.52;46.86) or Amatyas (5.176;31.57,102), both the terms, used in the same sense (21.85.86). The plurality of ministers (15.14; 65.1) is corroborated by the works on polity (Kautilya 1.8; Sukraniti 2.69-72).
There is a reference to Rajapariṣad (31.93) which was summoned by Dasaratha on the occasion of enthroning Rama. It consisted of Mantries and Samantas (31.50). It seems to be analogous to the modern council of state as Dasaratha had put before them the proposal of crowning Rāma and Kaikeyī is said to have gone there and demanded coronation of Bharata (31.71). Thereafter Dasaratha called his sons, Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa and with their consent he granted the promised boon to Kaikeyi. Thus it seems to be a Parisad of royal members, ministers and Samantas who discussed the matters relating to the state.
There is a further reference to Bhadaparisă of king Simhodara who had attacked the lord of Daśapura (33.111). It seems to be a special council of warriors for the purpose of war and military.

Page #491

462
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Ministers advised king on the matters of national importance (65. 1;66.1) and war-policy (88.28). They also helped king in settling the marriage of the latter's progeny (7.3;12.1;15.14). The work of coronation was entrusted to them (31.1.52). They were fully entrusted with the treasury and the work of administration when the king happened to be absent from the capital (23 16). They remained vigilant that the kingdom was not lost to any other power (34.21). A king who did not listen to the minsters about things good and bad brought his own downfall (64.6.9). This is the reason why a king has been enjoined to act always with the advice of his ministers (Kautilya, 1.15).
Ministers were required to possess the qualifications of good learning in various subjects relating to polity, administration (nayasatthavisārayā 8.5; nayasatthapandiyā 5.176) and secular matters (bahussue 77.77; pandiyā 77.78).
Other Officers : Purohita:-He is variously associated with a king (5.31;26.6;41.45; 103.92) but his function is nowhere referred to. The Sthānanga (Abhaya. 7.558) defines him as a 'Santikarmakāri', i e. he performed rituals for the peace of the country. In the works of Kalidasa (IK, p. 129) he is associated with the consecration work. The Arthasastra (1.9.15-16) lays down that a person of high family and character learned in the Vedas and their parts, well-read in portents, omens and the science of Government should be appointed as high priest. The king is advised to follow him as a teacher, father, and master,
Senapati:-Senāpati (37.2;86.26) or Balānika (7.11) was the Commander-in-chief of the army. In the matters of war his say was held supreme (86.30).
Salarakṣa:-He (52. 8) is mentioned to have been appointed to protect the fort of Larkāpuri. He can be identified with the Durgapāla of Arthaśāstrā (1.12) i. e. the officer incharge of Home Defences,
Bhāņdārika :-Bhandariya (29.11) was the officer of stores He is explained to be the superintendent of various store-houses, treasure, trade, grains, forest produce, armoury and jail (Kautilya, 2.5).
Kañcuki:-He (93.8) was the lord chamberlain or the lord of the servants of the inner apartment of the king. He was an aged person and was held in good esteem by the king (29.7).
Mahattaras:— They are found to be in association with princesses. Vidyadhara princess accompanied by Mayaharayas go to the battlefield to hail Lakşmaņa fighting with Rāvana (71.6). Sita was surrounded

Page #492

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
463
by many Mayaharayas when she was taken from the forest to the palace of king Vajrajangha (96.2). A Mayaharaya is said to be introducing a bride-princess to the candidates contesting the 'svayamvara' (106.7). And Mayaharayas inform Rama of the public censure of Sită (93.16). Thus they appear to be generally associated with the members of the harem. The Nisithacurni explains him as an executive officer of the harem. He took the ladies of the harem to the king, told them stories after their menstruation bath; pacified their anger and reported the of cause their anger to the (4.2.56) king'. Vatsyayana refers Mahattarika to the king with taking message to as from presents the queens". Thus Mahattara or Mayaharaya seems to be the officer of harem. But in the PCV they are also told to be the heads of the different departments of Indra, the celestial lord (102.155). At 102.49 the Mayaharaya is Thus here. referred to be as the head of the organisation of nuns.
various
they seem to be the heads of various departments".
envoy.
Dūta:-He was an ambassador (14.19) or The PCV does not inform that the offices of embassy were premanently established in the capitals of foreign states. It reveals that the Dūtas worked as messengers who carrried the orders of their king to other kings and returned after accomplishing their work (6.15; 8.67; 37.17; 49.1, 29; 65.9; 104.10). Kautilya while explaning the duties of an ambassador states that he was a diplomatic officer sent to the court of a foreign power to safeguard his master's interest and to gather all the requisite information of the strength and weakness of a foe and transmit it to his Government (Kautilya, 1.16).
The PCV mentions that a Duta should be clever, quick-witted, modest, strong, and well-versed in statecraft and other sastras (39.39; 65.10).
It was the ethics of the polity that an envoy was never killed by the foe king (8.82; 9.35) because he was merely a servant (8.83) or the carrier of the message of his master or the bespeaker of the words of his master (8.82). But he is even then mentioned to have suffered insults in the courts of enemy kings (9.36; 53.129; 65.34). Sometimes he was reproached and dragged out of the court (8.84). Duta who insulted king was tied down with chains (53.142) and humiliated.
1. Vide LAI, p, 56.
2. See Studies in the Kamasutra, p. 109.
3.
In the VGA (p. 263), they are explained
as District-council member. The
Uttaradhyayana Tikā, 3. p. 57; 9. p. 142a explains them as village officers (Vide LAI; p.83).

Page #493

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Carapurusas:-They were the spies who were entrusted with the work of espionage. Janaka ordered them to find out his lost son (26.95). The recovery of Lakṣmaṇa from injuries was communicated by them to Ravana (65.1). The secret attempt of Rāvana in mastering the supernatural powers was disclosed to Rama's Vānara forces by them (67.10). Madhu's loop-holes were transmitted to Satrughna by them (86.32) and thus Satrughna became successful in defeating him. Thus the PCV reveals that Cariyapurusas were the secret agents who kept their king and the Government informed of the position and the developments in the territory of an enemy king.
Lekhava haka:-Lehavaha (37. 1) was the carrier of state messages. Pratihara :-Padihāra (13. 1) was the officer of royal court. His permission (47. 6) was necessary to enter the court (See also VGA, p. 225).
464
Dvarapala: Daravāla as referred to in the PCV (17. 16), was the gate-keeper of town.
Udyanapala:-Ujjāņavalaya (39. 5) was the guard of royal park.
Lokapalas:-They are mentioned as governors of various divisions of the country. Vidyadhara king Indra appointed them as rulers of the four quarters or regions of India (7. 43-47; 57).
Adesadayaka:-Adesadayas are merely referred to (14. 19). They are mentioned along with ministers and envoys. They can be taken as the officers of various departments of the state.
Raṣṭrasvamin-Raṭṭhasāmis are merely referred to (14. 22). In the early Christian era, the districts were known as Raṣṭras and Raṣṭrasvamins should be the district heads or officers. The Inscription of Rudradāmaņa mentions them as provincial governors. The Rathikas of the Kharvela Inscription are explained as provincial governors".
Grameyakas and Bhogikas:-Gamaudas (66. 8) and Bhoiyas (3. 121) are merely referred to. Grameyakas are explained as the heads of village administration. They are called Gramapradhānas or Gāmanīs.' Bhogikas are explained as the chiefs recognised by the kings.5 They enjoyed the revenue of their lands. They were the headmen of villages,
1. See VGS, p. 262.
2. SI, p. 212.
3. VGA, p. 266.
4. Desinamamata, 2-89.
5. Santyācārya on Uttaradhyayana, 15. 9.
6. Lakṣmivallabha on Uttara, 15, 9.

Page #494

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
465
called as Bhoiyas or Bhojikas. In the Khārvela? Inscription they are explained as Jāgirdārs. H. Raychaudhari mentions that in the Gupta period villages were administered by headmen and other functionaries styled as Grāmikas, Mahattaras and Bhojakas. Grāmabhojakas are then said to be the heads of villages".
Policies of State : It was necessary that suitable policies were adopted by kings for the safety of their state and for the welfare of the subjects.
Ambitious rulers adopted the policy of war or Vigraha (Viggaha 19.1.7;88.27) for the expansion of their territory. Thus we find that Rávaņa made a war-campaign and defeated Vesravana (8.120), Yama (8.247), king of Māheśvara (10.67), Marutta of Magadha (11.99), Nalakūbara (12.68), Indra of Rathanūpura (12. 136), Varuna (19.20) and many other rulers (11.12). Ativīrya of Nandyāvartapura (Ch.37) waged war against Bharata for the similar purpose. Satrughna had killed the ruler of Mathurā in the battle for the same purpose (Ch.86). When Lakşmapa was made the ruler of Ayodhyā by his brother Rama, he did the same thing and conquered various rulers for the expansion of his territory (91.1) Lavana and Ankusa's war-campaign was of the same type (Ch.98). Thus the PCV reveals that there prevailed an era of expansionism and aggrandisement in those days.
A weaker king was advised not to have vigraha (PCV, 48.117) with a stronger one. He should adopt the policy of Sandhi (peace) or Samsraya (alliance) for the safety of his state. Indra was requested by his father to make peace or concilliation (Sandhi 12.75) with Ravana who had invaded the territory of the former. But his 'refusal brought about his own downfall. Rāvana similarly made peace (Sandhi) with Varuna when the former's relatives were captured by the latter in a battle (17.3). Rāvana was advised by his ministers to sign a pact of Sandhi (6.5.7) with Rāma but he did not pay heed to it, hence he brought about his own end.
When the territory of Janaka was invaded by barbarion tribes, he made alliance (Samśraya) with Dasaratha and thus emerged successful in chasing away the hordes (Ch.27). Virādhita's terriory was usurped by Kharadūşaņa (9.18-21) so Virādhita sought alliance with Laksmana and helped him in killing Kharadūşana who had attacked Lakşmana (45.2). Thus Virādhita reobtained his ancestral
1. Vyavahāra Bhāsya, 7.459. 2. Si, p. 212. 3. PHAI, p. 262. (9 th Ed.). 4. Ibid. p. 525.
20

Page #495

466
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
kingdom (85.27). Sugrīva made alliance with Rāma (47,4) who was considered to be a strong ally. He thus annihilated his enemy Sahasagati. Rama sought alliance with Sugrīva (47.30) to rescue Sita from Rāvana. Thus Rāma got success in bringing about the end of Rávana.
Thus the PCV reveals that a stronger king adopted the policy of war with a weaker king. A weaker king made alliance with stronger king sought the protection of another king. These are the the three (i. e. Vigraha. Sandhi and Samśraya respectively) of the six policies laid down by Kautilya (VII. 1.12-16) and Manu (7.160) in relation to foreign powers.
Besides the above mentioned policies, the PCV reveals that Rāma sent Hanuman to bring about conciliation with Rāvana for rescuing Sítā (48.120; 53.1-8). Similarly king Ativirya of Nandyávartapura first sent his envoy requesting Bharata to accept his suzerainty (37.19). In both the cases the method of conciliation (sama) failed and then a war was waged.
When Rāma's policy of peaceful negotiations failed he waged war against Rāvana. In the ensuing battle Rāvana's relatives got captured by Rāma. Then Rāvana sought to stop the war by offering some parts of his territory, many costly things, women, horses and elephants to Rāma (65.35-36). But as Sita was not returned hence Rāma rejected the offer of Rāvana. This is an example of the policy of Dāna or Dāma. In the same way Kharadūşana who had kidnapped the sister of Rāvana was afraid of Rāvana's attack. When Rāvana reached there on his way to the war-campaign, Kharadüşana greeted Rāvana with the presents of many jewels and put to his disposal a large number of soldiers. (10.17).
For the maintenance of law and order the policy of Danda (punishment) was followed by the rulers. Thus the PCV reveals that when Kundalamandita rebelled in the territory of king Anaranya of Ayodhyā, the latter got him captured and punished (26.23-31) him appropriately. Similarly the younger brother of a certain king was expelled from the state on account of causing touble in the former's state (39.83) and another king duly punished those persons who committed crimes in the state.
Thus the PCV reveals that the Sāma, Dāna or Dāma and Danda which were the three of the four instruments of successful administration of the country were duly adhered to by the rulers,
1. The four instruments are Sāma-conciliation), Dāma or Dăna (gifts), Bheda
(division) and Danda (war or punishment) Nayad hammakahão, 8. p. 978; MB (Santi parva) 35;Manu. 7.109.

Page #496

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
467
Justice and Law :-King was the judiciary head. He decided the suits, seated on Dharmāsana (105,100) i.e. the seat of justice. He used to consult learned Panditas whenever a suit came before him in the court (41.62.77;105.100). The suit instituted in the court was called Vyavahāra (41.62; 105.102).
Police and Jail :-The policemen are referred to as Dandapāsikas (82.48) and the Jail as Cārageha (3.11; 8.74). Jail equipment just as chains (sarkala 53.119, 142) and iron fetters (niyala=nigada 8.74) are also mentioned.
Toll and Tax :-Under the reign of Rāma and Lakşmaņa, as said in the PCV, their subjects were happy and they were not required to pay any toll or tax to the state (Karabharahio-80.17).
Crime and Punishment :-There are allusions to robbers and dacoits (gāmagaradesaghāya 14.15). Smugglers and thieves are referred to (takkara 2.7 & cora 14.15). Burglaries were committed even into the royal palaces (5.85; 33.72). The cases of adultery are evidenced among the common people (46.64; 82.47), the person of high position (39.42) and the royal class also (82.37). Murders were committed (5.89; 103.4) generally in the cases of adultery (39.42, 46;82.37; 82.49).
Guilty persons were punished. Thus a purohita who swindled the valuables of a Vanik is said to have been expelled from the state (divvāsio 5 34). Kautilya recommends expulsion for a Brahmin also who commits theft (IV. 8.33-38). In another similar case capital punishment was inflicted upon a Brahmin (sūlae nirovio 34.46). But he was granted pardon on the intervention of a Vanik who perhaps might have paid a heavy penalty in cash (34.47). Manu (8.337) recommends severe punishment for a Brahmin thief but grants him immunity from amputation of limbs and capital punishment. Further it is mentioned in the PCV that tho whole village was burnt to ashes by a king on account of the guilt of a single villageman who had comınitted theft (5.208).
Adultery committed in the royal house was punished severely. A Brahmin who was caught dallying with a queen was given the punishment of amputation of his limbs (ațțhanganiggaha 88.12). Kautilya lays down that such a criminal should be burnt to death (4.11.17). If the criminal happened to be a Brahmin he should be given life-long imprisonment (tamaḥ praveśyet 4.11.18). Manu (8.383-385) says that a Brahmin who commits adultery should not be awarded the punishment af death, he may be fined.
Śramanas and Tapasas were not immune from the punishment. A Śramana who was falsely charged with entry into the harem was

Page #497

468
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
punished to death along with his fellow Sramapas (41.30-31) by a king bigot. A Tápasa who entered the harem and requested to marry a princess, was tied with ropes and publicly censured (39.116) by the king.
Divine Ordeal :-The PCV reveals that divine ordeals were ordered for testing the guilt of a person. When Sítā was asked to prove the purity of her character, she offered to undergo any one of the five ordeals (pañcasu divvesu 101.38) of which the four are mentioned as 'tulă = balance, jalapaṁ=fire, phalam=ploughshare and visam = poison'. Sītā underwent the fire-ordeal. She entered a pit ablazing with fire. She was chaste so the fire pit changend into a waterreservoir and she was acclaimed guiltless. Manu (7.114f) recognises two ordeals. viz. fire and water. The Sukraniti (4.747-52) adds to them the ordeals of vișa, ghata or tulā, dharma and adharma, tandula and sapatha. It states that when all the other methods fail the ordeals are resorted to for prosecuting the person who is charged with some crime.
C. Army and Warfare.
Army:-A strong army was maintained by rulers for the protection and the safty of the territories from external attacks and internal upheavals. Thus the PCV reveals that the kings had at their disposal strong army which is variously called as Bala (12.139), Sadhana (27.30), Sainya (59.11) and Anika (99.54). It consisted of four columns (caturangabala 8.242) namely the infantry, cavalry, elephants and chariots (Sandanavaragayaturalgapäikkam 8.48; 12.139). In addition to the horses and elephants other beasts such as donkeys (khara), bulls (vasaha & go), bisons (mahisa) and camels (maya & karaha) were also employed in the army (7.14; 70,66; 99.52). Kautilya mentions that donkeys and camels should be employed for defensive purposes in case of the shortage of elephants (10.4.19). The references to the soldiers of Rāvana and Rāma riding on lions (kesari & siha), tigers (vaggha), Sarabha (saraha) and boars (varāha) indicate that the masks of the respective wild beasts were put on the faces of the ordinary beasts of burden to give them a frightening look (7.14; 70. 66; 99.52; See RKSj, p. 45).
The PCV (56.2-11) gives the measurement of the different units of army. It mentions that the smallest unit of army was called Pankti (Panti) which was comprised of one elephant, one chariot, three horses and five infantry soldiers. Then there were the successive larger units called Senā, Sanāmukha, Gulma, Vahini, Pștanā, Camū and Anikini which were three times larger than the preceding one

Page #498

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
469
successively. The last one was the Akṣauhiņī which I was ten times larger than the Anikini. Thus an Akṣauhiņi consisted of 21870 elephants, 21870 chariots, 65610 horses and 109350 infantry soldiers. The MB (Adi, 2. 19-27) corroborates this strength of an Akṣauhiņi but it mentions Senāmukha, Gulma and Gana in places of Senā, Senāmukha and Gulma of the PCV respectively.
Implements of War:-The war implemets were of two kinds, offensive and defensive. Offensive weapon is called auha=ayudha (71. 2) and paharana=praharana (8.9). It is also referred to as a sattha (sastra) or a attha (astra) respectively. The Sukraniti (4.1024f) explains that an astra was thrown or cast down by means of charms machines or fire while a sastra was any other weapon like sword, dagger, etc. The PCV does not make any such distinction between the two kinds of offensive weapons. (12.126-127; 58.60,62;71.61).
Various offensive weapons mentioned in the PCV are as follows:
Dhanu (12.84) also called Sarasana (61.66) is the bow. Cava (capa) is the bow made of a kind of wood called Capa.1 Sara (59.19 sara) or Bana (7.25) is the arrow. Ardhacandra (53.115) is the crescent arrow. Khuruppa (59.19 Kṣurapra) is a kind of arrow with its point like the blade of a razor3. Sella (7.26) is also a kind of arrow3. Toņira (24.30 Túnira) is the quiver. Asi (10.56) or Karavala (12.111) is the sword. Asilatthi (3.147 Asiyaşți) is a very sharp and long sword. Khagga (6.192 Khadaga) is a sword 25 or 50 angulas in length". Vasunandaka (70.67) is the best type of sword. Churiya (61.38 Kşurika) is the dagger or a battle knife. Parasu (12.101 Paraśu) is the battle-axe or scymitar semicircular in shape Kuṭhāra (72.34) or Kuhada (99.24) is a kind of axe. Karavatta (69.45 Karapatra) is saw. Kappa (9.73) may be a razor like weapon". Pattisa (53.109 Pattiśa) is a razor like weapon shaped like a trident at both ends. Sula (12.111) is a pike. Súlaratna (12.7) is the best type of pike which when thrown can traverse a very long distance. Triśula (53.109) is a trident. It possesses three blades branched off like a fork. Satti (10.56 Śakti) is explained as a metallic weapon four cubits in length like the leaf of Karavīra
1. Kaut, 2.18, 9.
2. IK, p. 16".
3, Desinamamala, 8.57,
4. Shama, p. 111.
5. Varahivṛhatsaṁhtu, 50. 1.
6. Kappa may be the Karpana of Kautilya which is explained as an arrow to be thrown by the hand (Shama, p.111).
7. Ibid, p. 111.

Page #499

470
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
and provided with a handle like a cow's nipple1. Savvala (59.21) is an iron spear2. Kunta (53.109) is a lance. Tomara (53.109) is a rod with an arrow like edge and four to five cubits in length3. Kanaya (12.111) is a metallic rod both ends of which are triangular. It is held in the middle and is two feet long. It is also called a type of arrow". Jatthi (59.15 Yaşți) is the pointed rod made of Khadira wood. Hala (59.86) or Nangala (72.33 Langala) is a heavy weapon like ploughshare. Musala (59.16) is a pestle or pointed rod made of Khadira. Bhinḍivāla (7.37 Bhindimāla) is a rod with heavy top. Moggara (57.28 Mudgara) is a staff hammer of iron. Gaya (52.7 Gadā) is a mace. Vajja (7.10 Vajra) is the thunderbolt, a kind of club made of iron. Phaliha (12.90 Parigha) is a club studded with iron pikes10. Musundhi (26.56) is the octagonal club.11 Cakka (99.24 Cakra) is the discus with pointed and sharp projection on the periphery12. The weapons which could not be identified are Caḍakka (7.29) and Jhasara (53.82). Bhujangapāsa (59.78) is the noose used to tie the enemy.
were
Thd PCV further refers to the throwing of stones in the battle (Sila 6.194;7.26;12.90). Kautilya (2.18.16) states that stones thrown in the battle by hand or by a machine or a sling. The references to the Yantras fixed on the ramparts (Jantesu 12.48; Kūḍajantesu 46.86; Jantapayaraṁ 52 6) indicate that machines were used for operating weapons and stones13.
The employing of magical missiles is referred to at several places in the PCV. Varuņāstra (59.60), the cloud-missile created darkness, It was counteracted by the Mărutastra (59.61) or Samiraņāstra, the airmissile (71.61). The fire-missile (Agneyam) was nullified by the cloudmissile (12.127). The Tamasastra (59.63) which spread darkness was counteracted by the missile of light (Diväkarastra 61.44 or Udyotāstra
1. Ibid, p. 111.
2. Vide LAI, p. 80.
3. Shama, p. 111.
4. Ibid; See TP, 8.257 also.
5. Desinamamala, 2.56.
6. Shama, p. 110.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid, p. 111.
9. IK, p. 160.
10. Ibid, p. 161.
11. LAI, p. 80.
12. IK, p. 160; See also Sukraniti,4. 1049.
13. See Shrma, p.110 and Sukraniti, 4. 1024f.

Page #500

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
471
12.128). Similarly the missiles of Siddhāstra (72.12), Vainateya (61.46), Raksasa (71.63), Indhana (71.64), Uraga (71.66) and Vinayaka (71.67) were counteracted by Vighnavinayaka, Dharma, Pratindhana, Garuda and Mahāstra respectively.
Supernatural powers or lores were also used in the battle. The Darsanāvarnividyā brought about the stagnation of the soldiers (59.40). It was counteracted by Pratibodhanīvidyă (59.42).
The defensive equipment of a soldier is called Avarana (8.93; 46. 97;59.11). It consisted of a coat of mail (kāvaya=Kavaca 6.11;59.47) a helmet (Sirattāņa-Sirastrāņa 12.84) and a shield (Phara, Phalaya = Phalaka; Khedaya = Khețaka 71.21).
Other Equipment of Army:- The other important equipment of the army was the tent (sibira 37.39;47.38;61.52). It accompanied the army wherever it proceeded for a battle. The tent was fixed for the encampment of the king and the army. This temporary encampment was called Sibiranivesa (10.27). It was well-planned with its ramparts, gates, guards (62.26-36), royal house (33.98), council hall (33.99) and other necessary facilities which a town would provide (10.27). It is called a temporary settlement (Sannivesa 62.35). Kautilya (10.1) corroborates is when he describes the establishment of the army (Skandhāvāra) with its royal buildings, offices, stationing of guards etc.
The necessary amenities of life were properly arranged for the king and the soldiers in the army-camp. The provisions of food and clothing as well as the valuables such as gold and jewels which were considered to be essential in emergency were taken along with the army. These were loaded on donkeys, camels, oxen, bisons and buffaloes (99.25). Articles of luxury such as betel-leaves, flowers, sandal, saffron and camphor were also available in the camp (99. 28). Systematic arrangements were made for the proper care of the fighting soldiers. Water to the tired and the thirsty and food of various kinds to the hungry were supplied in time. The wounded were treated with the sandal water and other necessary amentities were supplied to them at suitable time (71. 1-2).
Musical Instruments :-Musical instruments constituted an indispensable equipment of the army. They were used in war at every step from beginning to end. The army was alerted and mobilised by sounding Samarabherī (70. 63) or Mahābherī (53. 96; 55. 3; 63. 7). Its march commenced with the blowing of conches (15. 82). Its journey to the battle ground was encouraged by sounding various musical instruments

Page #501

472
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN (12. 86; 57. 22; 99.53), and by announcing the words of victory (4. 40). It was the sound of the instruments which indicated the arrival of the army of the enemy (44. 15). The fight commenced with the blowing of warhorns (8. 92) and during the actual fight the soldiers were encouraged by appropriate music (12. 118). In the end the victorious king returned with joy in the midst of the sound of the musical instruments (6. 235).
Banners and Ensigns : --Armies representing the particular kings had their own banners with distinctive emblems marked on them. The Vānara army had its own banner which bore the emblem of the figure of a monkey (59. 16). Besides the state banner, the kings, leaders and soldiers had their individual ensigns which were marked on their respective flags. Thus the flags of Ráma and Lakşmana had the ensigns of a lion and an eagle respectively (99. 68; 60. 1-2). These flags regularly unfurled on the chariots accomodating the respective kings (12. 122; 24. 25: 61. 64). Apart from the kings other leaders (nāyaga 59. 70) of the army had their own individual ensigns. Thus the garland, the banyan tree, a lion and an elephant were the ensigns of Viradhita, Jambūnada, Simhavara and Meghakānta respectively (54. 36). The fighting feudal lords maintained their seperate emblems on their flags (59. 11). Last of all the soldiers of repute also had their own respective signs. The soldiers of Rāvana are mentioned to have various ensigns (nāhācindhā 56. 47). The Mleccha invaders also are said to have been holding the flags marked with the figures of lion, bull elephant (27. 35) etc.
Battle : -Whenever there was an apprehension of some attack, it was the duty of the king to make proper arrangements for the defence of his capital. Thus the Paumacariyan mentions that when Vibhişaņa saw the danger of the probable attack of the army of Rāma, he made Lanka well-fortified. He alerted his country men, called for his feudal lords, installed war-machines on the fort and garrisoned the soldiers to protect the fort (46;96.52.4). The rampart was sometimes equipped with the fire around it (aggipauro pāyāro 12.45). Nalakübara had also made such defensive arrangements when he apprehended an attack from Ravana (12.48) on his capital.
In the actual battle, alike columns of the army faced each other (hatthi hatthinā samar rahavaro ālaggo saha raheṇam, turaenasaha turango paikkasaha payatthenam 12.113). Fighting soldiers sometimes took recourse to wrestling also (bhuyajujjhar 99.59).
There were occasions when kings tried to avoid the vast human massacre by arranging a personal (bout) duel between themselves,

Page #502

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
473
Thus Bahubali had fought a sight and a boxing duel with his brother Bharata (4.43-46).
Ethics of War :-The Paumacariyaṁ mentions that fighting was always stopped at the advent of night and it recommenced the following morning (59.10,11). Further it mentions that a person devoted to some religious performances was not captured deceptively, the fearful was not attacked (67.6) and the women were not harassed (67.16). This kind of battle could be termed as Dharmayuddha as mentioned by Kautilya (10.10.27), in which the time and place of fighting were pre-settled. Just the opposite of it was the Kūṭayuddha in which treacherous plans were executed. The Paumacariyam reveals that in the battle between Ativīrya and Bharata the latter during the night secretly (ukkhandaṁdāūņa = avaskandaṁ datva 37.39,41) attacked the former's camp and seized his elephants and horses. Further Rāma, Laksma pa and other soldiers disguised themselves as dancing girls and captured Ativirya (37.45-60) Satrughna secretly seiznd Mathura, the capital of Madhu, in the night hours when its king was out of the city (86.36-38). Rāvana followed Kūṭanīti in subjugating Nalakūbara of Durlanghyapura. Ravana's army could not enter into the fort of Nalakübara because it was heavily equipped with fire and various defensive machines. He accepted the love proposal of Uparambha, the wife of Nalakübara and took the Asaliya lore from her. Then with the help of that lore he entered the fort and defeated Nalakūbara, but he did not violate the chastity of Uparambha (12.48-70). Rāvana had further thought of another underhand policy to get his relatives released from the captivity of Rama, but he did not execute it (66.4).
Treatment meted out to the Defeated Kings:-Defeated kings were captured and taken away to the camp of the victorious king (10.67; 19.32; 12.137). They were not tortured but released and reinstalled as the kings of their respective territories (10.80; 19.33). The policy was not to confiscate the land but to subjugate the rulers and make them accept the suzerainty of the victorious one. They enjoyed autonomy in their kingdoms. They paid tributes and went to the help of the suzerain king on the occasions of war. These kings sometimes married their (33.138,139) daughters to the suzerain and thus made their position stronger and safe by such matrimonial alliances. Even if the defeated kings were punished, the punishment was very formal. The PCV states that when Ravana captured Indra, the latter's father approached Ravana for gatting his son released. Ravana then put before him some conditions for the release of Indra. He proposed that he would release Indra if he was ready to perform some menial services in his capital such as cleaning the city and

Page #503

474
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
strewing flowers on the roads (13.5). When it was acceded to by Indra, he was released by Rāvana. The rebels were duly punished. Kundalamandita, a rebel belonging to Durgamapura was released by Daśaratha only when the former duly satisfied the latter with his behaviour (26.32).
Sometimes a king was kidnapped and harassed. Rudrabhūti, the Mleccha chief of the Kāgonanda tribe captured Bālikhilya, the king of Kūvavadda and kept him as a prisoner. He used to receive a major part of the revenue from the capital (34.25) of Bālikhilya. It seems to be a case of holding on ransom. Bālikhilya was freed when Rāma and Lakşmana happened to overpower Rudrabhūti (34.41).
Causes of Battle: The most prevalent cause of war was the policy of expansion and aggrandisement. It was executed in two ways, firstly by killing the king of another country and occupying his throne. Thus Satrughna killed Madhu, the lord of Mathură and declared himself as the king of that city (Ch.86). Virādhita's father was killed and his capital city Pátāla kārapura was occupied by Kharadūşana (9.20-22). This policy was followed seldom. The second policy which was the most popular was that the powerful king subjugated the kings of various other countries and made them to accept his suzerainty (8.11;9.28; 16.22; 22.57, 58,92; 33.77; 37.19; 98.57-68). The subjugated kings were autonomous in their own states.
The other cause of battle was for the marriage of the princesses i. e. if a princess (5.65-77;9.28; 90.12; 98.11) who was demanded by a particular king was not married to him then he waged battle against the father of the princess.
Sometimes at the time of 'svayarn vara' ceremony, the disgruntled princes fought with the prince who was chosen as her husband by the bride (6.176;24.19). The disgruntled sons of Laksmana had tried to fight with Lava & Alkusa on the similar issue, but the war of fatricide was averted by the wise (106.13) counsel of their ministers and mothers. The sons of Srişeņa had fought between each other for a courtezan (15.19) only.
Previous enmity and insult were also responsible for a battle. Hanu fought with Mahendra because the former's mother was exiled from the country (50.5) by Mahendra. Lavana & Aukusa fought with Rāma on the same reason as their mother was exiled by Rāma 99.20).
Sometimes even a trifle caused a furious battle. Rāvana's Jina worship was disturbed by the overflow of the water of the Narmada which was sudenly released by the sporting king, Sahasrakirana. This caused a battle between Rāvana and Sahasrakirana (10.48).

Page #504

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS 475 SECTION 3. PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION
A. Philosophy. The PCI is mainly a narrative work but religious elements are predominant in it. At several places monks have been introduced giving discourses on Jaina philosophy and religion. We do not find any such information about other philosophies. Lord Mahavira's sermon to king Srepika (2.37-98) on the Vipulagiri, Muni Anantavīrya's (Ch. 14) and Muni Sakalabhūsana's (102.58-196) discourses to Ravana and Rāma respectively are the particular occasions in the PCV when the doctrines of Jaina philosophy are explained in brief. Then Lord Rşabha's sermon (4.23) and the discourses of a monk to Taditkeśa of Lauka (6.118), of Anantavīrya to Ravana (Ch. 14), of another monk tu the exiled king Saudāsa (22.80), of monk Dyuti to Bharata (32.57), of another monk to king Vajrakarpa of Daśapura (33.29) and of Muni Sarvagupta to Ráma (Ch. 102) are the occasions when the Jaina ethics have been dealt with. Besides that, we find that references to religious terms of Jainism are spread over at several places.
Here we shall give a brief account of the doctrines of Jaina philosophy and Jaina ethics which are well-established and well-known. The points which differ from the established things will be given a special treatment. Then we shall deal with the ascetic life, rituals and popular worship as revealed in the PCV.
Jaina Philosaphy :
Six Substances :- The substance (Dravya=Davvam duviham 2.62) is of two kinds-Jiva and Ajiva (Jivājīvā) i. e. living or conscious or soul and non-living or unconscious or non-soul. Ajiva is further said to be of five kinds e. g. Dharma--the fulcrum of Motion, Adharma- the fulcrum of Rest, Ākāśa--the space, Kala-the Time and Pudgal--the Matter (Dhammadham māgāsain kalo jivo ya poggalena samaṁ 102.99). Thus the substance is of six kinds (davvam chabbhevan 102.99). The distinction between the first four kinds of Ajiva and the fifth kind of Ajiva is well brought out in the TS (5.4) which mentions that Pudgala possesses form while the rest of the non-living substances as well as the Jiva are formless (5.3,28).
Jiva or Soul:--The fundamental characteristic of Jiva is said to be Upayoga consisting of Jñana and Darsana (Jivānam taha darsanam 102.96) i.e. knowledge and awareness or intuition (determinate and indeterminate knowledge'). Jñāna and Darśana are further
1, She OJP. 30.

Page #505

476
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
said to be of eight and four kinds respectively (nāņaṁ atthaviyappa cauvviham damsan 102.96). They can be accounted as follows: The eight kinds of knowledge are Matijñāna (sensory knowledge), Śrutajñāna (scriptural knowledge), Avadhijñāna (limited direct knowledge or clairvoyance), Manaḥparyāyajñāna (direct knowledge of other's mind or telepathy), Kevalajñāna (perfect knowledge or omnis. cience), Matiajñāna (sensory-wrong-knowledge), Srutājñāna (scriptural-wrong-knowledge) and Avadhi-ajñāna (limited-direct-wrongknowledge or Vibha iga-jñāna). 'The four kinds of intuition are: Cakşurdarśana (visual intuition), Acakşurdarśana (non-visual intution), Avadhidarśana (limited-direct intuition) and Kevaladarśana (perfect intuition).
Classification of Jivas:-Souls (Jivas) are said to be of two kinds i.e. the liberated and the worldly souls (Siddhas & Saṁsāravantas 2.62). The worldly souls or living beings are of two kinds i.e. those who are destined to get liberated and those who would never be liberated (bhavva & abhavva 2.66; 30.40). Again the worldly souls are classified as mobile and immobile (tasa & thāvara 2.64), then the both as complete or developed to the full and incomplete or undeveloped(pajjatta=paryāpta & apajjattā=aparyāpta 2.64). The immobile beings are of two kinds i.e. the subtle and the gross (suhuma=sukṣma & bāyara = bādara 102.95). The immobile beings are again of five types i.e. the earth, water, fire, air and vegetable bodies (pudhavijalajalanamāruya vaņassai 2.65). They are all onesensed (102.94). Then there are two (touch, taste), three (touch, taste, smell), four (touch, taste, smell, sight), and five-sensed (touch, taste, smell, sight & hearing) beings (102. 94). The one-sensed beings are immobile and the others are mobile. The mobile beings are again of two kinds i. e. rational and non-rational or possessed of mind and not possessed of mind (duvihatasã sanni iyare ya 2. 65)."
According to the state of their existence the living beings are of four kinds i, e. infernal, subhuman, human and celestial (caugai 2. 95
1. See TS, 1.9, 32 (Bhūşya 2.9) & Niyama, 10-14. 2. A newly born mundane soul is incomplete but it has the capacity to become
complete in respect of assimilation (ahāra), body (sarira). Sense organ (indriya), respiration (pānapāna), speech (bhāṣā) and mind (manas). Those who develop these six-fold capacities are called paryāptas and those who die before developipg them are known as aparyāptas--The Jaina Religion
and Literature. Vol. I. Pt, pp. 86-88. 3. The TS (2.25) explains that the human, infernal, celestial and some of the
subhuman beings i. e. those who possess five senses are possessed of mind while the rest of the beings are devoid of mind.

Page #506

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
477
naraya, tirikkha, māņusa & deva 2. 89-92). In relation to their birth they are of three kindst, viz. uterine, instantaneous and spontaneous. The first kind of living beings are born of the womb by the union of a male and a female, the second ones are the celestial and hellish beings who rise instantaneously and form the fluid body and the third ones are those who are produced by coagulation like cells (Gabbhayā............ Suranārayauvavāyā...............Sammucchimā 102.97). The uterine beings are further of three kinds viz. those who are born from egg are called incubatory, those who get born in a flesh envelope or yolk sack just as a human child are termed as umbilical and those whose birth is without any sack or shell just as a cub of a lion or a kitten are called unumbilical (andāuyapoyāuyajarāuyā gabbhajā 102. 97).
Pudgala or Matter :-The very etymological meaning of 'pudgala' differentiates it from other non-living substances. "Pud' means to combine and 'gala' means to dissociate. Therefore 'Pudgala (is that substance which undergoes modifications by combinations and dissociations. 2 The PCV 3 further categorically refers to five kinds of material bodies viz. audarika, vaikriya, ahāraka, taijasa and kārmana. They are said to be successively subtler in form. Their details can be known from elsewhere. 4
Nine-Principles : The PCV at 102. 181 refers categorically to the nine principles (Jivāīyāņa navapayatthāņam), and at other places the individual principles such as Jiva, Ajiva, Punya (75. 19), Pápa (31. 26), Bandha (14. 9), Nirjarā (14. 11) and Mokşa (14. 9) are referred to. The remaining principle is the Aśrava.5 These are the different conditions of Jiva bound with Pudgala. They denote the connection of soul with matter i. e, the way in which a soul is kept bound to the matter and the way it dissociates from matter and is completely liberated. This is the ethical classification of Padārtha.
Mokşa (5.41) is variously called as Siddhi (5.53), śivaṁ (5.167) and Nirvāna (14.120). It is the pure state of a soul (arayaviraya vimala 6.146) which has no blemishes. There is no obstruction (avvabaha 5.250), no decay, no death (ajarāmaranirayam 103.134),
1. See TS, 2. 32-34. 2. See Jain Philosophy & Modern Science, p. 44. 3. Orāliyam viuvvam āhārami tejasam ca kammaiyam/
Suhumam paramparāe gunehi sampajjai sariramil 102. 98. See also TS, 2.
37-38. 4. Outlines of Jaina Philosophy, p. 78. 5. See Uttara, 28.14; Sthāṇānga, 665. 6. For details see TS, 6.1-4; 9.1-3 & 10.1.

Page #507

478
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
no misery or pain (dhuyakilesa 21.64; dukkha vimokkham 4.55) and there is infinite bliss (ananta sokkham 2.83) which is never exhaustible (akkhayam 2.94), is ever lasting (anantakalaṁ 14.100), is never shakable and is unparalleled (sivamayalamaņuttaram 5.167).
Doctrine of Karma :-The PCV reveals that it is due to the Karmas that a soul wanders in transmigration. These Karmas are said to be of eight kinds (aṭṭhavihakammabaddho jivo paribhamai 14.10; 9.8; 21.59; 75.45) of which Vedaniya (14.10) and Mohaniya (14.99) are mentioned. The TS (8.5) mentions them as follows: (1) knowledge obscuring (jñānāvaraṇa), (2) intuition or conation or awareness obscuring (darśanavaraṇa), (3) feeling producing (vedaniya), (4) belief and conduct obscuring (mohaniya), (5) age determining (ayu), (6) personality determining (nama), (7) status determining (gotra) and (8) power hindering (antaraya). The PCV mentions that by the destruction of 'ghati' karmas one obtains perfect knowledge (Kevala jñāna 4,17) i. e. omniscience. The 'ghati' Karmas are Jñānāvaraṇīya, Darśanavaraniya, Monaniya and Antaraya (See TS, 10.1). At 2.30 the PCV mentions that by the destruction of all the eight kinds of Karmas Lord Mahāvīra attained Kevala (aha aṭṭha-kammarhiyassa It seems to be a scribe's error ...kevalanāņaṁ samuppannaṁ). because the Jaisalmer manuscript reads as 'atthaddhakammarahiyassa'.
Here it will be worthwhile to record that the PCV (2.82) categorically mentions 'Visam Jiņa kāraņāim' i. e. twenty factors or twenty kinds of religious practices which result in earning the 'gotra' of Jinanood. Their details can be known from the Nayadhammakahão (VIII.69). The TS (6.23) mentions their number as sixteen only.
The Path to Emancipation or Ratnatraya :-The PCV mentions that right faith, right knowledge, right conduct and austerities lead to emancipation (damsanananacaritte. suddha.........siddhim pāventi dhuyakamma 2.93; carittanaṇadamsanavisuddhasammattaladdhamahappo kāūņa tavamüyāram sivamayalamaņuttaram patto 6.155; see Uttara, 28.2-3; TS, 1.1). Austerities should be included in the right conduct. Right belief is characterised as faith in the nine principles (already mentioned -102-8). It is devoid of belief in heretic doctrines and is free from the defects of doubt etc. (loiyasuīsu rahio & samkai dosarahio 102.181, 182). The other defects which are not mentioned in the PCV are the desire for sense pleasures, feeling of disgust, thinking admiringly of wrong believers and praising them (See TS, 1.2; 7.18 & Uttra, 28.14-15). Right knowledge is the knowledge of the nine principles. It is said in the PCV that the fundamental six substances (i.e.

Page #508

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIGUS CONDITIONS
479
davvaṁ chabbheyaṁ) are sattabhangajuyam (102.99), i.e. the true knowledge in all its aspects can be acquired by the method of Saptabhangi. It is a method of describing a thing in seven ways. It is a reference to the Syādvāda, the theory of relative judgement or conditional predicament. Lastly right conduct including the austerities will be dealt further under 'Jaina ethics'. Here it is necessary to make it clear that right faith, right knowledge and right conduct along with austerities are all necessary in a combined form for attaining emancipation and for that they have been mentioned together in the Paumacariyam and not separately. No one separated from any other three essentials can help to realize Mokşa. The Uttaradhyayana (28.30) emphasises that without faith there is no knowledge, without knowledge there is no conduct, without conduct there is no emancipation, Thus all the three are interdependent and co-related and they are jointly indispensable for one to attain Mokşa.
Jaina Ethics :
is no there elate
The religious conduct called as 'dhamma' 14.108, 'caritta' 33.52 or 'cariyam' 39.52 is two-fold, i.e. the rules concerning lay-devotees or householders and those concerning monks. The former conduct is called Săvayadhamma (14.111 Śrāvakadharma) or Gihatthadhamma (6.120) (Gshasthadharma) or Salambanadharma (33.52) and the latter is termed as Samanadhamma 14.10, (śramanadharma), or Sāhavacariyaṁ 39.52 (Sadhudharma) or Mahārisidhamma 6.123 (Maharşidharma) or Nirāyāradhamma (5.118 Nirāgāradharma) orNiralambana dharma (33.52). They are also called as minor and major dharma (dhammo anuo taheva ukkoso 103.80; anujetthoor jettho 22.27) respectively.
Monk's conduct :- The code of religious conduct prescribed for monk is said to be consisting of observing of five greater vows, five kinds of carefulness and thre kinds of preservation (Pañca mahavvayāiń samiio panca, tippi guttio 4.23)?. Five greater vows are complete abstinences from causing injury, speaking falsehood, committing theft, observing non-celibacy and keeping worldly possessions (Himsaliya. corikkamehunapariggahassa niyatti 14.70; 11.23). Five kinds of Samitis are carefulness in walking, speaking, eating, lifting up or laying down of things and excreting (iriyā, bhāsā, esaņā, āyāṇanikkheva
1. See for details Pravaca nasāra, Int. p. 83.91 & OJP, p. 118. 2. See Niyama, IV. 3. See TS, VII. 1-2.

Page #509

480
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN & uccārai 14.71). Three Guptis are: Control of mind, speech and body (maņa-vaya-kāyagutti 14.72).
Besides that, the monks are advised to subdue the passions of anger, pride, deceit, greed, attachment and aversion (koha mõna, māyā, lobha, rāga & dosa 14.73) which are said to be the most powerful enemies.
The PCV states that the monks should observe twelve-fold austerities (bārasabheotavo 14.76) for shedding of the Karmic matter from their souls (Kammatthanijjarattham 14.76). The austerities are said to be of two types—internal and external (abbhintara 14.75) and (bāhyam tapah)3. The six-fold internal austerities are mentioned as expiation, reverenee, service to the saints and worthy people, study, non-attachment to the body and concentration (Pāyacchitam viņao veyāvaccam sajihão ussaggo & jhiņam (14.75). The six-fold external austerities are referred to as fasting, eating less than the appetite, taking a mental vow to accept food from a householder only if a certain condition is fulfilled without letting anyone know about it, daily renunciation of one or more of the six kinds of delicacies such as ghee, milk, curd, sugar, salt and oil, mortification of body and sitting and sleeping in lonely places (anasana, unoyariyā, vittisaukheva, rasaparicāga, kāyaparipida & vivittasayanāsaņa 14.74).
The PCV at 22.30,39 and 102.178 specifically refers to the 'árta' and 'Sukla-dhyāna'. The other two are the fraudra' and the dharma". Ārta is the painful concentration; Raudra is the wicked concentration, Dharma is the religious concentration and Sukla is the pure concentration. Nidāna is one of the various types of Artadhyāna. It is fixed for obtaining worldly objects. The PCV states that a monk should never fix Nidana (103.109-111), i. e. he should not hanker after worldly objects. It is very harmful. A monk fixing 'Nidāna' is compared with a person who is insane and gives up gems for a handful of vegetables or a piece of thread.
Further the PCV mentions that the monks should always devote themselves to twelve kinds of contemplations (bārasaaņupekkhāsu 14.77). The TS. (9.1-2,7) gives their details and states that they are helpful in checking the further flow of Karmic matter into the soul.6
1. See Mūta, 5.104-133, 2. Ibid, 5. 134-148. 3. See TS, 9,19; Mūta, 5.148-161. 4. See TS, 9.21-26; Müla,5.163-222. 5. See TS, 9.29. 6. See Dvādasānu pre kşa’ of Kun dakunda and Mura, Ch. 8.

Page #510

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS 481 Monks are further advised to bear 22 kinds of sufferings (bavisa parisaha chuhāryā 117.24). They are prescribed for developing internal stability. Their details can be known from the TS (9.2).
Further the PCV lays down that the monks should hold 18.000 kinds of discipline (atthārasayasahassā sīlarganaṁ dhāranti sappurisā 14.81). They are described in the Mülacāra. They comprise of controlling of each kind of activity viz. of mind, speech and body (Yogas) through each of the three agencies (Karanas) of mind, speech and body, each agency in relation to four impulses (Sarjñās), every Sarjña in relation to give sense organs and every sense organ in relation to protection of ten classes of living beings, each correlated with ten kinds of Dharmas (3 Yogas X 3 Karaņas X 4 Samjñas X 5 Indriyas X 10 Kāyas X 10 Dharmas=18,000). The details of the ten Dharmas can be known from the TS. (9.6).
Monks are advised to remain free from seven kinds of fears (sattabhayavippamukko 103.84). The Samavāyānga (7) and the Malacāra (2.53) give their details with minor differences in the names of three of them.
Householder's conduct:--The layman's conduct is said to be consisting of observing five lesser vows (pañcāņuvvayajutto 4.24) and seven disciplinary vows (sattahi sikkhāvaehi parikiņņo 4.24). The latter vows are also divided into two groups viz. three salutary vows and four disciplinary Vows (gunavvaya tiņņi cattāriya sikkhão 6.120;14.112).
The TS states that first five vows of a householder are called apuvratas because they are to be observed partially while in the case of the monks they are called Mahāvratas because they are to be followed in their completeness (deśasarvatoanumahati 7.2). The first five lesser vows are mentioned in the PCV as non-injury, speaking truth, non-stealing, non-indulgence with another' wife and contentment with limited possessions (ahiṁsā or thūlayaram pāņivahań nivitti, saccam adattādānam, paradarassavirai or parajuvaiņa nivitti & santoso 6.119; 14.113; 32.63-67), the three salutary vows (14.114) limit the quarters and the place for one's activity (disividisána niyama), preach abstention from unprofitable enjoyment (aņaţthadandassa vajjanaṁ) and further restrict one's enjoyment of consumable things (uvabhogaparimāņaṁ). The four disciplinary vows are: contemplation of the self (sāmāiyam), observance of fast, religious study and contemplation (uvavāsa posaha), right distribution of alms (atihisamvibhāga) and
1. Ch. 11.2-4. See Jinasahasyanāma, p. 38.
31

Page #511

482
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
peaceful self-mortification (samāhimaranam 14.115) or (samlekhana 63.49).
As regards the division of 12 vratas into two classes i. e. five anuvratas and seven sikşāpadas, the Jaina canonical work namely, the Uvāsagadasão agrees with the Paumacariyam (Pañcānuvvaiyam sattasi. kkhāvaiyam duvālasaviham gihiddammam 1. 13). But the 'disividisa' i, e, the first gunavrata of the PCV is bifurcated and mentioned as the first and the fifth Sikşăpadas (in the Uvāsagadasão (disivaya & desăvagāsiya 1.50 & 54) while the fourth 'sikşāpada' vrata of the PCV is not included in the 12 'sikşāpadas' but is mentioned separately as a supplementary vow (1.57). The 'atithisaṁvibhāga' of the PCV is called as "ahasaṁvibhāga=yathāsamvibhāga' in the Uvāsagadasão (1.56). The Ovavăiyasutta (34) follows Uvāsagadasão. It further divides the seven latter vows into the three 'guņavratas' and four 'Sikşāpadas”. This scheme is followed by the Srāvakaprajñapti (280-328, 378), Yogaśāstra of Hemacandra (3.1,4,74,23-87) with some differences in arrangement of the Guņavratas and Sikşāvratas The Ratnakaranda Śrāvakācāra (65, 91, 122) follows Ovavāiyasutta. It mentions 'vaiyyāvștya' in place of 'atihisaṁvibhāga'.
The Caritrapāhuda of Kundakunda (24-25) and the Bhavasangraha of Devasenal (354-355) agree with the PCV in the arrangement of the 'gunavratas' and 'Sikşāpadas'. The Adipurāņa of Jinasena (10.65-66) divides 'disividisi' of the PCV into two separate vows and then mentions the 'bhogopabhogavrata' as the fourth 'gupavrata' while the four "Sikşăpadas' are in agreement with the PCV.
The Tattvārthasutra (Dig. 7.21-22; Svet. 7.16.17) does not mention the latter seven 'vratas' as either seven 'Sikşāpadas' or three 'gupavratas' and four "Sikşāpadas'. Further it mentions 'dik, deśa and anarthadanda' as the first three i. e. they can be taken as three ‘gunavratas' (see the Sarvārthasiddhi). The Samlekhana is not included in the 12 vratas. It is mentioned separately.
The Yaśastilaka of Somadeva, Căritrasāra (p. 8 MPJG 1974) of Camupdarāya and the Dharmaparikșă of Amitagati follow Tattvārthasūtra.
Here the vow of 'atithisaṁvibhāga' i. e, offering of gifts deserves a detailed treatment because the Paumacariyan deals with it at various places in details and makes some pertinent observations. The PCV mentions that gifts i. e. of āhāra (food), abhaya (protection), nāņa
1. It mentions Devatthuvai' for 'Samāyika'. 2. See 7 aina Acāryon ka Sasanabheda, p. 49.

Page #512

483
ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
(knowledge 32.68-69) and osaha (medicine 14.41 should be offered. These are considered to be the best objects of gifts. The gifts of cows, girls, land and gold (goitthibhumidāņaṁ suvannadanaṁ 14,50) are mentioned as the cause of transmigration hence neither one should offer nor any monk should accept these things. This prohibition is quite against the practice of the Brahmanical religion, because Manu (4.230-231) extols the gifts of land, gold, silver and cow. The Padmapurana also (Brahmakhanda, Ch 24) highly recommends these gifts and lays down that (24,22) by offering a girl adorned with ornaments to a Brahmin one gets liberated from rebirth. This practice is found prevalent among the kings devoted to the Brahmanical faith. Kṣatrapa Rṣabhadatta (SI, I. p. 161) is said to have endowed gifts of gold, women, cows, and village to the Brahmins.
Some necessary conditions are attached offering to gifts. The Paumacariyam reveals that the alms should be offered with faithfulness, in accordance with one's capacity, and with devotion and awareness (Saddhasattībhattīvinnāņeņaṁ 102.135). The gifts offered with these carefulnesses bring about prosperity and happiness. The gifts are said to be of two kinds in relation to two types of receivers i.e. the right person and the wrong person (supattadapam and apattadāņaṁ 102.133). The right persons are those who observe five Mahāvratas, engage themselves in studies and meditation, perform austerities and are detached from wealth and worldly ties (102.134). Thus the Jaina monks are the right persons who deserve gifts (14.38.39). The wrong persons are those who are devoid of self control, infatuated by attachment and aversion (102.137). So the people of wrong faith engaged in injurious activities and immersed in sensual enjoyments do not deserve alms (14.42, 45) because the gifts given to wrong persons bring about subhuman existence and miseries (3.44) to the offerer. Therefore such gods who hold various weapons, who entertain passions, who have lust and attachment, who take delight in adorning their bodies, who have not crossed the world over and who pretend to liberate others are not fit for receiving any gift (14.61-62). Only the Vitaragas e.g. those who have destroyed the passions of attachment and aversion and who are free from all sorts of blemishes are worthy to receive alms (14.64), because the gifts offered to right persons are fruitful (102.135).
Besides the above vows, the PCV mentions that a householder should abstain from taking food at night and from using honey, meat and wine (raibhoyaņavirai mahumaṁsasurāvivajjaņam 14.116), because their use leads one to hell (103.28). The taking of food

Page #513

484
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
at night is often criticised because it brings about many-fold miseries in the next world (32.70; 14.137-148). Once it is said that abstinence from taking food at night forms the sixth lesser vow of householder's conduct (anuvvaya pañca......chaṭṭham ca raibhattam 6.120). Not only food but even the taking of water at night is not advised (amayaṁ pi na pāyavvam bcadda tume kim puno saliam 103.24). It is said that taking meal at night is just like devouring flies, worms and moths (103.25). The Sarvarthasiddhi (7.1) and Rajavartika (7.1), quote it as being regarded by some as sixth 'aņuvrata'. The Căritrasara of Camuṇḍaraya and the Acarasăra (5.70) of Viranandi mention the abstinence from taking food at night as the sixth Anuvrata of a houeholder's conduct. But the Yogas astra (3.6) of Hemacandra puts it under the 'bhogopabhogaparimāņa', i.e. the second 'gunavrata'. The Upasakācāra (5.1) of Amitagati and the Sagaradharmamṛta (2.18) of Asadhara include it among the Mulagunas. According to the Sravakacara (4) of Vasunandi and the Ratnakaraṇḍaśrāvakācāra (142) it is prescribed to be observed at the time of holding the sixth 'pratima' i.e. the sixth stage of householder's dharma which comes after 12 vratas (as described above), which are to be observed during the second 'pratima' stage. It has been already mentioned, that the PCV prohibits even the taking of water at night. The Caritrasara of Camuṇḍarāya prohibits it but the Acarasara of Viranandi prohibits food only, not water (sarvathännännivṛtestatproktam saṣṭhamanuvratam 5.70). Taking meat is similary criticised (14.47-49, 116;22.83-89) because it entails the killing of living beings (26.35) as it is not the product of trees or it does not grow on land (26.39) and killing is the negation of 'ahimsa', which is the very basis of the Jaina conduct (havai ahimsa mulaṁ dhammassa 26.62).
Thus the prohibition of taking honey, meat and liquor as mentioned in the Paumacariyam is corroborated by other Jaina works. These three abstinences have been included among the eight mulag uņas' of householders conduct (the other five being the five aņuvratas) by the Ratnakaranda Śravakācāra (66), (the other five being the five udumbaras, fig-tree fruits) by Yaśastilaka (1. 327)1, Bhavasamgraha (356) and the Sagaradharmamɣta (2. 2-3). The Yogaśastra (3. 6) and the Ratnakaraṇḍaśrāvakācāra (84) mention the above three abstinences under the 'bhogopabhogaparimana'-guna-vrata. The Śravakācāra (70-87) of Vasunandi puts them under the first stage (pratima) of the householder's conduct.
Ascetic Life.
The ascetic life as revealed in the Paumacariyam can be treated under two heads i. e. Jaina ascetic life and the non-Jaina ascetic life.
1. Vide Jasastilaka and Indian Culture-Handiqui, p. 262.

Page #514

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
485
Jaina Ascetics :
The Jaina monastic organsisation consisted of monks and nuns. The monk has been variously called as Samaņa (4. 72), Sāhu (14. 111; 13. 18), Nigganatha (2. 55; 32. 60), Jaivara (yativara 82. 12), Maharisi (4. 73; 14. 111) and Muni (6, 147) whereas the nun as Arya (2, 56; 103. 165) and Samani (105. 53). The act of getting initiated into the asceitc order called ordination is termed as Samanadikkhā (21. 55), Nigganthaṁ (1. 88), Jiņadikkhā (30.30), Jinavaradikkhā (21.84), Jaina paramadikkhar (3.136), Pavaradikkhā (5.250), Pavvajjain (6. 147), Sāmaņņa (1. 36), and Samanatta (39. 62). It is also called as entering the Tapovana (111. 5). The organisational head of the nuns is called Sayalaganapali (39. 48) while the chief of the smaller unit of the organisation as Mayahariya (102. 49- mahattarikā).
There is a single reference to a Svetām bara monk-i. e, the monk wearing white clothes but the naked monks i. e. the Digambaras are nowhere explicitly referred to. The nuns are referred to be putting on white garments (102. 60; 103. 165). Rajoharana (Rayaharana) i, e. the broom of woolen threads or peacock feathers was a necessary equipment of theirs (monks and nuns 114.15).
Those who entered the ascestic order had to give up kingdom, wife, sons, money and wealth (5.163). They had to be free from all wordly pleasures (nivvinpakāmabhoga 5.200) and had to restrain themselves from taking delight in any wordly object (paricayai visayasokkham 5.39). All the wordly possessions had no meaning for them and they had to give up all the injurious professions and activities (caiūņa pariggaha ārambha 13.40). They had to be free from all the attachments hence one who took ordination was called ‘vosariyasavvasariga' (4.52; 5.241); 'nissanga (29.33); "savvasangao mukkam' (6.98) and 'sangaparihiņam' (9.43). Before entering the ascetic order one took due permission of his parents and other relatives (106.45). The ceremony either in case of a male or a female was performed by voluntry uprooting of five handfuls of hair from the head (3.136; 102.46).
Causes of Renouncement:- The sole cause of accepting the life of an ascetic as depicted in the PCV is the disgust with wordly miseries which affected wordly persons in various ways and thus prepared
1. The PCV narrates that Sodāsa, king of Ayodhyā was dethroned and expelled
from the state on account of being addicted to taking human flesh, He happened to meet a Svetāmbara monk (Siyambara) in the Dakşiņadesa. He listened to his religious discourse and then became a Śrāvaka. Further he is said to have become the king of Mahāpura (22. 72-91).

Page #515

486
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
them for seeking spiritual emancipation. This disgust developed on accont of various kinds of wordly incidents. Some of the political reasons which led to asceticism were the defeat and humiliation in the battle(12.136;13.17; 37.64-65); preferring renouncement to submission to other king (9.44-46); and disgust from the horror of huge massacre in the battlefield (4.52). The household incident which led to asceticism were the lust of wealth and then enmity between sons and their mother (55.43), personal weakness in observing chastity (105.108); lustful eye on the flesh of one's own sister (3996); desire for another's wife and then lamentation (12.24); being not chosen in 'svayamvara' (106.27); being kidnapped by another man (30.70); being forcibly raped (103.102); losing one's own beyond recovery (26.20); one's wife being forcibly kept by another king and the unbearable pains of separation (21.5; 105.98); parent's getting separated from their son and daughter-in-law (30.65-67); the death of husband in the battle and sons' renouncement (6.75,82-84), the death of sons (5.197), the death of relatives (75.76-77; 110.37); mother being separated from her son who had taken dikşă (83.9-12); wife in separation of her husband who took dikşā (21.73), one's brothers' renunciation (113.70), or by friendship and by association (6.98).
Sītā on account of being blamed by the public and due to her husnand's doubt in her character, developed disguest for worldly miseries and became a nun (102.46). Rāma on being disgusted with various vicissitudes in worldly life (113.69) accepted asceticism. Kings are generally said to be renouncing the world at the time of their old age after transferring the crown to their sons (21.27: 5.250; 6.154). Some took dikṣa on having listened to the religious discourses from monks on the worldly miseries (5.164; 31.55; 32.21) or having heard the account of their miserable previous births (5.215: 6.147).
Sometimes very trivial causes were responsible for renouncing the world such as on seeing the blue cloth (3.122) or a waning winter cloud (21.22) or the grabing of the sun by Rāhu (21.81) or the bee dying in the lotus (5.218) or the sky overcast with clouds and devoid of the moon (108.23-24-47) or the withering lotuses (5.55).
Eligibility for becoming a Jaina monk:-The Paumacariyan reveals that there was no age-limit for entering the ascetic order. Any person at any period of his age could enter the Order. Women? were freely admitted without any distinction of sex or age. In addi
1. 21.72. 77; 22.21; 25.20; 39.47; 41.63; 80.26; 103.102; 106.46; 110.41. 2. 30.67.70;41.63; 103.102.

Page #516

ECONÔMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS 487 tion to the Jainas, non-Jainas also were free to enter the order. It is found that the monastic order did not nurture any racial", class sex or age distinction in accepting persons into the ascetic fold. It was open for one and all who wanted to bring about their spiritual emancipation.
Movements and shelter :- Monks wandered from place to place giving religious discourses to the people (3.139;103.63;2.29). The organisation was called Samanasangha which consisted of monks and nuns and moved in groups headed by a guru (5.223.226;102.48-60). A guru could permit his monk disciple to wander alone (114.24). In the rainy season they sojourned at one place for four months (82.95;22.34) and in the month of Kārtika they resumed their wandering (22.37). The places of their sojourn and shelter were the gardens of the towns (5.224;6.137;29.37;75.27;82.5) or the trees outside the towns (5.106; 38.16) or sanctuary (kotthaga 89.14) or temples or shrimes (89.15; 29. 39) or forest (33.30) or the bank of a river (11.18) or the caves (37.70; 38.9;29.39 ) or the valleys of the hills (22.34;89.7) or the tops of the hills (82.95). The place of their sojourn was called Samaṇāsama (śramanaśrama 103.22).
Austerities:-Monks are referred to be performiug fasts of the duration of two days (5.59) to six months (22.28). Various types of Tapas performed by Muni Sukošala (22.24-27) are mentioned as Ratnāvali, Muktavali, Kanakávali, Kulićamadhya, Yavamadhyā, Jinagunasamprāpti, Vidhi, Sarvatobhadra, Trilokasāra, Mşdangamadhyā, Pipilikamadhyā, Sisankārayaladdhi (Śrīsatkāralabdhi), Darśanajñāna. labdhi, Pañcamandara, Keśarīkrīda, Caritralabdhi, Parişahajaya, Pravacanamāyā, Ādinnasukhanāmā, Pañcanamaskāravidhi, Tirthārthaśrutā, Sukhasamprāpti, and Dharmopāsanalabdhi. Monks exposed their bodies to the scorching heat of the summer sun and practised mortification (21.93;9.55,61). They remained absorbed in studies (sajjhāya 46.71) and practised meditation (22.3) in various postures (padimā) such as sitting posture (paliyanka), standing posture (117.4.6) (Virāsana posture (22.36) and Caukāņaņa pratimā (60.6) or Caurānana (82.2) postures. The austerities performed by Sīta were so severe that her body was reduced to a frame of bones only (105.7).
The references to ‘malavilittavvarigo' (22.1) and 'malakañcuyadháriņi' (105.5) indicate that monks and nuns were prohibited from taking bath.
1. 6.147, 152,9.46; 13.51:75.82. 2. 11.54;26.20; 30.67, 70; 41.58;103.106. 3. See History of Jaina Monachism, pp. 450-451, for the explanation of some of
these austerities. The canonical literature does not mention all of them.

Page #517

488
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Alms : --Begging of food was done at the mid-day with due consideration of place and time (majjhanhadesayāle 4.3;22.1). That time is called as 'goyaravelā=gocaravela' (1 16.10). They entered the populated settlements at the proper time and used to beg at every successive house by and by (gharapantie bhamanto 4.3, gharaparivādie 88.12). But if any body invited them for food they did not go to his house, because food prepared for them or purchased for them (kīyagaduddesnipphanno 4.71) was prohibited and thus the invitation for taking alms was not acceptable to them.
Samlekhana :-Monks (39.80) and nuns (105.8) in the last days of their life practised 'samlekhana' (giving up food and drink and limiting the movements of body) and thus without having any attachment for the physical body ended their life in complete equanimity. It is also called as Panditamaranam (85.7) i.e. the death of the wise.
Non-Faina Ascetics: Non-Jaina ascetics are referred to as Pasandina (wrong-faithed 4.85;22.9) and Lingiņa (22.32 bearers of some signs). This class of ascetics included Tāpasas and Paribrājakas of whom the latter are referred to (Parivvão 41.27) once only. Both these types of ascetics belonged to the Brahmanical faith as it will be clear in the concluding lines of this topic.
The origin of the Tāpasas is referred to not less than four times in the Paumacariya. At 3. 140-143 it relates that some of the disciples of Rşabhadeva, the first Tirthankara, could not bear the hardships of the Jaina ascetic-life and also could not dare to revert to the householder's life due to the fear of Cakravartin Bharata, the then emperor of India, hence they renounced the Jaina order and started observing new practices. They came to be known as Tāpasas. This account is repeated on the occasion of the destruction of the animal sacrificce of king Marutta by Rāvana, and here it is added that they composed Kuśāstras and deluded the people (11.96). It is once more stated on the occasion of narrating the previous births of Bharata and the Bhuvanālaukāra elephant (82.23).
Then on the occasion of narrating the origin of the Brahmanas (Māhanas) the account of the origin of the Tāpasas is given. There Bhrgu and Argirasa are mentioned as Tāpasa descendants of the Brahmanas who composed Kušāstras namely, the Vedas and preached the immolation of animals in the sacrifices (4.80-86).
1. Sce Dasavai, 5.45 (Uddesiyan kiagadai puikammatica āh adan...vivajjae).

Page #518

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
489
40
In the Buddhist literature also Bhsgu and Angirasa along with some others are popularly claimed to be the ancestors of the Brahmins and the Seers of the Vedic mantras. That Bhrgu and Angirasa were the Vedic Rşis is corroborated by the Vedic literature also. Bhrgu appears as a teacher and sage in the Satapatha Brāhmana (VII. 2.1.11) and Angirasa is mentioned as a famous teacher in the Taittiriya Samhita (III. 1.7.3; VII. 1.4.1)'.
The Tāpasas used to put on the tree-bark (4.85), Kuća-grass and leaves (3.143). They kept matted hair (39.84; 33.1; 58.12). The female recluses used to put on red-ochre coloured cloths (39.110). They subsisted on the fruits of the forest (3.143), wild-corns (32.2) and roots (8.155) which were (32.2) gathered and preserved for future use. They lived in the hermitages (āsamapaya 8.163 also called as tāvasakula 33.1 tāvasanilaya 11.51), in the forest. They are also said to be moving in groups and their organisation is called as Sangha (39.100). Whenever they passed on to some city they stayed outside the precincts of the city (39.105). The Pāriyātra forest (33.3) and Vaņārasi (41.48), have been mentioned as the great centres of the Tāpasas.
There is also a reference to the husband and wife living together as Tapasas in a Tāpasakula in the forest (11.52).
They kept the fire ablaze by burning the wood (82.30) and offered oblations to the fire as indicated by the reference to the 'samidha' (32.2). Observing of austerity was the general course of their life (39.102). Guests who happened to reach their hermitage (32.3) were received with modesty, and fruits and roots were offered to them (8.155).
These Tāpasas can be indentified with the anchorites or Vanaprasthas”. A Paribrājaka who is referred to without any detail about his practices, can be identified with a Paribrājaka defined by Manu (6.34-81) i. e. as belonging to the fourth stage or Aśrama of the Brahmanical fold.
Rituals As the Paumacariyaṁ reveals, the rituals can be divided into two groups i. e. concerning the Jaina and the non-Jaina or Brahmanical religion.
Faina-Rituals: Jaina rituals consisted mainly of salutations or obeisance, eulogy and worshsp of the Jinas (14.120; 28.46) and the monks (89.35; 39.19).
1. Vide Age of the Nandas & Mauryas, p. 288 (1952 Ed). 2. See Supra. The stages of life. 3. Ibid.

Page #519

490
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Salutations to the Jinas were made thrice a day (Jiņavandanam tisañjjhaṁ 41.77, Arahantanamokkārarii tinni vi kāla 32.71). At the time of salutations the Pañcaparamești namaskāra mantral along with the formula of Mangala' was recited.
Similarly eulogy (thuimangalam. 28. 46) of the Tirthařkaras formed an important part of the religious duty of householders. Tirtharkaras are treated as the supreme and magnanimous beings and are addressed as Aruhā (worshipable), Bhayavaṁ (28.48), Tiloya. pujjāriho (adorable by the three worlds), Ananto (boundless), Uvayāraparo (beneficial) Apāhāņaṁ sattāņam nāha (Lord of the forelorn living being 5.121-122), Jagabandhu(true brother of the world 109.13)and Isara (supreme lord). In their eulogy the devotees sang in praise of the various qualities of the Jinas (28.47-50). Besides that the names of various deities common with the Vedic and Furaộic tradition have been attributed to the Jinas". In other Jaina works those epithets can be found explained in confirmity with Jainism. The epithets mentioned in the PCV are-Hiranyagarbha, Svayambhū, Brahmā, Pitāmaha, Caturmukha, Vişnu, Siva, Saukara, Iśvara, Maheśvara, Mahadeva, Rudra, and Trilocana. Then there are epithets like Bhānu and Nārāyaṇa. The significance of the above deities vary in the Brahmanical religion."
Image-worship was very popular among the Jainas. There are several reference to shrines and temples situated in palaces (17.61; 77.3, 25) and at public places. There is even a reference to the installing of Jina idol in every house (89.51). Devotees used to put on white garments while worshippiug the Jina idols (2 19, 66.30). The sacred bath of the Jainas was performed with perfumed water, milk, curd and ghee (32.78-81; 92 13). The substances and articles used for worshipping were the land and water flowers (32.72), perfumes (32.77), aloes, (14.66; 32.74), incense, sandal powder, saffron (32.74; 68.20), lamps (32.75; 14, 66) and various articles of decoration such as umbrella, flywhisk, flags, mirror, canopy, festoons (32.76) and naivedya (niveyanaya 32.83) be corns or sweets.
1. Ņamo Arahantānam, Siddhāņa namo Sivan uvagayānani
Ayariyauvajjhāņań namo sayā savvasāhūņam / 86.63. 2. Arahanto siddho vi ya sāhu taha kevali ya dhammo ya
Ee havanti niyayan cattāri vi mangalan majjhan 86.64. 3. 5.122; 28.48; 109.2, 4. See AP, 24.30-46; 25 99; Arhat sahasranāma of Hemacandra; and Jina
Sahasranāma of Asadhara. 5. See J. Dowson's Classical Dictionary of Hindn Mythology.

Page #520

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
The offering of corns made to the Jinas is called Balikamma (32.82) which was regularly performed by the devotees (7.157; 68.20; 108.19).
491
The Aştähnikaparva1 (eight days festivity 22.74) was celebrated thrice a year in the months of Aṣadha (20.1) Kartika (89.30) and Falguna (66.14), beginning on the eighth day and ending on the fifteenth day of the bright fortnight. These festivities were celebrated with great pomp and show. Various kinds of decorations were made with flower garlands, cloth-paintings, flags, canopies, festoons, chowries, chatras (parasol) and mirrors (66.10, 12; 92.18, 21). Singing, playing of instrumental music and dancing accompanied the ceremony (32. 84; 92. 22; 78. 52). Chariot procession on the occasion of religious festivity is also referred to (8. 145).
=
Pilgrimage to holy places such as Aṣṭāpada Kailaśa mountain (5. 169; 12. 36), Meru (14. 1), Vijayardhagiri (15. 31) and Sammetaśikhara (39. 63, 94. 27) have been mentioned.
The adoration and worship of the Maharsis (great sages) was also prevalent. The origin and the worship of the seven Ṛsis (sattarisï) have been described in the Paumacariyam. It is said that once the city of Mathura was attacked by an epidemic which was spread by Camara (a celestial lord 87. 12). On the arrival of the seven Caraṇa (89. 56) monks namely, Suramanna, Sirimanna, (89. 2) Sirinivaa, Savvasundara, Jayamanta, Anilalalia, and Jayamitta, the epidemic speedily subsided (89. 2). Then Satrughna, the ruler of Mathura (89. 34) paid his obeisance to them. Further by the advice of those munis he (89. 52) installed the images of those seven Ṛsis to bring about peace and prosperity in his country Thus the worship of the seven Ṛsis gained popularity.
The Saptarṣipūjā is still prevalent among the followers of Jainism. They are named as Śrīmanva, Svaramanva, Srīnicaya, Sarvasundara, Jayavan, Vinaylalasa and Jayamitra,2 These names generally agree with the PCV and the PCR.3
In the Brahmanical literature also a particular group of seven Rṣis has been mentioned. They are represented in the sky as the seven
1. It is called as Nandiśvaravaramahotsava (66.14) also. The celestial beings going to Nandiśvaradvipa to celebrate the astahnika-parva is also referred to (15.30; 66.17).
2. See Saccha Jinavani Sangraha, Kasturchand Chawada, p.352.
3. Suramanyu, Śrimanyu, Śrinicaya, Sarvasundara, Jayavan, Vinayalalasa and Jayamitra (PCR, 92.23).

Page #521

492
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
stars of the Great Bear. In the Rgveda (IV. 42.8) They are numbered as seven, are associated with gods (X.109.4) and are called divine (X.130.7). The Satapatha Brāhmaṇa for the first time conceives them as the constellations of the Great Bear (2.1.2.4). In the BỊhadaranyaka Upanişad (2.2.6) they are named as Gautama, Bharadvāja, Viśvāmitra, Jamadagni, Vaśiştha, Kaśyapa and Atri. They are often referred to as the mind-born sons of Brahma and their reference is available in the Mahābhārata and the Purānas (Vāyu & Vişnu) with some difference in number going upto nine and their names also?. But none of their names is indentical with those of the PCV.
Brahmanical Rituals: The PCV reveals that Brahmin Kapila used to go to the forest every morning to gather 'Kuśa' grass, fire sticks and fruits. His abode is called Agnihotragpha (35,5,7,9,27). It indicates that every morning and evening oblations were poured into the sacred fire. The domestic fire was the essential feature of the Vedic rituals, because all the rituals for householders centred round the worship of the fire to which oblations were offered.
Deity worship: The deities which have been referred to as held in reverence by the followers of Brahmanism are Caturmukha, Indra Skanda, Rudra and Soma.
Caturmukha:-The PCV (11.72) mentions that he expounded the Yajñas (killing of animals in sacrifices) as described in the Vedas. According to the Brahmanical tradition he is the first member of the Hindu triad and the active creator of the universe. Originally he had five hands but one of them was destroyed by the fire emitting from the central eye of Śiva when the former showed disrespect to the latter. His name is not found in the Vedas and the Brāhmaṇas in which the active creator is Hiranyagarbha. According to the Rāmāyana he sprang from the ether on earth which originated from water, the first element of creation. In the Mahābhārata he is said to have sprung from the navel of Vişņu. In the Purānas he is held inferior to Vişņu and the Saiva authorities regard Mahādeva as the creator of Brahmā.3
The PCV while critisizing the persons who are not celibate, who indulge in injurious activities, but pretend to be Brāhmaṇas, refers to Skanda (khanda), Indra and Rudra (105.49) as the persons who
1. OP. Cit. J. Dowson, p. 268. 2. SRL Gr, p. 207; 3, Dowson, p.56.

Page #522

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
493
should not be regarded as Brāhmaṇas in the true sense, because they are vow-less. Thus the PCV is referring to the deities of the Brahmanical tradition, who were worshipped with reverence by the followers of Brahmanism.
Skanda :- In the Avaśyaka Cūrnī? people are said to be celebrating festival on the full moon day of Asoja in honour of him. According to the Brahmanical tradition he is the god of war, riding on peacock. He is the son of Siva and Parvati. He was born for the purpose of destroying Taraka Daitya.
Indra:-In the Niśithacūrņi, it is mentioned that people celebrated a festival in his honour on the full-moon day of Āşadha3. He is a Vedic god of first rank4. His weapon is the thunder-bolt. He governs the weather and dispenses the rain. In later mythology he is inferior to the triad, is the seducer of Ahalyā, is defeated by Rāvana and is the sender of nymphs to beguile the holy men from penances. In the Jaina mythology Indras are the lords of the heavens, and they worship Jinas".
Rudra:-In the Vedas he is a god of storms, diseases as well as a healer. In later mythology he is the son of Brahmā and as he wept at the time of his birth so he was named Rudra. He is also called Mahadeva. In the later ages, Rudra developed into powerful god Śiva. Under the name of Mahākāla, he is the destroyer but destruction means reproduction, hence he became siva or Sankara (the auspicious). Thus he became supreme lord or Mahadeva. There are 11 Rudras in the Hindu Mythology. The Jaina mythology also mentions 11 Rudras who are said to have descended to hells on account of the penances performed for material ends?.
Soma (11.73):—The reference is to the propitiation of Soma etc. by performing animal sacrifices. In the Ķgveda, it is a juice of Soma plant, which is offered to the deities. Later on it was appropriated to Moon or Oşadhipati. who was considered the guardian of sacrifices and penances. In the Vişnupurāṇa he is the monarch of the Brāhmanas. Elsewhere he is said to have emanated from the ocean when
1. Ibid, p. 315 (LAI, P, 217). 2. Dowson, p. 152. 3, Nisi Cu, 19. p. 1174. (LAI, p. 216). 4. Dowson, pp.269, 296. 5. Sec Supra. 6. Dowson, 7. TP, 4.14.39-42.

Page #523

494
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAW
it was churned by the Devas and the Asuras?. According to the Jaina mythology, Soma is one of the Lokapāla of Indras of the Kalpavāsīdevas.
Prajāpati (17.13):Añjanāsundari after having been abandoned by her relatives, expresses in grief as to why the Prajāpati has made her body full of sorrows and troubles. At 15.64 Pavanañjaya remarks that Añjana's body is so formed as if it is modelled by Prajāpati. In the Vedas the term is applied to Indra, Savitri, Soma, Hiranyagarbha and other deities. Manu applies it to Brahmā as an active creator and supporter of the Universe. 3
Taking of holy baths at the Tirthas (Majjai titthesu 22.85) is referred to and it is said that taking holy bath for purification by those who take meat etc. is a futile effort to shake off the shackles of sin.
Animal Sacrifices:-Vedic sacrifices which involved animalslaughter have been severely critisized in the Paumacariyaṁ. It is said that the heretics compiled the Vedas and preached animal-slaughter in the sacrifices (jannesu 4.79-80). The priests (Purohitas) have been referred to as presiding over the animal sacrifices (14.16). Rāvana is said to have destroyed the animal sacrifice (14.16) which was being performed by king Marutta of Rājagļha (Ch. 11). On that occasion many kinds of animals were brought and tied to the posts and many Brāhmaṇas had flocked there to take part in it. Narada, a Jaina sage also reached there and opposed the sacrifice but the Brāhmaṇas explained that the sacrifices had been preached by Caturmukha, that they should be performed by the first three Varpas-castes, that animals should be sacrificed propitiating the gods to attain heaven. On this occasion a story of king Vasu, Parvataka and Narada had been narrated in which Vasu supports Parvataka who preaches that goat should be killed in sacrifices. Parvataka is reborn as a Raksasa and then he in the disguise of a Brāhmaṇa preaches various sacrifices such as Gomedha, Pitmedha, Matsmedha, Rajasūya, Aśvamedha and Pasumedha in which the respective persons and animals are ordained to be slaughtered (11.41.42), so that they would attain heaven. Taking of meat and wine was also freely ordained by him,
1. Dowson, p. 301. 2. See Supra. 3. See Op. Cit. Dowson. 4. Gomehanāmadhee janne pāyāviyā surā havai/
Bhaņai agammāgamanam kāyavvan natth hi doso ccha// Piimehamāimehe rāyasūe āsameh apasumehel Eesu măria vvā, saesu nămesu je jivā// Jivā māreyavvā āsayapānam ca hoi kāyavvam/ Mamsaṁ ca khāiyayyam jannassa vihi havai esā 11.41.43.

Page #524

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
495
Now let us examine how far the charges levelled against the followers of Vedic rituals are justified in view of the sacrifices advocated by the Vedic literature and other historical evidences about the performing of the above mentioned sacrifices.
First of all we find that some hymns of the Rgveda have been associated with the horse-sacrifice'. In the latter Samhitās and Brāhmaṇas, animal and Soma sacrifices are found to be very common? The Brahmana explain the complicated procedure of the Yajñas. The Śrautasūtras and the Gyhyasūtras give us details about the method of performing various sacrifices. The Smrtis also refer to the daily domestic sacrifices.
The rajñaparibhāşāsūtra3 of Apastamba clearly lays down in support of the contention of the Paumacariyaṁ that animals, besides other things also, were offered in the sacrifices, that the sacrifices were prescribed to be performed by the first three Varņas, that the three Vedas prescribe sacrifices and that they were presided over by Brāhmaṇas.
As regards the offering of goats, the Sankha yana Srautasūtra refers to the immolation of goats (14.2.14; 14.6.2; 14.7.3-4: 14.13.1; 15.1.2122). The Paraskara Gịhyasūtra (4.13.1) refers to the offering of meat of red goat during the Śrāddha ceremony and that of goat and sheep in Pitstarpaņa (4.12.5). Further according to the Gịhyasūtras goats offered to guests is said to be a sacrifice to the Gods. The Manusmyti also refers to the offering of the meat of goat for the libation of the manes on the occasion of monthly Śrāddha (3.268-70).
About the offering of various other animals in the sacrifices, the Sankhāyana Srautasūtra (6.1.20) refers to the Nirūdhapasu sacrifice which was performed for the purpose of fulfilling some special wish. In the Srāddha ceremony the offering of meat of various animals have been prescribed in the Pāraskara Grhyasūtra (4.12.6-12) and the Manusmrti (3.268-270). The animals mentioned in that connection are the fish, deer, ram, boar, bison, hare, tortoise, sheep etc. The rajñaparibhāşasūtra (154) refers to various utensils used for preparing the meat of different animals. Manu (15.39) lays down that animals have been created by Svayambhu for sacrifice and their killing in a Yajña is not killing. But he does not permit their killing for other purposes.
1. Ķgveda, 1.162. 2. SRL. Gr, p. 205. 3. Sut, 1-3.21. 4. See CHi, I. p. 208.

Page #525

496
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
He further says that the killing of animals in accordance with the prescription of the Vedas is not to be cognised as Himsa. About the efficacy of the Yajña it is said that the Dvija and the sacrificed animals attain to superior existence.
As regards the taking of meat and wine (Surā) the Brahmanical references are not wanting. The limbs of the sacrificed animal formed the 'dakșiņā' of the Rtvik Surā was used in oblations offered to the Manes. The remaining part of the wine was offered to the Acārya and Antevăsin. Manu (5.31) prescribes that the animal flesh associated with the Yajña should be taken but not on any other occasion. He (5.48) further lays down that the killing of living creatures leads to hell.
The PCV states, as already mentioned, that the father (pitā), mother (mātā) and the king (rājā) were killed in the Pits, Māts and Rajsüya Yajñas respectively. This statement seems to be based on hearsay and is made for the sake of criticism only. There was a Pitr-Yajña rite which was to be performed daily by the householders. In this ceremony food and water was offered to the manes and on the occasion of performing monthly Śrāddha the offering of meat is also prescribed (Manu, 3.82;3.123). In the Madhyama-aştaka ceremony 'sura' was offered to the mothers (Pārā. Gr. Su, 3.3.11). Pițr-medha is dealt in the Taittiriya Aranyaka (VI) and its hymns are found in the Sukla Yajurveda (35)?. But it has nothing to do with the killing of father. Thus we find that the PCV is making wrong allegations. The Sankhāyana Srautasütra (4.3.5) mentions Piņdapitryajña but in it no killing is envisaged. It was a sacrifice of rice balls.
The Sankhāyana Srautasütra further describes a Purusamedha also (XVI 10 & 12). A Brahmin is purchased and then let loose (16.10.9). He is then sacrificed with other animals (16.12.12 & 21). The rites of Rajasūya Yajña were performed on the occasion of a royal conse: cration. It is said in the Sankhāyana Srautasūtra (15.12.1) that by performing this Yajña the performer attains sovereignty and supremacy over
1. Ya Vedavihita himsā niyatāsminscarăcare /
ahimsāmevatam vidyad Vedat dharmo hi nirbabhu // 5.44. 2. Ibid, 5.12. 3. Pära, 3.11.9. 4. Ibid, 3.3.11. 5. Ibid. 6. Vide VSS, 243. 7. Ibid, p. 125. 8. Sce CHI, p. 126.

Page #526

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS 497
all realms.
In this sacrifice in the preliminary stage a he-goat was sacrificed. Other Śrautasutras do not mention this killing1. Then two pregnant cows were immolated (XV. 14.13). Then a red he-goat an ewe and a bull was immolated for expiating various gods (XV. 15.2-4). Sura was offered and partaken by the Brahmaņas (XV. 15.15). The sacrificial fee is said to be 10000 cows (XV. 16.16). Thus the killing of father, mother and kings in the sacrifices as stated in the PCV seems to be a false allegation. K. K. Handiqui (p. 378) observes that the Sunaḥśepa legend of the Rgveda is taken by some as a reference to the human sacrifice while some hold it to be a reminiscent of an early rite of Rajasuya and others reject it totally..
The Satapatha Brahmana (13.5.4.1) states that by performing an Asvamedha sacrifice one propitiates his sins and even the heinous
sin of killing a Brahmana is anulled. In the Śrautasutras the Aśvamedha sacrifice is described.2 The Sankhāyana Srautasutra mentions that the performer of the Aśvamedha attains all wishes, achieves all worldly attainments (XV1.1). In it a horse is let loose for a year (XVI. 13.14-15). After that period the horse (XVI.3.13), a hornless he-goat, a go-mrga and many other animals are killed. Thus in this sacrifice a horse was actually killed.
The Gobhila Grhyasutra (3.6) lays down that Goyajña and Aśvayjña are performed for the prosperity of the animals concerned, but it does not ordain the killing of these animals.
There are references to the Gosava sacrifice in the Brahmanical literature. It was a Vrata which was observed imitating the ways of an ox. The sacrificer slept with his mother, sister and a woman of his gotra. He drank water and ate grass with face downwards and ease himself whenever he felt the necessity. It was observed during old age but no COW or bull was killed on this occasion. However there are references to the killing of cows on the occasions of a wedding or a sacrifice1. The cow was killed as a rule in the honour of the guest". In the Aṣṭaka ceremony, the parts of the cow killed on the occasion were given to the Brahmanas, In the Grhyasutras cow-sacrifice is prescribed compulsorily on diffe
1. Sankhayana Srautasutra, p. 433.
2. See VSS, p. 287.
3. Jaiminiya. Brahmana, I. 113; Taittiriya Brāhmaṇa, II. 7. 6; Tandya Brahmana XIX. 13.1; Vide Handiqui, p.384.
4. Para, 1. 3. 30.
5. SRL. Gr, p. 82.
6. Ibid. p. 100.
32

Page #527

498
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
rent occasions such as those of Aştaka, Anvaştakya, wedding, Salagava sacrifice, reception to a Snātaka, honouring of a deseased relation on the 11th day?. Under the Haviryajñasoma, the Sankhāyana Srautasūtra prescribes the immolation of goats (14.2. 14; 14.6.2;14.7. 5), cow (14.3. 19; 14. 5. 7; 14.6. 3; 14.7 5); and barren cows (14. 2. 15). In the Srautrāmana ceremony a he-goat, an ewe (14.13. 1) and barren cow (14.13.2) were immolated. In the Vājapeya Yajña animals such as goat, ram, ewe and cow (XV. 1. 21-22) were killed. The Pāraskara Gphyasūtra mentions that in the Madhyama Aştaka ceremony the fat of a cow was oblated (3.3.8.9). The Gobhila Gịhyasūtra (3.10.18) states that the cow was sacrificed in the Aştaka festival. The Hiranyakeši Gịhyasūtra, (2. 5. 15. 8) mentions that at the time of taking the meat of cow, a part of the cow-meat was offered to the Brāhmaṇas. The Sūlagava sacrifice is prescribed for procuring cattle, sons, wealth, fame, long life and heavenly bliss. It is meant for propitiating Rudra and for averting plague among the cattle". Some of the Gịhyasūtras make it symbolical only and no killing of ox is mentioned 4. The Aśvala yana and the Paraskara Grhyasūtras describe actual killing of an ox and they incorporate the cow also as a sacrificial victim”. In the Vrşotsarga Yajña a bull was killed but according to some Rșis the bull was not killed. The sankhayana Srautasütra (4.17.11) also mentions the slaughtering of oxen in sacrifices.
The animal sacrifice is described in the Paraskara Gịhyasūtra, (3.11). In this the animal selected for sacrifice is other than cow (3.11.1). The limbs of the animal formed the 'daksiņā' of the Rtvik (3.11.9). It further mentions that for some expiation an ass also can be sacrificed (3.12.2). In the Nirudhapaśu Yajña many kinds of animals were sacrificed in view of fulfilling the special wishes and it has been already mentioned that animals were the objects of offering in the Yajñas.
Thus the allegations made by the Paumcariyaṁ about the slaughtering of animals in the sacrifices is corroborated by the Brahmanical literature itself. Now it sbould be seen whether the references are merely literary or actually the animals were immolated.
1. Ibid, p. 109. 222. 2. See SRL Gr. p. 110. 3. Pāra, 3. 8. 3. 4. Hiranyakesin Grhya Sutras. 5. SRL, Gr, p. 111. 6. Pūra, 3. 9. 9. 7. Sankhāyana Srautasūtra, 6, 1, 20. 8. Apastambya T ajña Paribhāsā, Su. 1,

Page #528

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL & RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS
499
The Pali canon refers to the performing of a great sacrifice by a Brahmin. In it hundreds of bulls, calves, goats and other animals were brought for slaughtering. Lord Buddha is said to have stopped that sacrifice1. Then the Prasastapāda's Bhasya prescribes all sorts of Yajñas in connection with the duties of a householder2. Kalidasa refers to the immolation of animals in the sacrifices".
Even Sankara in his Bhasya on the Vedanta Sutras (3.1.25) speaks of Vedic rites being performed by cultured people.1
On the evidence of the ancient inscriptions Dr. Altekar remarks that the Vedic sacrifices were most popular during the third and fourth centuries A. D. They were performed by the rulers such as feudatory lords, kings and emperors and the most popular one was the horsesacrifice. The Vedic sacrifices were on descendancy later on but they were sporadically performed till quite recent times. V. M. Apte remarks that the growing influence of Bhakti cult and the association of cow with Kṛṣṇa as well as the attack of Buddhists and the Jainas had given great set back to the slaughtering of animals and certainly the cow was reverred and its killing was prohibited'.
Jaina conecption of Sacrifice:-The sacrifice which involved death of a large number of animals is severely criticised in the Paumacariyam. It is said that the performers are greedy of meat, marrow and blood of the animals and they descend to hells and suffer innumerable miseries in the cycle of transmigration (11.80-81). It further mentions that a real sacrifice (Janna) according to the Arṣaveda, consisted of the physical body as the altar, mind as the fire, knowledge as the ghee, and the dirt of Karma as samidha (sacrificial fuel). They all should be burnt in the fire of mental control. The passions such as anger, pride, deceit, greed or attachment and aversion were the real animals to be sacrificed along with the senses. Truth, forgiveness, non-injury constituted the sacrificial fee. Right faith, right conduct, self control and chastity were the gods to be propitiated. This is the true sacrifice which has been preached by the Jinas. It is performed by mental concentration or meditation and thus it brings about emancipation (11.75-79).
1. Digha Nikaya, Su. 5.
2. Vide Handiqui. p. 377.
3. IK, p. 324,
4. Handiqui, p. 377.
5. VGA, p. 339.
6, Handiqui, p. 378.
7. SRL. Gr, p. 100, 116. See Gita Rahasya, 305.

Page #529

500
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN This kind of interpretation of Yajña is found in the Gita also. It lays emphasis on performing that kind of Yajña which does not involve animal-slaughter. The oblations to be offered should consist of materials. It further states that with mental deta tchment, freedom from attachment & aversion (4.23), the oblations of sense-organs should be made into the fire of self control (4.24) which is ablazed by knowledge (4.27), austerity and meditation (4.28). This kind of sacrifice leads to emancipation (4.32)
Popular worship: The Paumacariyan refers to a Jakkhatthāņa (39.68) and a Jakkhanilaya (82.47) i. e. the Yaksasthānas or the sanctuaries of the Yaksas. It indicates that the worship of the Yakşas was prevalent in the Magadha country as the references indicate.
Forest deities (Vanadevatā 36.14; 17.81) were invoked on the occasions of difficulties. The worship of forest deities was prevalent as the PCV reveals that Añjanā and Vanamālā invoked them in their difficulties and requested them for protection.
1. See also Gita Rahasya, p. 308.

Page #530

CHAPTER X
GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES.
Cosmology.
The PCV describes the Universe at two places. First of all its account is given by Gautama, the first Gañadhara of Lord Mahāvīra while commencing to narrate the story of Rāma, in reply to the enquiry of king Srepika (3.18-32). At another place Muni Sakalabhūşaņa describes it at the time of delivering a religious discourse to Rama when his wife Sita renounces the world (102.61-66.100-110). Both descriptions are brief, traditional and mixed with mythology. In the following lines account of the same is given. It is supplemented by other Jaina works and is compared with the accounts of the Universe given by the Brahmaical and the Buddhist works.
According to the PCV, the Universe (Loa=Loka) is situated in the middle of the unlimited space (añantānantam āgāsam). It is divided in to three parts-viz. the lower part (ahaloga=adholoka), shaped like a cane-seat (Vettāsaņa); the middle part having the form of a cymbal (Jhallari); and the upper part of the pattern of a tabor (Muraya = Muraja). The whole Universe seems to be like a palmyratree (Täla sariso). The middle part of the Universe which is comprised of many islands and oceans is called as the region of subhuman beings Tiriya loo). In the centre of this Tiryakloka is situated the Jambūdvipa of the shape of a round mirror (dappaņāyāro). In extention it is 100000 Yojanas and is itself encircled by the Lavana ocean which is progressively encircled by alternate island and ocean, which are innumerable. The area of the successive island and the ocean is said to be the double of the previous one. The last island is called Svayambhuramana.
The Lavana ocean is encircled by the region (continent) named Dhāta kikhanda (Dhāyaisanda) which is four times greater in area than that of Jambūdvīpa. Beyond Dhātakīkhanda there is Puşkaradvipa half of which is twice larger in area than that of Dhātakīkhanda. Puşkaradvīpa is divided into two parts by a mountain called Manuşottara. One part of Puşkaradvīpa facing Jambūdvipa is included in the human world and the other part lying on the other side of
1. See Supra Supernatural elements for Adholoka and Urdh valoka.

Page #531

502
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Mănuşottara mountain is excluded from it, because in that region and beyond that human existence is not possible. Thus the human world consists of two and a half continents (46.35). The above account is corroborated by other Jaina works. The Brahmanical literature does not mention innumberable islands and oceans but limits their number to seven. The position of Jambūdvīpa is similar to that given in the Jaina works. It is said that Jambūdvīpa lies in the centre of seven concentric continents each encricled by an oceana. The names of those continents and oceans are : Jambū, Plakșa, Sālmala. Kuşa, Krauñca, Saka and Puşkara; Lavaņa, Ikşu, Surā, Sarpi, Dadhi, Dagdha and Jala respectively.
Some of the names of these islands and oceans resemble those of the Jaina tradition but their order differs.3 The extension of Jambūdvīpa to 100000 Yojanas is corroborated by the Brahmanical literature. Puşkaradvīpa is divided by a mountain called Mānuşottara and the two divisions are called Mahāvīrakhanda and Dhātakikhanda. In the Jaina literature, Puşkaravara is the 3rd island which is divided into two parts by Mānuşottara, while Dhátakikhanda is the second independent island.
In the Buddhist literature Jambūdvípa is mentioned as one of the four great islands or continents and described as situated in the south while the other three in the other three directions. The Bhimaparva of the Mahābhārata' also corroborates this view of the Buddhists by stating that there are four continents on the four sides of the Meru mountain.
Jambūdvipa. According to the PCV Jambūdvipa is circular in shape. In the centre of it stands the great mountain, Mandara. It is further said that there are six mountains, three to the south, and the other three to the north of Mandara. They all touch the Lavana ocean on both the sides. They are named as Himavat, Mahāhimavat Nişadha, Nila, Rukmin and Sīkharin, These mountains thus divide Jambūdvīpa into seven regions viz. Bhārata, Haimavata, Harivarşa, Mahāvideha,
1. TP, 1. 136f. 4. 2-11; 5. 8f; JPS, 4. 4, 20; 11. 2, 49, 84f; and JP, 3. 2. Vn. Pu, 2. 2. 5-7; Mār. Pu, 50. 11, 17f and 51. 7. 3. See TP, II. Int. p. 82. 4. Mar. Pu, 51. 8. 5. Vn. Pu, 2. 4. 74. 6. HGAI, p. 8; IDETB7, p. 2; TP, II, Int. p. 88. 7. Chs, 6 & 7. 8. It is also called Meru (2.24,26).

Page #532

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
503
Ramyaka, Hairanyavata and Airavata. There are fourteen rivers which flow in Jambūdvīpa. They are Ganga, Sindhu, Rohita, Rohitāṁsā, Hari, Harikāntā, Sítā, Sítoda, Nārī, Narakāntā, Rūpyakula, Suvarn. akūlā, Rakta, and Raktāvati, two rivers flowing in each country respectively.
According to the TP (4. 12f, 90f) the seven countries and the six mountains as mentioned above are said to be successively occupying Jambūdvipa from south to north, stretching from east to west and touching the Lavaņa ocean on both the sides. The JP (10) gives a detailed account of these countries.
According to the Brahmanical literature also the Jambūdvipa has got the Meru mountain situated in its centre (Vn. Pu, 2. 2. 78). There are also other six mountains, three to the south and the other three to the north of the Meru mountain. They are the Himavat, Hemakūta, Nişadha; and Nila, sveta, and Srngin. The last, Sšngin is identical with Sikharin and the Sveta with Rajatamaya or Rukmin of the Jaina tradition respectively. Thus the names of all the six mountains of the Brahmanical account agree with those of the Jaina tradition. The seven countries of Jambūdvīpa are mentioned as Bhāratavarşa, Kimpuruşa Harivarsa, Ilāvstavarşa, Ramyaka, Hirraṇyamaya and Uttarakuru (Vn.2. 2. 12f). The first, third, fifth and the sixth country are identical with those of the Jaina tradition. Uttarakuru is called as Airāvatavarşa in the Mahabhārata (VI. 6. 37) and the latter is identical with Airāvata of the Jaina tradition. The second country namely, Kimpuruşa is named as Haim avatavarşa in the MB (VI. 6.7) which is identical with Haimavata of the Jaina tradition. Thus the names of six countries out of the seven of the Jaina tradition are in agreement with those of the Brahmanical tradition'.
In the Buddhist literature the Meru mountain is said to have been situated in the middle of the four islands or continents. The four countries are named as Pubbavideha, Aparagodana, Uttarakuru and Jambūdvīpa”.
1. Shri Rēmakrsnadāsji in his article named Caturdvipaka Bhugola', identifies
the Himayat with the Himalayas and the Hemakūta with Tibet. This Hemkūţa of the Brahmanical literature is the Mahāhimavāt (Mahāhimavanta) of the Jaina tradition. It is said that the country lying between Himavat and Mahāhimavat always has a great snow-fall, hence it is called Hemavaya (Jambu, Sū. 78). The Nişadha is further identified with the Hindukusa range and the Uttarakuru with the western Turkistan (Vide
JPS, Intro). 2. Vide HGAI, p. 8. 3. IDETB7, p. 2.

Page #533

504
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Bharata (varsa) According to the Jambūdivapannatti, the country of Bhārata is situated in the southern most part of Jambūdvīpa. It is bound on the north by Cullahimavanta and on the south, east and the west by the Lavana ocean?. It is divided into Uttarardha and Dakşiņārdha? Bhārata by the Vijayārdha mountains stretching from the east to the west in the middle of it. The lake Padmadrahasituated in the middle of the Cullahimavanta is said to be the source of the Ganges and the Sindhu which flow first to the south, go across the Vijayārdha mountain, again flow in the Dakşina Bhārata towards the east and the west and then empty into the eastern and the western Lavana-Samudra respectively. Thus these two rivers and mount Veyaddha divide the Bharata country into six divisions. 5
In the Brahmanical literature the situation of the Bharata is between the Himālaya and the sea. The Märkandeyapurāna locates it in the south of Jambūdvipa?. But there 'Bharata' covers a much larger area than the real Bhārata, because Bhäratavarşa has been divided into nine regions which are separated by inaccessible seas and the last region is called Bharata.
According to the Buddhist conception of the world, Jambūdvipa means India except Simhaladvipa, The Ganges and the Sindhu have their sources in the Anavatapta sarovara beyond the Himavat.10 The Sumangalavilasini does not mention Sindhu whereas the five rivers of Jambūdvipa are said to be the Ganges, the Jamuni, Sarabhū Acirāvati and Mahi.
Thus we find that Bhāratavarşa meant a larger area than India to the Brahmanical conception and Jambūdvipa of the Buddhists12 was
1. Su 10; also TP, 4.107; 4.196f, 4.252. 2. Referred to in the PCV as Bharahaddhavāsa (7.164 & 8.143) and Dahina.
bharaha (103.7). 3. TP, 4.195. 4. JP, Su. 73. & 74. 5. 7P, Su. 10. 6. Vn. Pu, 2.3; 1; Mār. Pu, 54.49. 7. 52.21. 8. Mār. Pu, 54.4, Vn. Pu, 2. 3. 6f (Vide B. C. Law's TIG:11 Int.). 9. Geog. Essays, p. 9. 10. Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakosa-Vide H.L Jain-TP, Int. p. 88. 11. II. 429. 12. The Asoka minor RE. I mentions Jambūdvipi which denotes the whole
country ruled by him.

Page #534

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
505
the India proper while to the Jainas and the Brāhmanas Jamūdvīpa cannot a very big continent and Bharatavarşa of the Jainas was the real India.
The PCV further at (102.109) refers to two trees namely the Šalmali and the Jambu growing in Jambūdvīpa. The Jambüdivapannatti tells us that the Jambū tree stands in the Uttarakuru, to the south of the Nila, to the north of the Mandara, to the west of the Malavat and on the eastern bank of the river Sitā. After the name of this tree the whole continent is called as Jambūdvipa,
In the Brahmanical works also this tree is said to be the reason of naming the island as Jambūdvipa.?
The Buddhist works also assign the same reason for calling it as Jambūdvipa". The tree is said to be standing near the Anavatapta Sarovara beyond the Himavat.4
According to the Jaina tradition, the country was named Bhāratavarşa after the name of the first Cakravartin Bharata, the son of the first Tirtharkara".
According to the Brahmanical sources the name Bhāratavarşa was derived from king Bharata, a descendant of Priyavrata, the son of Manu Svayambhū.
Thus it is clear that according to the Jaina tradition, Bhārata is the Indian continent which is surrounded by Lavaņodadhi (Indian ocean) in the south and the Veyaddha (the system of Vindhya mountains) divided the country into the northern plains and the southern plateau. Further the PCV refers to the Sindhu Sagara (112.17), the Himalayas (10.13), the Ganges (11.111), the Jamuna (55.42), the Sindhu (98.63), the Narmadā (10.29) and the Tāpti rivers (25.1). Sindhusāgara is the Arabian sea on the west. The Ganges, the Jamuna and the Sindhu rivers water the northern plains of India while the Narmada and Tāpti flow into the western Vindhya region and empty into the Arabian sea.
Now we proceed to explain the geographical terms mentioned in the PCV and then after we will try to identify the locations of various geographical places referred to in the PCV.
1. Su. 90; also TP, 4. 2195. 2. Vn. pu, 2.2.18. 3. Vinaya Texts, I. p. 127. Visuddhi magga, I. 205-206. 4. Vinaya Texts, I. p. 30. 5. See VH, p. 186 & LAI, p. 375. 6. Bhäg Pu, XI. 2.15ff.

Page #535

506
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Country or State is generally denoted by Deśa (11.108; 33.23; 38.57; 98.61), Viṣaya (Avanti-visaya 33.11) or Janapada (Magahājapavaya 2.1). Janapada is used in the sense of the people also (puraja. pavaya the citizens of the capital 11.107). Videśa (39.117: 37.19) denoted the foreign country or other state. Then there are references to some particular people who were some ancient tribes and the region where settled in came to be known after their names. Thus the countries such as Yavana, Śaka etc. (98.64) denote the places of their habitation. The PCV says "it is also true that some peoples are named after regions to which they belong." The Asuras, Yakṣas, Kinnaras, Gandharvas etc. are such instances (7.49-50).
The unit of people's habitation is generally termed as Niveśa (3.114) or Sannivesa (5.249). Various types of settlements such as Nagara, Pura, Pattana, Kheta, Karvata, Madamba, Droņimukha, Grama and Palli (2.1,2; 11.103: 32.9; 39.63) are mentioned. The PCV does not differentiate between a Nagara, Nagari and a Pura or Puri (20.10;21. 6; 8.156; 11,5; 35.26). Sometimes Grama and Pura are identical (Kundagamapura 2.21; Kundapura 20.50). Except Nagara, Pura, Grāma ane Palli there is no reference to any habitation, the name of which ends in Pattana, Kheța, Karvata, Madamba or Droņimukha. For their significance other works1 can be referred to. There are references to a number of Dvipas A Dvipa in the Indian literature always does not mean that it should have waters surrounding it. There are several references to Saka and Yavana dvipas which were not islands but the inland-regions of the Sakas and the Yavanas in the North-West India. For example the PCV refers to Vanaradvipa (6.34) and many others (6.31-33) The Vanaradvipa can be indentified with the high lands of Kişkindhi mountains near Raichur in the Deccan plateau.
The geographical places and peoples mentioned in the PCV can be dealt under five separate heads viz., (1) Those associated with Rāma (including the route of his exile); (2) Those conquered by Lavana and Ankuśa; (3) Those associated with the great persons of the Jaina faith; (4) Those referred to in the intervening stories; and (5) Unidentified places.
Besides that we shall take up the Aryan and the non-Aryan peoples referred in the PCV. It should be noted that some clans and countries are identical as the PCV reveals. Some of them are specifically
1. TP, 4. 1398-1490; The Jinist Studies by Otto Stein, pp. 9.12 & 19; Kaut, 2.1. 2-4; Shama, p.45.
2. JP, 53. p. 217; Ava Cu, p. 191; VH, p. 146; JPS 7. 104 calls Magadha country a dvipa.

Page #536

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
507
mentioned as Anāryas and at places no distinction is made between the Aryas and the non-Aryans.
(1) Places and peoples referred to in the main story or associated wtth Rāma.
Saketapura :-Rama's birth place was Sāketapura (25.22). It is variously called as Ayodhyā (37.19). Vinītāpuri (24.34;32.50), Kośalapuri (99.30), Kośalā (20.28), Kośalanagari (98.53), and Kośalāpuri (82.5). It is called Prathamapuri also (28.70) as it was the birth place of the first Jina and it was the first city to be established by Dhanada (3.113;20.30; PCR. 3.169). It is mentioned in the PCV (99.30) that some river lay near it. Ayodhyā is identified with a place about six miles from the Fyzabad Railway station in Uttara Pradesh. The river should be the Saryu on which it is situated. The Saryu is identified with the Ghagra or the Gogra in Oudh'.
The PCV mentions Ayodhyā as the capital of KośalodeśaKošalavişaya-Kosalāpurivişaya (99.29). Košala was one of the 16 great Janapadas of ancient time. It lay to the east of the Kurus and Pañcalas and to the west of the Videhas from whom it was separated by the Gandak
Aruhasthala:--Rāma's mother, Aparājita was the princess of Aruhasthala and the daughter of its king Sukošala (22 106). The PCR (22.171) mentions that place as Darbhasthala. Darbha is the other name of the Kusa grass, therefore Darbhasthala and Kuśasthala are two names of the same place. The PCV further mentions Kušasthala also and says that marital relations existed between the kings of Ayodhyā and Kuśasthala. An ancestor of Dasaratha, namely Kirtidhara had married a princess of Kuśasthalapura (21.79). The PCR calls it Kausalastha (21.142). According to the VR there were two Kośala countries viz. North-Kośala and South-Kośala (VR, 7-107). Ayodhyā was the capital of North Kośala or Oudh while Kuśāvati was the capital of South Kośala and Kusa ruled there. The VR (7.108. 4) mentions that Kuśavati was situated in the Vindhyas (Vindhyaparvatarodhasi). The VR Vayupurāna mentions it as Kuśasthali.3 Thus it seems that Aruhasthala", Darbhasthala, Kausalastha and Kuśāvati should be identical. The PCV names the king of Aruhasthala as Sukošala, a name similar to the name of the country. South Kośala
1. HGAI, p. 67. 2. Ibid, p. 42., 99. 3. Vā. Pu, 88.98 4. Vide Supra, p. 34.

Page #537

508
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
is identified with the region comprising the districts of Bilaspur, Raipur and Sambalpur1. And its capital should be somewhere in that region, with which Aruhatthal may be identified.
Kamalasankulapura:-Sumitra, the mother of Lakṣmaṇa is said to be the princess of the above place (22.107). The Raghuvamsa (9.7), the Padmapurana (Uttara, 269) and the Ananda Rāmāyaṇa (11.32, 70.71) mention that Sumitra was a princess of Magadha. The PCV also mentions it (2.8). At one place the PCV refers to Kusumanagara (Kusagganagara according to other manuscripts) as the birth place of Lord Munisuvrata (95.35) and at another place is called Kuśāgranagara which is another name of Rajagṛha. Thus Rajagraha, Kuśāgranagara and Kusumānagara appear to be indentical. The Kamala of Kamalasankulapura probably denotes the flower in general i.e. Kusuma and thus Kamalasankulapura could be identified with Rajagṛha. But in the ancient literature Kusumapura occurs for Pataliputra which later on became the capital of Magadha (HGAI, p.249). Kālidāsa also mentions Pațaliputra, Puspapura and Kusumapura as and the same place and as the capital of Magadha (IK, p. 2). The PCV also specifically mentions Kusumapura (48 83) and it should be a reference to Pataliputra. It seems that the PCV confuses the two capitals of Magadha at two different times in ancient history and thus Kamalasankulapura should be identical with Pataliputra which is mentioned as the capital of Magadha by Kalidasa who states that Sumitra belonged to the Magadha country.
the one
Kautukamangalapura (24.2):-Kaikey belonged to this place.
Aruhasthala and Kamalasanikulapura of the PCV are well identified with the birth places of Kausalya and Sumitra as mentioned in the Brahmanical literature. Thus it is probable that Kautukamangalapura of the PCV is the capital of Kekaya country which is mentioned in the VR as the country from which Kaikeyi hailed. The PCV locates Kautukamangalapura in the north and Kekaya country is also identified with the present district of Shahpur in the Punjab. The capital of Kekaya country is identified with Girjaka or Jalalpur on the Jhelum2, and so Kautukamangalapura is probably Jalalpur.
Kampilya:-Rama's teacher Airakucchi belonged to Kampilyapura (25.16). It was the capital of ancient Pañcala. It is identified with modern Kampil on the old Ganges between Budaon and Farrukhabad" in U.P.
1. VGA, p. 153.
2. HGAI, p. 98.
3. Ibid, p. 92.

Page #538

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
509
Rajagļha :-Airakucchi himself got his training in archery at Rajagļha (25.18). It is called as Kuśāgranagara (2.98), Rajapura (2.8) and Magadhapura also (82.46). It was the capital of Magadha country (2.1). It is identified with the present Rajagir in south Bihar. 1 King Sreņika is referred to as the ruler of Magadha country (2.15). He was a lay devotee of Lord Mahāvīra (2.48-49) who spent 14 rainy seasons at Rājagsha”.
Mithila :-Rāma married Sīta who was the daughter of Janaka, the ruler of Mithila (28.95). Subhadrā, the daughter of Kanaka, brother of Janaka was married to Bharata (28.132). It was the ancient capital of Videha country (North Bihar). It is identified with modern Janakapura, a small town within the border of Nepal. Prof. Rhys Davids locates it 35 miles to the north west of Vaiśāli".
Route of Rama's Journey in Exile: The description of the route of Rāma's journey shows that the author of the PCV had some scientific knowledge of the geographical places of north and south India.
Păriyātra :-Rama is said to have travelled toward the west from Sāketa (dvaradisar vaccantā 32. 7) and entered the forest of Pāriyātra (Patta.........adavim ciya Pariyattassa 32.10). The Pāripatra or Pariyātra (mountainous region) is identified by Prof. Pargiter with the modern Vindhya range which is situated west of Bhopal together with the Aravali hills. 4 Dr B. S. Upadhyaya also identifies it with the western part of the Vindhya range extending from the source of the Cambal and Betwa. It comprised the Aravali mountains and the belts of Rajputana including the Pathar range which is perhaps a contraction of Pāriyātra. According to Prof. Jayacandra Vidyalankara, the Pāriyātra region forms the part where all the rivers from the Parvati and Banas to Betwa take their rise.5 The PCV mentions that from Pariyātra Rāma went to the Citrakuța hill and entered the Avantideśa. Thus the place of Rāma's entry into the Pariyātra should be the region lying to the south of Bharatapura and to the north of the Banas river.
Gambhira:-When Rāma entered the Pariyātra forest, he saw the Gambhīrā river (Gambhira nāma nadi 32.11). He crossed it and
1. Ibid. p. 254. 2. Nayādhammakahāso, II, 10. 3. HGAI, p. 236. 4. HGAI, p. 20. 5. Vide. IK, p. 9.

Page #539

510
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
sojourned on its other side in the forest. It was here that Kaikeyi and Bharata followed Rama to call him back to Ayodhya (32. 42-50). The river is identified with modern Gambhira, a tributary of the Yamuna above the Cambal, flowing east from Gangapura.1
Daksinapatha:-Rama asked the people who followed him, to allow him to go to the Dakṣinapatha (32. 13). Rama while consoling his mother before his departure from Ayodhya tells that he might go to the Vindhyas, or to the Malaya or in the vicinity of the sea (31.100). There are other references such as Dakkhinadesa (32.55), Dahiņa Bharaha (103.7) and Dakkhiņāvaha (26.68) which denote the same region. The Dakṣinapatha comprised the region from the Vindhyas upto rhe shore of the southern ocean. Southern India is identified with the whole of the Peninsula from Nasik and Ganjam to the cape Comorin in the south or very nearly the whole of the region lying to the south of Narmada and Mahanadi (CVGI, p. 31f).
Citrakuta -From there Rama began his journey towards the south (Dakkhiņadesābhimuha caliya 32.55). Proceeding further he reached a Tāpasakula. He stayed there for a night and then reached, passing through the forest, Citrakuta hill (duruppayasiroham pecchanti Cittakuḍam te 33.4). He sojourned there for four months (33.11). This is the modern hill of Chittor, a range of the Aravali mountains, in the Udaipura division of Rajasthan.
Avanti-From there Rama entered the Avantīdeśa (pattā Avantivisayam 33.11), the capital of which was Ujjeni (33.25) and it was ruled by king Simhodara. The Vasudevahindi (p. 36, 49) refers to Ujjenī as the capital of Avantījanapada. Avanti as a great Janapada is referred to in the Ava. Cu (I. p. 39). During the time of Lord Mahāvīra, Pradyota was the king of Avanti (Ava. Cu, II. p. 162). The Vividha Tirthakalpa refers to Avanti as a city (p. 83). The Skandapurana mentions that Avanti was the other name of Ujjeni. Avanti came to be known as Ujjeni in honour of the visit of Mahadeva to that city on the victory of destroying the demon, Tripura". Avanti roughly corresponds to modern Malwa. Nimara and adjoining parts of Madhya Pradesh. It was one of the 16 great Janapadas of ancient times. Ujjeni is the modern Ujjain in Madhya Pradesh.
1. HGAI, p. 36 & RI, p. 39.
2. Skandapurana, Ch. 43. (HGAI,p. 7; VGA, p. 404.)
3. HGAI, p. 52.

Page #540

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
511
Dasapura :-Rama further proceeds to Daśapura-nagara (33.25) variously called as Daśārņapura (79.9) and Daśanganagara (33.89). Vajrakarna was the lord of this town. He was a 'bhrtya' (feudatory) of Simhodara of Ujjenī. He was attacked by Simhodara. Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa defeated Simhodara and brought about reconciliation. Daśapura is identified with Mandasor in western Malwa in the Madhya Pradesh1.
Kūvavadda Kuvara pura:-From Daśapura Rama proceeds to (33.148) also called as Kuvvarapura (77.45) or Kuvvaranagara (Kubara pura-PCR). Balikhilya, the lord of this place was kidnapped by some Mleccha chief and the former's daughter Kalyāņamālā ruled there in the disguise af a prince (34.22-23). The RPS (p. 104) mentions the place as Nalakacchapura. Jaina poet Asadhara is said to have lived in Nalakacchapura. Nalakacchapura is identified with modern Nalacha situated 10 krośas far from Dhara (Malwa"). But it is not certain whether The PCV Kūvarapura is the same as Nalacha. mentions 'Purikobera' (98.67) = the Purikauberas. They were conquered by Lavana and Ankuśa. It seems that the peopele of Kuvvarapura are styled as the Purikauberas. They can be identified with the Paurikas who had Purikā as their chief city. Purika is placed near Mahiṣmati by the Khila-Harivamśa (XCV. 5220-28). Our Kuvvarapura is perhaps the Purika of the MB and the Puranas".
Narmada:-Further Rama crosses the river Narmada (34.32) and enters the Vindhya forest (Viñjhaḍavim pavanna 34.4). The river Narmada is well-known. It flows between the Vindhya and Satpura ranges. The PCV calls the region lying to the south of the Vindhya range as the Vindhya forest. Dr. B. C. Law says that it comprises Khandesh and Aurangabad region including Nasik1.
Kagonanda:-Proceeding further Rama faces some Mlecchas known as the Kagonandas (34.41). Lakṣmapa defeats Rudrabhūtī, the leader called the of the tribe and rescues Balikhilya. The Kagonandas are Kākonadas in the PCR (34.72). In the MB (6.9.64) the Kakas are associated with the Vidarbhas who the Central occuppied Provinces (Nagpur)". The Allahabad Pillar Inscription (4th cent. A.D.) mentions the Kākas and others along with Prarjunas. Vincent Smith places the Prarjunas in the Narasimhapura disrtict of the Central
1. HGAI, P, 291..
2. JSI, p. 343,354.
3. See HGAI, p. 184 & GD, p. 162.
4. HGAI, p. 302.
5. TAI, p. 356.

Page #541

512
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Provinces1. The PCV mentions them as occupying the region falling to the south of Narmada. It seems that their activities were spread over the south-west region of Narsimhapura also. Thus the Kakas and Kakonadas or Kāgonandas seem to be identical people.
Tapi:-Proceeding further Rama crosses the Vindhya forest and reaches the region where the river Tapi was flowing (Vinjham aikkameūņa pāviyā visayaṁ majjheņa vahai Tavi 85.1). The Tapi river is well-known. It flows in the south along the Satpura hills.
Arunagrama:-Rama further goes to Arunagrama (35.5) but there he is insulted by Brahmin Kapila, hence he proceeds further and sojourns in the jungle. (Not indentified).
Ramapuri:-There in the jungle a Yakṣa is said to have conjured up Ramapuri for the temporary sojourn of Rama (35.36). Kālidāsa mentions that a Yakṣa sent his message from Ramagiri. He also states that Ramagiri was rendered sacred by Rama and Sita'. Therefore in our opinion Ramapuri of the PCV can be identified with Ramtek (Ramagiri) of Nagpur district, situated 24 miles north of Nagpur (HGAI p. 328). That place is at a distance from the Tapti and PCV does not mention that the Tapti was crossed by Rama. It says that it flowed in that region nearby (Majjheņa vahai) and it may mean the basin of the Tapti.
Vijayapura:-Proceeding further Rama reaches Vijayapura (36.7). Lakṣmana here marries the princess Vanamālā, daughter of king Mahidhara of that town. The PCR (36.11) calls it Vaijayantapura. The VR (2.9.12) says that Vaijayantapura was situated in the south towards the Dandakaranya (Daṇḍakanprati). One Vijayapuri is said to have existed in the valley of the Nagarjunīkoṇḍa hills. It was the capital of the Ikṣvākus of the far south. Other Vijayanti, the capital of Kadambas, is identified with Vanavāsī in the Kannara district. But both the places fall at a very great distance from Rama's immediate journey. The PCS (29. 1) mentions its name as Jivantapura and further states that Rama leaves it behind and reaches the river Godavari (Golā pai 31. 3. 2). Thus it indicates that Vijayapura was situated to the north of Godavari.
Nandyavartapura:-While staying at Vijayapura, Rāma receives news of the attack of Mahārāja Ativīrya on Bharata, the former trying
1. TAI, p.95.
2. See IK, p. 10.
3. VGA, p. 60.
4. Ibid. p. 405.

Page #542

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
513
to establish his suzerainty over the latter. Ativīrya who is said to be the king of Nandāvattapura (37. 3. Nandyāvartapura), had demanded military help from Mahidhara. Rāma proceeds from Vijayapura to the site of the battle. He captures Ativirya, makes him to accept the suzerainty of Bharata, and returns to Vijayapura.
Ancient Vākā taka inscriptions record one Nandivardhana which is identified with modern Nagardhan or Nandardhan near Ramtek about 13 miles north of Nagpur? Nandivardhana is considered to be one of the capitals of the Vākāțakas. The capital was shifted to this place from Purika and later on it was shifted to Pravarapura (about 430 cent. A.D.). The reference to Ativīrya's expansionism seems to be an allusion to the probable attempt of some Vākāțaka king for expanding his territory and then his defeat at the hands of the Nalas. 2
It is said that Ativīrya was helped with military contingents by the lords of Anga (37. 7), Pañcāla (37, 8), Pundapura Paundrakṣmas (37. 9), Magadha4 and many Yavana lords (Jaunāhivai 37. 10). Anga is identified with the modern districts of Bhagalpur and Monghyr. It was one of the great Mahājanapadas in ancient
India, Pañcāla roughly corresponds to modern Budaon, Farrukhabad and the adjoining districts of U. P.7 Pundapura is probably Pundravardhana, Rāma also refers to it as Pondavaddhana. He asks Śatrughna whether he would like to become the ruler of it (86.2). It is identified with Mahasthan seven miles north of the modern town of Bogra. It was the capital of the ancient Paundras or Paundrakas. (See further for the Yavanas & Magadha).
Kșemañjalipura :-From Vijayapura Rāma traversing the forest reaches Ksemañjalipura (38.22). Here Lakşmana wins the hand of Jitapadmā, the daughter of king Satrudamana. It is not identified. The PCS mentions that it lay at some distance from Godāvarī (31 4.1).
Ramagiri & Dandakāranya :-Proceeding further Rāma traverses a dense forest (Mahädavim 39.1) and reaches Varšasthalapura,
4.
1. HGAI, p. 323. 2. VGA, p. 105-109; See also. 3. PCR, 37. 17.
See Infra. 5. The PCR calls them 'Yavanadhipab' (37. 20). 6. GE, I. p. 13. 7. GE, I. p. 133. 8. HGAI, p. 246–247.
33

Page #543

514
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
situated in the valley of Vamśagiri (39.4). On that hill he sojourns for some time. At the request of Rama, the king of that place gets some Jina temples built on the hill. It then comes to be known as Ramagiri after the name of Rama (40.16). After some days Rāma tells Laksmana to proceed to some other place beyond the river Karparava (known as the Dandaka forest). He further says that the forest lies in the vicinity of the great ocean and expresses his desire to sojourn there1. Accordingly they start from there and enter the Daṇḍakaranya and sojourn on the bank of the river Karparava (41.2). They proceed further towards the interior and come across the big river Kuñcarava (42.15), or Koñcarava (43,21). They stay there for a long period of time. The river is called Krauñcarava in the PCR (42.61). At the time of departing from Ayodhya, Rama tells his mother that he will return to her after settling some abode on the Vindhya hills or on the Malaya mountains or in the vicinity of the ocean3. Further while departing from Ujjain, Lakṣmaņa tells that he along with Rama and Sita is going to the Malayaparvata3. From the last reference it can be inferred that Rama might have entered the Malayadeśa or the region near about the Malaya mountains which are the southern parts of the Western Ghats or the region of Malabar coast. The ancient Malayaparvata has been identified with the portion of the Western Ghats from the Nilgiris to Cape Comorin'.
The VR (3.69.5) refers to the Krauñca forest and locates it at a distance of some miles to the west and then south of Pañcavați. As one proceeds further to the south the source of river Kṛṣṇā comes nearer, It is presumable that the Karṇarava or Kroñcarava of the PCV is the Kṛṣṇa river. Vamśagiri should be some hill in that area and Vamśapura, a town situated in the foot of the hills. But they are not identified. The ocean also falls in the vicinity and thus the Dandakaranya is the region lying on both the sides of the Kṛṣna flowing from the north towards the south i.e. in the Kokan and Maharastra region. R.G. Bhandarkar identifies the Dandaka
1. Nisunijjai Kannarava mahānai tie atthi paracṇam, maṇuyana duggamam ciya tarubahalam Dandayaraṇṇam 40.13; Tattha mahāsamuddāsanne kāūņa ālayam parivasamo, bhaniyo ya Lakkhanenam jahanavesi tti eveyar 40.14.
2. Viñjhagirimatthae và Malae va sayarassa vasanne; Kauņa paitthanam tujjha, phuḍam agamisse ham-31.100.
Bharahassa sayaladesam mottuņam Malayapavvae amhe, Kauņa Paitthāṇam niyayapuram agamissamo 33.141.
4. HGAI, p.22.
3.

Page #544

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES 515 forest with Maharastra (EHD', See II), and Pargiter with the region from Bundelkhanda to the Kșşnā (JRAS, 1894. p.241-42).
Krauñcapura is also the name of Vanavasi in north Kannara, situated on the river Barada, an affluent of the Tungabhadra (GD, p. 104). It is probable that Barada has been referred to as Karnaravā. Vanavasi is also in the vicinity of the sea and the Malaya region also lies in its vicinity while as regards the site discussed in the preceding paragraph the Malaya mountain remains far apart. Then the Dandakāranya would mean the region lying to the south of the Krşņā and the north Kannara region. But in both the cases Vamśagiri called as Rāmagiri also remains unidentified.
Jyotiprasada Jain2 has identified the Rāmagiri of Ugrāditya's Kalyāpakāraka with the Ramatirtha-parvata of the Vizagapattan district, near Vijianagaram. That hill was known as Ramakonda (koppa = giri) in ancient times. This site seems to be identical with the Rāma giri of the PCV on account of the vicinity of the sea and the great rivers Godavari and Krşņā, Dandakāraṇya would mean the region lying between the Godavari and the Krşņā. In that case Godavari and Krşpā would be the Karnarava and Krauñcaravā of the PCV both called as Mahāpais (40.13; 42.15). The PCV mentions that the forest was abundantly rich with coconut trees (41.9; 42.9). These trees grow abundantly in this region. This area seems to be the plausible identification because the Vanara country or Kişkindhipura comes into its vicinity. It is said in the PCV that Vanara Lord Sugrīva while wandering in distress came to know that Kharadūşana was killed in this forest (47.1-4).
Following the death of Kharadūşana, the father of Sambūka and the kidnapping of Sitā by Rāvana, Rāma is escorted to Alamkārapura (43.12) or Pātālaukārapura by Virādhita (45.38). It is said to be situated to the south of Dandakagiri and to the north of the Lavana ocean (Indian ocean 43.10-11). Dandakagiri is said to be situated in the Dandaka forest (42.14). Both these places remain unidentified.
Kapidvipa Kiskindhipura :-As Rāma sojourns at Pātālankārapura, Sugrīva, the lord of Kiskindhipura arrives there to seek Rāma's help for retrieving his wife Târā (47.9). Rāma goes to Kiskindhipura and restores Tārā to Sugrīva, after killing Sahasagati. The PCV mentions that Kapidvipa = Vānaradvipa was ruled by Sugrīva and it
2,
1. See also Jha, Comm. Vol. p.57.
Jain Antiquary Vol. 19. Anika 1; & S1, p. 447; See also Madrāsa Va Mysore Prānta ke Prācina Faina Smāraka, p. 15, & Jainism in South India, p. 21 (P.B. DESAI).

Page #545

516
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
flourished in the clove-trees (Lavargagandhena susuyandho 6.1). Kiskindhipura is said to be the capital of Vanaradvīpa (6.45). It is said to be situated on the Kiskindhi Parvata (6.45). Pargiter identifies the Kişkindhya country and the hills bearing the same name with the hills near Kupal, Mudgal and Raichur? Kiskindha or Kiskindhipura is said to be probably situated some where near Hampi?. It is identified with the modern Anagondi situated on the bank of Tungabhhdra four miles away from Hampi in the Bellary district D. R. Bhandarkar quotes evidences from some incriptions of medieval period, which were found near about the region of Pampa. They are of rulers and big personages who trace their descent from Vāli, the king of Kişkindhi". And thus the Kapidvīpa or Vánaradvípa should be identified with the hilly region of the Kişkindhi mountains located near Raichur.
Sindhudeśa-From Kiskindhipura Lakşmaņa goes to Sindhudeśa ? (Sindhuddesa 48.102) and lifts up the Koțiśīla (Siddhaśīlā 48.108) to convince the Vanaras that he is capable of slaying Rāvaņa as prophesied by some Muni. Thereafter Lakşmaņa returns to Kiskindhipura. Ancient Sindh has been identified with the modern Sindh'. But the VTK. of Jinaprabhasūri locates the place of Koțišila in Magadha. Some locate it in the Kalingadeśa and some near the Dasárnaparvata (781, p. 447). The Vasudevahindi (I. p. 348) locates it on the Sammetaparvata. Kotisla was a particular slab of stone. It was called so because crores of munis attained nirvāna on this slab. Thus the place can be located somewhere on the Sammeta mountain, but it is not clear why our author calls it Sindhuddesa.
Sripura:-Hanumat is brought to Kiskindhipura from Sripura (Siripura), his capital town (49.1). This town must have been situated in the area adjoining the territory of Sugrīva because both Hanumat and Sugriva are the Vanara kings.
Further there is a reference in the PCV (55.16) that the people of Kapidvipa (Vanaradvīpa) and those of Mahendra, Malaya and Sriparvata hills became the allies of Rama and fought with Rāvana. Thus the Kapidvipa, the Mahendra, Malaya and the Śríparvata should be in the vicinity of one another. In the story of
1. HGAI, p. 21. 2. Collected works of R. G. Bhandarker, Vol. 3. p. 16. 3. Rāmāyaṇa Kalina Sanskrti, p. 322. 4. Ganganath Jha Comm. Vol, p. 56-57. 5. Geographical Dist. by Dey, p. 183.

Page #546

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
517
Añjanāsundari it is said that when Hanuman was a child, he fell down on the hill from a Vimāna faring in the sky and the peak of the hill was crushed to pieces, so he was named Srisaila (Sarcuppio also...... tepam ciya Siriselo nāmaṁ se kayaṁ kumārassa 18.49). Thus the reference is to the Śrīśaila or Śrīparvata because it is further said of Sirīpura was situated on Śrīparvata (85.26) which was under the rule of Hanumat. Śrīparvata also called as Śrīśaila is located in the Karnul district near the river Krşnāt. Thus Śrīpura must be a town situated on or in the valley of this mountain.
Hanumat is sent from Kiskindhipura to Lanka. He on his way to Laikā first subdues his maternal grandfather at Mahendrnagara (50.1). It is said to be situated in a corner of Bhārata in the south, near the sea and in the valley of the hill Danti (15.9-10)2. Dantapura was the ancient capital of Kalinga. It is identified with a place near Chicacole, which is on the eastern coast of India or the Bay of Bengal. Mehendragiri also is situated near it. Then the other Dantapura is identified with Rajmahendri situated on the Godavari. it is also not far from the sea coast". But both the places do not fall on the route connecting Kişkindhipura and Laikā. It is also known that the ancient Mahendra mountains comprised the whole of the Eastern Ghat ranges. The Harşacarita (Ch. 7) mentions that the Mahendra mountains join the Malayaparvata. There is also a Mehendragiri in the Tinnevelli district of Madras and a town in its valley may be called as Mehendranagara. but then the town falls very far from Śripura as mentioned in the PCV. Our author states that Añjanāsun darī was exiled by her mother-in-law from Adityapura. She was sent to Mahendranagara. There her father did not accept her. She entered a forest in exile and when her maternal uncle was taking her to his own town her new born child fell down on the Sriparvata hill. Thus the account of the story requires that Śriparvata and Mahendranagara should not be situated at a very great distance. There is a place known as Mahendravadi village three miles east-south-east of the Sholinghur railway station on the line from Arkonam junction to Arkot. This place is situated on the coastal land. It falls very well on the route joining Kişkindhipura
1. HGAI, p. 189; VGA, p. 91, 217. 2. Bhārahavarisante......dahiņapāsammi sāyarāsānne Dantināma mahiharo. 3. HGAI, P, 149. 4. Ibid, p. 172. 5. Ibid, p. 22. 6. Ibid, p.172 ; See EI, Vol. IV. p. 152.

Page #547

518
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN and Lanka, Śrīparvata is not very very far from this place. It is situated in the south also. Thus Mahendranagara can be identified with Mahendravadi (Mahendrapura).
Lankapuri :-From Mahendranagara. Hanumat reaches Larkāpuri (53.I). He accomplishes his mission and returns to Kiskindhipura (54.1). There are references which establish that Lanka was situated in the sea. It is said that Rama along with the army of the Vānaras reached Lankā which was situated in the middle of the sea (sāgaravarassa majjhe 54.44). Sita also asks Hanumat as to how he could reach her after crossing the waters (laugheūņa jalaņihi 5 3.25) and so on (rayaņāyaram samuttarium 53.51; sāyaravaram uttariūņam 63.4; uttariūnar imam salilanāham 63.8). Rāvana is said to have crossed the sea while returning to Larka after defeating Lord Yama. The sea has been described in 6 verses with its surging waves (8.257263). At the time of narrating the origin of the Rakşasa Vamsa it is said that Vidyadhara Meghavāhana was made the first Lord of the Rākşasadvipa which was situated in the sea (sayaravare 5.126). That 'dvípa' had in its middle the Trikūța hill and Laňkāpuri was situated in the valley of that hill (5.127-129). The Uttarapurāra (68.254-256, 294, 501, 509,& 724), the Mahapuräna (69.2; 73.6, 12; 74.2,7; 77.5), the TSP (IV. p. 245,273; I. p. 165) and the RPS (Ch. 3 p. 16) give ust he same account. The PCV farther mentions that Laikā abounded in trees of coconut and areca catechu (53.79). Therefore the present island of Ceylon can be identified with the Rakşasadvipa, Larkāpuri with a town in it and the Trikata hill with a hill in it. It is believed by some that Trikūța is identical with the present Mantotte in Ceylon'.
Rāma, before reaching Lankāpuri, is said to have defeated king Samudra of Velandharapura (also called Suvelapura 54.43) situated in the valley of Velandharaparvata (54.39). Both these places seem to be situated on the southern coast of India, opposite Ceylon. Further Rāma reaches Haṁsadvīpa and camps there before attacking Larkāpuri (54.45). Hamsadvīpa is said to be situated near Lankāpuri.
Allies of Rāma :- Various peoples (55.16-17) are said to have made alliance with Rāma to fight against Rāvana. They are as follows :"Kaidīvavāsiņo bahave māhindamalayatīrā siripavvaya
haņuruhāiya// Keligila ya rayaņā taha ya velandharā ya nahatilayā sajjhārāyā
ya tahā dahamuha-divă sayā ceva"//
1. See also 19. 14,20. 2. GD, p. 113

Page #548

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
519
Kaidivavāsiņo=Kapidvipavāsinaḥ :-The people of the Kapidvīpa can be identified as the Kapidvīpavāsinaḥ.
Mahindatīrā :-The people occupying the coastal land along the Mahendra mountains should be the Mahendratíras. The Mahendra mountains are identified with the eastern Ghats (See supra).
Malayatīrā :-The people occupying the coast along the Malaya mountain are called Malayatīras. The Malaya mountains are the southern parts of the Western Ghats south of the river Kaveri (GD, p. 122) i.e. Kerala costal land (see Supra).
Siripavvayā=Śrīparvatiyas :-The Śrīparvatiyas are the historical people. They were the Ikşvākus of the south Āndhradeśa, whose capital was Vijayapura in the Nagarjunikonda hills. Sriparvata overhangs the river Krishna in the Kurnool district. The peeple of this region are called Sriparvatīyas (see supra).
Hanuruhā or the people of Hanuruhapura:-It is said to be a town reigned by the maternal uncle of Añjanasundarī, mother of Hanumat (17.121). When Añjanāsundari was exiled from her father-in-law's and father's houses, she left Mahendranagara and wandered in a forest, By chance her maternal uncle, Pratisürya saw her there and took her to Hanuruhanagara. Her son was brought up there and so was named Hanu (18.51). Hanu's other name was Srisaila. He became the ruler of Sripura. Hanumat was a Vánara. Sugriva also was a Vānara. All these facts indicate that these places lay near one another. Brahmacāri Sitalaprasādji regards Honavar situated at a distance of two miles from the bank of Jarasappa or Siravati in the north Kannara, as the Hanuruhadvīpa of the Jaina Rāmāyana of Pampa?. It lies in the vicinity of Vānaradvīpa of Sugrīva, therefore it can be identified with Hanuruhapura of the PCV. The people of this place were called as Hanuruhas in the PCV.
Keligilā= the Kelīkilas (PCR, 55. 29):- They should be Kilakilas. The Kilakilas or the Vindhyakas are held to be the ancestors of the Vākāțakas (EDAD, p. 39). It is held that under the Imperial Andhras there were five dynasties in their empire in the Dakṣiṇāpatha. The Puranas mention the duration and the succession of such dynasties that came down to the next Puranic epoch and the rise of the Kilakilas or the Vindhyakas (EDAD, p. 16). The DKA (p. 48) states that according to the Purānas, (Vākātaka) Vindhyasakti (225-275 A. D.) came into power after Kilakila kings (vide VGA, p. 89). Thus it is clear that Kilakilas
1. Bambaï Prānta ke Prācīna Jaina Smāraka, p. 139 (1925 ed.)

Page #549

520
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYA
were some historical people and they might have ruled in the south before the first quarter of the 3rd cent. A. D. The Ratnas, the Velandharas, the Nabhatilakas", the Sajjhārayā=Sandhyārāgas or Sandhyākaras and the Dahamuhadvīpās are the people named after the places to which they belonged. They are unidentified and may be probably mythological names. (see infra for these places).
Back to Ayodha: Mathura:-Rama kills Rāvana and in due course returns to Sāketapurī from Lanka. He declares Satrughna as the king of Mathuri (86.3). Satrughna defeats Madhu, son-in-law of Rāvana, kills his son Lavana and occupies Mathurā. It was the ancient capital of Surasena and is identified with the present Mathurā, situated on the bank of Jamuna in the Agra division?
Ratnapura:--(No. 1):-After the occupation of Mathura, Rāma and Lakşmapa marry Sridāmā and Manoramā respectively, the daughters of Vidyadhara king Ratnaratha of Ratnapura (Rayanapura 90.1). It is said to be situated on the southern Vijayārdha mountains. Vanara king Kişkindhi of Kişkindhipura is said to have married his daughter Sūrakantā to a prince of Ratnapura (6.216). In the Kuvalayamālā also it is referred to as if it was situated in the Vindhya system to the south of Narmadá river (p. 196). The GD (p. 168) mentions on the basis of Jaimini Bharata (Ch. 41) that it was perhaps the capital of Mayurdhvaja and his son Tamradhvaja who fought with Arjuna and Kșsņa. It can be identified with Ratnapur 16 miles north of Bilasapur in the district of Bilasapur in Madhya Pradesha?
Then Laksmana is said to have conquered various Vidyadhara kings of the southern Vijayardha mountain. The places mentioned are-Kañcanapura (91.3), Gandhārapura (91.6) Sihapura (91.6) and many others.
Kañcanapura:-The PCV also mentions it as Kāñcanapura (94.4). The PCV states that it was the birth place of Vidyādhara Kubera (7.45) who was appointed as the Lokapāla of the northern division of Bhārata. Kanakaratha, the Khecara lord of this place is said to have married his two daughters, namely, Mandākini and Candramukhi to Lavana and Ankusa respectively (106.1-9). Kañcanapura is also called as Kanakapur (106.3). Mālyavat, one of the ancestors of Rāvana is said to have married a princess of Kanakapura (6.241). Kanakapura
1. The Nubhakānanas are mentioned in the Markandeya purāna as the people of
the South, (Tr, p. 337). 2. HGAI, p. 107: 3. HGAI, p. 327.

Page #550

521
GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
is said to be situated on the southern Vijayardha mountains (15.20). A prince of this town was proposed as the bridegroom for Anjanasundari before her marriage with Pavanañjaya. Thus it was a place under the rule of Vidyadhara kings. There is one village Kanakavalli which belongs to Pangalanādu, a division of PaḍūvurKoṭṭam in Jayankonda-colamandalam1. Ancient Kanakagiri or Hemagrāma (Meleura) is said to be a famous place of pilgrimage for the Jainas in old days, situated in Camarajnagara district of Mysore2. But these places stand far away from the Vijayardha or the Vindhyas. Ancient Kañcanapura as the matropolis of Kalinga3 is identified with modern Bhuvaneshwar. It lies on the southern side of the Vindhya region as described in the PCV., hence our Kañcanapura can be taken as Bhuvaneshwar.
Gandharapura :-Gandhara is identified with a place
near
Broach. In ancient history it is known as a coastal port'. As it falls south of the Vindhyas hence it can be taken as the ancient Gandharapura.
Simhapura -It can be identified with Singupuram situated between Chicacole and Narasannapeta".
Ganga :-In the course of time Rama exiles Sītā. The General of Ram's army takes her in a chariot, traverses the forest, crosses the river Ganges (Janhavi 94.47) and abandons her in the Simhaninada forest i. e. a place, terrifying owing to the roar of lions therein (94.28). Ganga is the modern Ganges of the northern plains.
Pundarikapura -Vajrajangha, the king of Pondariyapura (94.103) or Pundariyapura (95.10) who happens to pass by that way on an expedition to capture elephants sees Sītā. He takes her to his city. and looks after her, as her brother. As the reference goes it should lie to the south of the Ganges. The GD (p.147) identifies one Panderupur or Pandharpur on the southern bank of the river Bhīmā in the district of Satara in Bombay province and states that Pandupura is a corruption of Pundarikapura. It was visited by Kṛṣṇa and Rukmiņi. But it seems to be very far from the situation mentioned in the PCV. Pargiter identifies the Pundra country
1. HGAI, p. 159.
2. JSI, p. 460.
3. LAI, p 293.
4. JSI, p. 475. & Gujarāts par Arabi Farasini Asar, Pt. I. pp. 128, 149 by Chotabhai Naik.
5. HGAI, p. 260; VGA, p. 71.

Page #551

522
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
with the modern Chotaragpur (Mar. Pu, Tr. p. 329). Pundariyapura night probably be the capital of this country.
Pythoipura :-In due course Sītā gives birth to Lavana and Ankusa at Pondariyapura. Lavana marries the daughter of Vajrajangha and Ankuśa marries the daughter of king Prthu of Pṛthvipura (Puhaipura 98.4). It is unidentified.
(2) Place and People Conquered by Lavana & Ankusa.
After their marriage, Lavana and Ankuśa, make a war-campaign and bring about many countries under their snbjugation. Generally the countries denote the names of ancient peoples or tribes (98.57-68). They are not mentioned systematically in accordance with their geographical location. It is to be borne in mind that the author is mentioning the names of the ancient countries by his memory and so all of them are not to be always strictly regarded as existing during his time.
Both the brothers first conquer Alokanagara (Lokākṣanagara PCR, 101.69), and Abhyarnapura (PCR, 101.70). They are unidentified.
Further they conquer Lampāgadesa (Lampāka). The region of the Lampākas is identified with modern Lamghan, north-east of Kabul and south of the Hindukush in modern Kafiristan. (TAI, p. 152). Further they conquer the following peoples and places.
Vijayasthali Mahanagari (98.60) :-The Mar. Pu. (Tr. p. 411) mentions a town, Vijaya situated in Kamarupa i.e. west Assam. Proceeding further they cross the Ganges and go to the north of Kailasa. Kailasa is the modern Kailaśa mountain situated about 25 miles north of Manasarovara, in the country of Tibet (HGAI, p. 67). It is also named as Aṣṭāpada mountain (9.33;9.57). Further Lavana and Ankuśa are said to have conquered the following countries:
(Jhasakaṁvukuntasīhalapapanandapasalahamangalabhima bhūya ya vāmaņā vi ya jiya bahuvaiyādesā 98.62).
Mahabharata the Yakha and the Jhaşa & Kamvu:-In the Khambu tribes are called Kirātas1. The Jhasas and the Kamvus of the PCV are probably the above people.
Kunta: The Markandeyapurana (55.46) mentions Kunta as a hilly region. The Varangacarita (16.33) mentions the Kuntas along with the people of Kashmir. Thus their location falls near Kashmira. The
1. GESM, p. 84, see Marakandeyapurana, Tr. p. 322.

Page #552

523
GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
PCR mentions it as Kuntala (101.77). In that case the Kuntaladeśa is well-known as the region including southern part of previous Bombay State and northern part of Mysore (TAI, p. 176). But the PCR also locates it in the north of the Ganges and the Kailasa. The Varangacarita supports it but the country or the people of that name remain unidentified in that north region. However the Kunti Janapada referred to in the MB is identified with Kontavara or Gwaliar
Bha. Să, p. 140).
Sihala Simhala or the Simhalas:-It is identified with modern Ceylon, southern most island of Indian peninsula (GE, I, p. 5; VGA, p. 137). But the PCV has often referred to the Rākṣasadvīpa and its capital city as Lanka which has been identified with Ceylon. Sihala of the RCV seems to be lying in the northern most region of India. The JP (52. p. 217 & 56. p. 213) and Ava. Cu (p. 191) mention that Bharata conquered Simhala, Babbara, Cilāyaloka, Javaņadīva and Arabaka etc. Thus these references also locate Sihala in the northern region. On the basis of Saktisangama Tantra (3.7.49) Dr D. C. Sirkar puts Simhala in the Punjab-Rajasthan region and thinks that it may be the kingdom of Simhapur in the Jhelum district1.
Pananandana (Nandinandana PCR, 101.77) or the Pranandanas :The Anandas of the Marakandeyapurana are taken as Nandas and are located on the bank of river Nanda. mentioned as situated in north between the Ganges and Kosi (Tr. p. 383, see p. 412 also).
Salaha or the Salabhas:-Our work puts the Salabhas in the north. They are unidentified.
The Mangalas:-Wilford identifies Mangalapura with Mangora or Manglora. It was situated on the left bank of the Swat river (GD, p. 125).
The Bhimas-The Puraņas also mention the Bhimas2. Bhimas thāna of the MB (Vana. Ch. 82) is identified with Takhtibhai, 28 miles to the north east of Peshawar (GD, p. 33).
The Bhuyas Bhutas or the Bhautas:-Bhutan or Bhutasthan is identified with a place in the Palai valley close to the southern fort of Shahkot pass leading to Swat. It was a large important Buddhist site. The area appears to have been a stronghold of the Bhutas or Bhauttas. They have been mentioned by Danḍin and Vagbhata as
1. Studies in the Geograpthy of Ancient & Medieval India by Dr. D. C. Sirear, p. 103.
2: Ibid. p. 62.

Page #553

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
speaking the Paiśaci dialect1. Pargiter also takes the Bhutas as a north-western border tribe2. Then the people of modern Bhutana are still called as the Bhotiyas or Bhotas
524
Vamana or the Vamanas-The Märkandeyapurana (55.35) refers to the Vamanas. They are identified with the Vanavas of the MB and their place is located in the north-west. It is presumed to be Bunnu in the north-west of the Punjab (Mar. Pu, Tr. p. 372).
Sindhu:-Thereafter Lavana and Ankuśa cross the river Sindhu and conquer various countries of the Aryans and the Non-Aryans. Sindhu is the river Indus emptying into the Arabian sea.
Thereafter the countries conquered by them are named as "Ahiravoyajavaņā kaccā sagakīralā ya nemālā varula ya căruvacchi varavadă ceva sopārā":
Ahirava the Abhiras:-The region of the Abhīras have been located at different places by different works. They are located In Saurastra, western Rajputana, and Daksiņāpatha (TAI. p. 79-81). They also formed independent dynasty after wresting portions of Maharastra from the Satavahanas (TAI, p.80). A settlement in central India between Bhilsa and Jhansi was called Ahirawārā VGA. p. 131).
Javana the Yavanas:-They have been mentioned along with the Abhiras, the Kacchas and the Sakas. Therefore their area should have been in the western part. A Yavana king has been referred to as the ally of the king Ativïrya of Nandyavartapura, who attacked Bharata (37.10). The Puranas refer to the Sakas, the Yavanas and the Tuşaras ruling in the north west during the early centuries of the Christian era (VGA, p. 12). The Khārvela Inscription refers to a Yavana king of Mathurā. Kalidasa refers to a Yavana ruler of the southern bank of Sindhu (TAI, p. 157; IK, p. 117).
Kaccha the Kacchavasins:-Kaccha has been identified with the lowlands of Kaccha, the swampy lands (CAGI, p. 348) lying in the west (Papini 4.2.133) in Gujarat (modern Cutch-GD, p. 82).
Saga = the Sakas:-The Sakas were the Scythians. Their ancestral land lay to the east of Sogdians and according to some, to the east of the Caspian sea (GD, p. 172). In the first century their settlements sprang up at Takṣaśila, Mathura and Ujjayanī (IP, p. 78).
1. Nagpur University Journal, No.7, Dec. 1941, p 44. 2, JRAS, 1912, pp, 290,711.

Page #554

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
525
e.
They as Ksatrapas ruled west India for a very long time up to the end of the 4th century A.D. (VGA, Ch. 3).
Kirala=the Keralas (Kerala. PCR, 101.81): The Asoka RE, II & III mention them as Ketalaputas who were outside the boundaries of the territory of Asoka. Keralas are located to the south along with the Colas and the Pandyas. Cera or Kerala territory comprised Travancore, Cochin and Malabar districts (CHI, I. p. 585) nearly the modern Kerala.
Nemala, Nevala (Newāra) (99.55)=Nepāla (PCR, 102.156) :Nepala is the modern Nepala, a trans-Himalayan state (HGAI, p. 113). The Newāras are considered to be the people closely associated with the origin of the word Nepāla. In the Allahabad Pillar Inscription. Nepala is mentioned as an autonomous frontier state.
Varula ?:-Varaṇā or Varuņā was one of the twenty-five and a half Aryan countries with Accha as its capital. Varana was known by the name of Uccīnagara which is identified with modern Bulandashahara in UP. (LAI, p. 352; VGA, p. 192). Presumably Varula and Varupa are identical.
Caruvacchi - Cāruvatsiya? :-The Purāņas refer to the Vatsiyas?. If 'cari' be taken as an adjective it can be the Vatsa country with its capital at Kosambi i.e. Kosam situated on the Jamuna river (CAGI, p. 448f). The country lay to the south of Jamuna. In the Jaina canonical literature Accha and Vacca are referred to as Aryan countries. Acca is identified with the region about Bulandshahara and Vacca the capital of which was Verāda is taken to be as Matsya country, i.e. modern Alwar and Jaipur region (LAI, p. 254).
Varāvada ?:-It is unidentified. If Varāvada and Vairāļa be the same then Vairāțanagara is just near Jaipur. It was the capital of Matsya country or Virāța country (HGAI, p. 333). If Verawal, then ancient Somnathadeva Pattana in Kathiawar can be identified with it. If it is Vallavāda then it is identified with Valayavāda or Vaļavāda the site of present Radhānagarī about 27 miles to south west of Kolhapura (HGAI, p. 301).
Sopara=Sürparaka :-Soparaka town is mentioned as being situated in the Konkandesh (VH, I. p. 284), on the seacoast (Uttara. Tika, 4., p. 78). It is identified with Sopāra in the Thana district of Bombay and the region situated near Prabhasa included the country around the mouth of the Narmada (TAI, P, 354).
1. D.R. Regmi --Ancient & Medieval Nepal, p. 4f. 2. SGAM, 1. p. 33.

Page #555

526
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Then they conquer "Kasamiravisāņā vi ya vijjā tisira hidimbayambațýhā, Sūla vavvaramāla gosalā saramayā savara".
Kasamira=Kāśmira:-It lies to the north of the Punjab (HGAI, p. 97).
Visānā - Vịśāna (PCR, 101. 82):-The JPS refers to the Vesānigas as residing in the dvīpas of Lavaṇasamudra (10.53; 11.51). It is unidentified.
Vijjā=Vaidyas (PCR, 101. 82): They are unidentified.
Tisirā= the Tuşāras ?:-They have been mentioned as the people of the north (Mār. Pu, 57. 39; Vā. Pu, 14. 118). They have been identified with Tochari tribe and are located to the north of the Hindukush mountain (TAI; p. 396). They played an important part in the history of Kashmir upto the ninth and tenth centuries (TAI, p. 397).
Hidimba:-The Kavyamimāṁsā? mentions the Hidimba river of the Paścimadeśa. The river has tentatively been identified with the Cambal on the evidence of Hidimbavana mentioned in the Mahabharata. Perhaps the people of this region were called the Hidimbas.
Ambatthā - the Ambașthas: --Ptolemy speaks of a tribe called Ambastai who occupied the east region of the Hindukush mountain (TAI, p. 97) while Pargiter locates the Ambașthas in between Ambala and Sutlez (LAI, p. 358).
Sula=the Sūlikas or Calikas? :- They are probably the Culikas of the Purāņas. They have been identified with the people of Oxus in Turkistan (TAI, p. 385). They spoke Culikā Paisaci and Su-lig was a well-known ancient name of Kashgara.
Vauvaramālā = The Barbaras :- The Vavvaras have also been mentioned as the allies of Lavaņa and Arkuśa when they fought against Rama and Lakşmaņa (99. 55). According to the Mahabharata they seem to be the people of northern country. The BỊhatasaṁhită refers to them as the people of north or north-west (TAI, p. 92). The country of the Barbaras was in the north-west frontier of India and it stretched up to the Arabian sea (CAGI, p. 693). Now in the PCV itself there is a reference to the people called Ardhabarbaras and Mlecchas who attacked the terriory of Janaka. They are located to the north of the Kailāśa. Further the PCV tells that various
1. Pandit Kedarnath Sharma (1954), p. 227. 2. Ibid. p. 229. 3. Nagpur University Journal, No. 7, Dec. 1941, p. 44f; See 1A, Vol. 3, No. 4.
p. 107.

Page #556

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
527
other countries adjoining them were the Kamboya (Kamboja), Suya (Suka), Kavoya (Kapota) which were infested with the Savaras (27.5-7). They are again called as Vavvaras (Barbaras 27.26). They were flat-nosed (civiďanāsā 27.32). The horde of those peoples has been called as Cilāyasenna (27.8). Thus it is clear that these peoples are referred to as barbarians. They were the Kirātas (Cilátas), and the Sabaras whose habitations have been named as Kamboja, Suka and Kapota.
Kamboja - the Kambojas -The Mahabharata locates them along with the Gandharas and the Barbaras in the Uttarāpatha (XII. 207.43). In the Raghuvassa, Raghu meets them after defeating the Hupas on the bank of Varkşu (IV. 69f). Kalhaņa puta them in the north of Kashmir (Rajatar, IV. 163-176). On the evidence of the Raghuvaṁía, B. S. Upadhyaya locates them in the north-east of Kaśmīra (IK, p. 61) in the Ghalcha speaking areas of Pamir.
Suya = Suka or Saka ? :-They are not identified.
Kavoya=Kapota=Kapiśā ? :- Pāṇini refers to Kapisa along with Gandhāra and Balhīka (IV. 1.175). Kapiśā has been identified with the region next to Gandhāra coinciding with modern Kafiristan and occupying the whole area between the river Kunar and the Hindukush. The Rohitagiri separated Kapiśā from Balhika (IP, p. 48).
Kirātas :The Nepalese tradition still gives the name Kirāta to a region of their country (TAI, p. 283). On the basis of evidences from Mahabhārata the Kirāta region is said to be lying from Nepal to Assam (Bhārata Savitri, p. 135). The Kiratas of the Raghuvamśa have been identified with the Tibetans or Tibeto-Burmese of Ladakh, Zankar and Rupsu. In the Indian literature they have been placed along the Himalayan entire range mostly in the Brahmaputra valley (IK, P. 62). Similarly the PCV calls them as trans-Himalayan people.
Savaras = Śabaras:=In the Indian literature the Sabaras have been mentioned as the people of south, infesting the forest region (TAI, p. 172). But PCV mentions them as trans. Himalayan people.
Thus the Barbaras or the Ardha-Barbaras of the PCV are the wild tribes, also called as Mlecchas and they were the trans-Himalayan people.
Malā:-According to the MB (Sabha. 29) it was situated to the east of Videha and north-west of Magadha and on the north of the Ganges (GD, p. 121, see Mār. Pu, Tr. p. 330).
Gosala= Gasila (PCR, 101.82):-Govasana referred to in the MB is said to be the Sibi country (Bha. Sa, p. 135). Can the Gosalas be identified with the Govasanas ?

Page #557

528
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Saramaya:-They are unidertified.
Further they subjugate "Āṇandā tisirā vi ya khasă taha ceva honti mehalaya/ Sūraseņā palhiyā khandhārā kolauluga ya// (98.66).
Ananda -the Anandas:-They have been referred to as the allies of Ravana also when he is attacked by Rama (55.55). On the occasion of the war compaign of Lavana and Aikuśa the Anandas are mentioned along with the Trisiras, the Khasas, Mekhalakas etc. Anandas as a people have been mentioned in the Markandeyapurana and they are assumed to be occupying the region of the lower Krisņa river (EDAD, p. 328). Historically the Ananda dynasty is known to have ruled in the southern Andhradeśa, The Ananda dynasty succeeded the Bṛhatphalayanas (EDAD, p. 215). They rose in southern Andhra country and dislodged the Pallavas in c.300 A.D. Damodarvarman (295-315 A.D.) was the first king of Ananda dynasty but probably he was preceded by several kings (EDAD, p. 233; 336). The three kings Kandara, Ativarman and Damodar varman are assigned to the Ananda dynasty of the Guntur region and on their prakrit names it is suggested that they belonged to a period not later than the middle of the fourth century, A.D.
(VGA, p.64-65).
Khasa-the Khasas:-Mr. Stein identifies them with the Khakha tribe to which belonged most of the petty chiefs of the Vitasta valley below Kashmira and in the neighbouring hills'. B.C. Law locates them in the Tibet on the evidences of Mahabharata2 and some locate them on the bank of the Shailoda river near Pamira (Bha. Sa, p.154).
Mehalaya the Mekhalas Mekalas:-In ancient times the Amarakanṭaka range was called Mekala, whence the name of the tribe is derived. The Mekalas were a small tribe inhabiting the tract of country comprising the modern Amarakan taka, which is a part of the Vindhyas (TAI, p.374).
Surasena Sauraśenas :-Surasena was a Janapada with its capital at Mathura-north VH, I. p. 232). According to the VR, Śūrasena was a son of Satrughna, after whom the territory was known as Śaurasena (CAGI, p.706). The country is identified with the region west of the Jamuna river (BI, p.27) or the district of Mathura and the region still further south (CHI. I.p. 316).
1. Rajatarangini (Tr.) II, p.430.
2. TAI, p.400.

Page #558

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
529
Palhiya the Bahikas:-They are called Anaryas (VC, 8.3) and are associated with the people of the north (VR, 4.44.13). Their country is located between the Bias and the Sutlej, north of Kekaya (GD, p.19).
Khandhārā = the Gandharas:-The Gandhara country is identified with the modern Kandhar comprising the districts of East Afganistan and the north-west Punjab (BI, p.28). The country comprised of the district of Peshawar and Rawalpindi (GD. p.60f).
Kolathe Kolas :--The Kols, a collection of aboriginal tribes are said to have dwelt in Bihar in ancient times and now they inhabit the mountainous districts of Chhotanagpur, Orisa and Madhya Pradesh (Mar. Pu, Tr. p. 365).
Uluga Uluka :-The Ulukas of MB are located by Pargiter in the Nepal (Mar. Pu, Tr. p. 346).
Further they are mentioned to have conquered "Purikobera kuhara andha ya tahā kalingamãiya, countries (98.67).
A
Purikobera the Purikauberas?: - On the basis of the reference in the Harivamsapurana to the city of Purika in the kingdom of Mahiṣmatī B.C. Law calls it probably a city of the Paurikas (TAI, p. 383). Our Paurikauberas are perhaps the same people.
Kuhara the Koharas -The town Kahror is known to ancient India. It was on the bank of the old Beas river, 50 miles to the southeast of Multan and 20 miles to the north-east of Bahawalpur (CAGI, p. 277). Then in the Puranas the river Kabul is mentioned as Kuhu and in the Rgveda as Kubha (GEI, p. 89). Ptolemy includes the Kirrhadai among the tribes of Sogdiana (TAI, p. 282). The word Kuhara of the PCV has similarity with the above mentioned names, but the people of that name remains unidentified.
Andha the Andhras:-V.A. Smith regards them as the Dravadian people and progenitors of modern Telugu people, inhabitants of the deltas of the Godavari and the Krishna (Ind. Ant., 1913 p. 276f). They are also called as a Vindhyan tribe who extended its political power from the west to the east down the valleys of the Krishna and the Godavari. The Satavahanas are called Andhras or Andhrabhṛtyas by the Puranas and it is well-known that they ruled over the whole of Andhradeśa (TAI, p. 164). Huen Tsang's accounts locate the Andhradeśa in the region of the deltas of the Kṛṣṇa and the Godavari (Ind. Ant., 1877. p. 339).
Kalinga = the Kalingas:-Aśoka conquered the Kalingadeśa and annexed it to his country (RE). King Kharvela was the ruler of Kalinga
34

Page #559

530
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
deşa (Hathīgumpha Insp.). The Raghuvamsa (4.38) puts it on the eastern cost of India and mentions Utkala as a separate adjoining country. The Godavari formed its southern boundary and the Gaolia branch of the Indravati as its northern boundary (IK, p. 52).
The PCV further mentions some countries or the people who were the allies of Lavana and Ankuśa in their battle whith Rama and Lakṣmaṇa (99.55). They are said to be
"Kalapalaṁsucuda gavanganevālavavvarā puṇḍā/ Magahayaparasaulā kālingā sīhala ya taha"//.
Kalaṇalā Kālānala or the Kalas and the Nalas :-Both these tribes are mentioned together in the Puranas as Nalakalika1. The Märkandeya Purana (Venk. Press 54.35) refers to the Kalatoyakas as a people of the Godavari region in the Aparantadeśa. Except some similarity in names there is nothing definite material for identification of the Kalanalas. Nalakalika of the Bra. Pu. (Ch. 49) and Nalakanna of the MB (Bhisma, 9) is said to be probably Nelcynda identified with Nileśvaram on the Malabar coast (GD, p. 139). Or the Nalas may be the historical people who ruled during the 5th century A. D. (VGA, p. 107f).
Amsucuḍā Cūḍā - Cula:-See Supra under Sūlā.
Vanga:-Pargiter identifies the country of Vanga with the modern districts of Murshidabad, Nadia, Jessore, parts of Rajashahi, Pabna and Faridpur. Kalidasa's Raghuvamsa places it in the delta of the Ganges and the Brahmaputra (IK, p. 51). It was the ancient name of Bengal.
For Anga, Nevala, Vavvara, Punda, Magaha, Kalinga and Sihala see supra and infra.
Parasula the Parasakūlas Pāras ailas (PCR, 102.156):-Modern Persia is referred to as Pārasaküla in the ancient literature. The Parasailas can be identified with the people of modern Persia called as Parasa in ancient literature (LAI, p. 320).
Kancananagara:-Lavana and Ankuśa after having been accepted by Rāma marry Mandakini and Candramukhi, the princesses of Kañcananagara (106.1) (See Supra. Kāñcanapura).
Syandanasthali;-Rāma as a monk is said to have moved to Syandanasthali called as Mahapuri (115.1; PCR Nandasthalipuri 120.2). The river Syandika is identified with the Sai river which flows between the Ganges and the Gomati on the southern boundary of the
1. SGAM, I. p. 31.

Page #560

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
531
Koshaladesh (RKS; p. 312). Syananadasthali may be probably a place situated on its bank.
(3) Places associated with the great persons of the Jaina Faith. . The places which have been already identified in the preceding section are only mentioned here. Others are identified.
Sāketa, Košala, Prathamapuri or Ayodhya:-It was the birth place of Tīrtharikara Rşabha (20.27); Ajita (20.28); Abhinandana (20.30); Sumati (20.31), Ananta (20.44), Ara (20.44) and the capital of Cakravartin Bharata (4.54) and Sagara's (20.109) territories.
A ștāpada::-Rşabha attained 'Nirvāna' on this mountain (20,51). It is called as Kailasa also (9.53: 9.57). Sixty thousand sons of Cakravarti Sagara were burnt to ashes on this mountain, when they dug a ditch around it to fill it up with the waters of the Ganges to protect the Jina shrines situated on this mountain (5.169). Dasamukha raised the peak of this mountain to disturb the meditation of Muni Vāli. Thereupon he suffered discomfiture at the hands of Vali and he made an alarm of terror so he was known as Rāvana (9.78).
Srāvasti:-It was the birth place of Tīrtharikara Sambhava (20.29), Cakravartin Maghavā (20.111) and Subhūma (20.139). It is identified with modern Saheļh Mahe!h in U. P. on the bank of the Rapti (CAGI. p. 469).
Kośāmbi :-It was the birth place of Jina Padmaprabha (20.32). It is said to be situated near the river Jamuna (55.38). It is identified with Kosam situated on the Jamuna about 30 miles south-west of Allahabad (HGAI, p. 100). It was the ancient capital of the Vatsa country.
Kasipura:-It was the birth Place of Tirthaikara Supārsva (20.33). It is the famous holy place in U. P. situated on the northern bank of the Ganges. It is the same as (Vanārasi) Vārānasi (HGAI, p. 94).
Candrapuri :-It was the birth place of Tirthankara Candraprabha (20. 34). It is the same as Srāvasti (HGAI, p. 125).
Kakandi:-It was the birth place of Jina Puşpadanta (20.35). The king of this place ran away secretly to Vānārasi and took shelter there when his minister burnt his palace and troubled him (104. 2-21). The PTSg. (I. p. 25) locates it presumably 25 krośas to the east of Gorakhapura. Some identify it with Kakan in Monghyr district (LAI, p. 291).

Page #561

532
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Bhaddilapura (Bhadrika PCR, 20.46):- It was the birth place of Jina sitala (20.36). It is identified with Bhadia, a village from Hunterganj in the Hazaribag district (LAI, p. 272 & PTSg, I. 28).
Simhabura:-It was the birth place of Jina Śreyārsa (20.37). The PTSg, I. 4, locates it near Benaras, called Sihapuri. Some locate it probably in Saurāṣtra (JASG, p. 201).
Campā:-It was the place of birth and emancipation of Jina Vasupūjya (20. 38). The Harivarnsa originated here (21. 6). It was the ancient capital of the Anga country. Kūņika, the son of Sreņika made it the capital of Magadha. It was situated at a distance of about four miles to the west of Bhagalpur in Bihar (HGAI, p. 215).
Kampilla=Kāmpilyapura:-It was the birth place of Jina Vimala (20.39), Cakravartin Harişena and Brahmadatta (20. 150, 158).
Ratnapura (No. 2): It was the birth place of Jina Dharma (20.41). The PTSg (Int. p. 37 and p. 95) identifies it with Runai in Oudh.
Nāgapura :-It was the birth place of Jina Santi (20.42) and Kunthu (20.43), Cakravartin Mahāpadma (20.143) and Sanatkumāra (20.124). It is called as Gajapura and Kuñjarapura (95 34) also. It was the ancient capital of the Kurus, situated on the Ganges in the Meerut district (HGAI, p. 81), 22 miles to the north-east of Meerut (IK, p. 71).
Mithilāpuri :-It was the birth place of Jina Malli (20.45), Nami (20.47) and Keśava (Vasudeva) Datta (20.180).
Kuśagrapura :- It was the birth place of Jina Munisuvratanātha (20.46). It is also called as Kusumánagara (95.35)".
Sorivapur (Sauripura) :-It was the birth place of Jina Nemi (20.48). Some identify it with Mathura (HGAI, p. 122), some with Suryapura or Sūrajpura situated near Bateśvara, in Agra district, on the right bank of the Jumna river (LAI, p. 337; PTSg, I, p. 38).
Urjavanta :-It was the place where Jina Nemi attained emancipation (20.48, 51). It is identified with the Girnar hills near Junāgarh (HGAI. p. 300).
Vāņārasi :-It was the birth place of Jina Pārśva (20.48). It is the same as Kaśīpura. It derives its name from two rivers, Varaņā and Asi (HGAI. p. 94.f).
Kundapura or Kundagāmapura :-It was the birth place of Mahāvira, the last Tirtharikara (2.21; 20.50). It has been identified with a suburb called Basukunda of Vaisali (Basarh) in the Muzaffarpur district of Bihar.2
1. Sec Supra Rājagsha. 2. Encyclopaedia of Religion & Ethics, Vol. 7, p. 466 & SBE, Vol. 22, P. X-XIII.

Page #562

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
533
Pāvā (Pāvāpuri) :-It was the place of Lord Mahāvīra's emancipation (20.51). Some identify it with a village near Biharsarif (LAI, p. 268), some with Kasia, situated on the little Gandaka river to the east of the district of Gorakhpur and some with a place near Rajgir in Bihar (HGAI, p. 251).
Sammeta :-It is the place of emancipation of 20 Tírtharkaras (20.52). It is the Sammetaśikhara or the Pārasnatha hills in the Hazaribag district of south Bihar (LAI, p. 330).
Prayāga :-It was associated with the meditation of Jina Rşabha (82.21). It is the modern Prayaga or Allahabad at the confluence of the Ganga and Yamuna (LAI, p. 322).
Rayapura (-It was the birth place of Cakravarti Jayaşeņa (20.153). Vasudeva Purişapundarika (20.180), and Prativasudeva Jarāsandha (20.202). It is also referred to as Rājagrha (2.8, 48; 11.5, 46), and Magadhapura (82.44,46). Rāvana is said to have prevented the animal sacrifice of king Marutta of this place (11.46).
Poyanapura:-It was the birth place of first Vasudeva Triprstha, (20.180). It is said to be situated in the Dakşipa-Bhārata (82.77). The PCR calls it Paudanapura (20.221). The VH (I. P. 354) locates it near the Godavari. It is identified with Paitthāna or Pratisthāna in Mahārāśțra on the bank of Godavari (LAI, p.318 ; See also Jain Antiquary Vol. 3. No. 3).
Väripura:-It was the birth place of the 2nd Vasudeva Dviprştha (20.180). It is called Dvāpuri in the PCR (20.221). Can it be Bāravai=Dvārikā=Dvāravati ? situated on the sea shore on the western coast of Kathiawad (HGAI, p.282).
Mahāpura:--It was the birth place of third Vasudeva Svayambhū (20.180). King Saudasa of the Ikşvāku line, on being exiled from Sāketa, is said to have become the king of Mahāpura (22.91), situated in the Dakşinadeśa (22.78). It is not identified.
Šantinā managara: It was the birth place of fourth Vasudeva Puraşottam (20.180). The PCR calls it Hastinagara (20.221). Hastinapura or Gajapur was the birth place of Jina Santi hence it is called as śāntināmanagara in the PCV.
Cakrapura :-It was the birth place of fifth Vasudeva (20.180). Cakrapura is also referred to as a place of southern Vijayardha (91.4) It is not identified.
Mathurā;-It was the birth place of ninth Vásudeva Krsna (20. 180 ; 5.153).

Page #563

534
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAW
· Alkāpurī:-It was the birth place of the first Prativasudeva Ašvagriva (20.201). It is not identified. Kalidasa locates Alakāpurs in the Himalayas.
Vijayapura (See Supra):-It was the birth place of second Prativasudeva Táraka (20.201). It is not identified.
Nandananagara:-It was the birth place of third Prativāsudeva Meraka (20.201). There is also a reference to Nandapuri (20.188) as a place of the previous birth of fourth Baladeva. Both may be the same. In the Jaina literature Nandipura is mentioned as the capital of Sandibbha, one of the 25} Aryan countries. Then there is Nandigrāma or Nundgaon in Oudh, eight or nine miles to the south of Fyzabad. It may be ancient Nandapuri (LAI, p. 316). There is an epic reference to Nandigrama in Punjab (VGA, 8.62). Then there is Nandapura, a village in the district of Monghyr on the southern bank of the Ganges (EI, XXIII. Pt. II, Apl. 1935, p. 53).
Pythvipura (See Supra) :-It was the birth place of fourth Prativāsudeva Nisumbha (20 201). It is not identified.
of
fifth
Prativāsudeva
Haripura :-It was the birth place Madhukaițabha (20.201). It is not identified.
Sürapura (Suryapura PCR, 20.242) :-It was the birth place of sixth Prativāsudeva Bali (20.201). It may be probably Suryapura or Surajpur (See Soriyapura).
Simhapura (See Supra) :-It was the birth place of seventh Prativāsudeva Prahlada (20.201).
Takşaśīla :- Bahubali, the brother of Cakravartin Bharata was the ruler of this town (4.38). It was the ancient capital of the Gandhara country. It has been identified with modern Taxila in the district of Rawalpindi (HGAI, p. 130).
(4) Places mentioned in the intervening stories Amaragiri :-It is referred to as a Tírthasthāna (95.37). same as Devagiņi (see Devagiri).
It is the
Amệtapura :-(91.4) It is probably Amareśvara on the opposite side of Omkāranātha on the southern bank of the river Narmada (GD, p. 5).
Aristapura (Aritthapura 39.77): It is identified with the ancient capital of the Sivi kingdom i.e. the Shorkot region of Punjab (HGAI,

Page #564

535
.GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
66). A town of this name probably existed also in the Mahārāṣṭra (JASG, p.14).
Asinapura (7.50):-The people belonging to this place came to be known as the Asinas (Aśvinis PCR, 7.119 ?). A village Asni is situated about 10 miles north of Fatehpur (U. P.), where a stone pillar inscription has been discovered (HGAI, p. 66). If the Asinas are the Asmakas then Aśmeka can be identified with a place on the Godavari near Paithan (SI, I, p. 198).
Indranagara (36.12):-Vanamālā the princess of Vijayapura was bethrothed to the prince of this town but later on she was married to Lakṣmaṇa. Indrasthāna of the Bhag. Pu. (10.58.1) or Indraprastha of Padma. Pu. (200.17.18) is identified with Indrapat two miles to the south of modern Delhi (HGAI, p. 86). Another Indrapur is identified with Indor in the Bulandsahar district in U. P. (JASG, 24; SI, I, p. 311).
Isindapalli (29.63):-It is referred to as a settlement of the Mlecchas situated in the thick forest, in the vicinity of the Sammeta mountain.
Karnakundalapura:-Hanumat is said to have lived there (19.35; 108.1). But he was the ruler of Śrīparvata (85.26). Marital relations existed between the Vanaras of Kişkindhipura and the Vidyadharas of Karnakundalapura (6.218). Dandaka is mentioned as the ancient king of this place. It is said that it was situated in the interior of the Dandaka forest (41.19) Thus it seems to be a place of the southern plateau.
Kinnarapura or Kinnaragitapura:—It is mentiond as a Vidhyadhara town (5.242.. Those who lived there came to be known as the Kinnaras (7.49). Hanumat married various Kinnar princesses (19.36). Thus it should be in the Dakṣiņāpatha. But in the Jatakas the Kinnaras are assigned the Himalayan region (IV.p.438f). Jayacandra Vidyālaṁkār identifies the land of the Kinnaras with modern Kanaur in the upper valley of the Sutlej where the head water of the Candrabhāgā flow adjacent to it (Vide IK, p.62).
=
Kuñcapura (Krauñcapura 48.14):-It is perhaps the Krauncapura (Vanavāsī) situated on the Berada an affluent of Tungabhadra river GD, p. 104).
Kundanagara:-The PCV mentions that Ujjeni was visited by merchants from Kundanagara (33.65). Vidarbha's ancient capital Kundanapura is identified with Kundanpura on the bank of Wardha

Page #565

536
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARİYANI
about 40 miles to the east of Amraoti in Berar by Dowson! This Kundanpura may be Kundanagara of the PCV because the situation of Ujjenī and Kundanpura indicates that there might have existed a trade route between them.
Kuruvaradvipa:--It is said to be the territory of the maternalgrand-father of Añjanā, the mother of Hanumat (17.102). The PCR calls it Hanuruhadvipa (17.346). Hanuruhapura was the capital of this region (PCV, 17.118). There are Kurugoda hills in the Bellary district”. There are antiques of Jain temples in this region. There is also a Hanumanti hill.3 Both the places can be identified with Kuruvaradvspa and Hanuruhapura of the PCV (See Hanuruhapura).
Kusumapura: (48.83):-It is the ancient name of Pataliputra HGAI, p. 249). But our author once confuses Kusumānagara with Rājagsha (See Rājagsha).
Kusumăvati (5.29);- It is probably the same as Kusumanagara or Kusumapura.
Kaumudinagari (39. 100):- It is said to be visited by a Sangha of the Tāpasas. It is perhaps the same as Padminipura.
Cakrapālanagara (5.75) :-It is called as Rathanūpuracakravālapura also (5.64). It was the Vidyadhara capital of Daksina Vijayārdha. (3.i52). Janaka's son, Bhāmandala was kidnapped and adopted by the king of this city (26.86). Chakranagara is identified with Keljhar, 17 miles north east of Wardha (GD, p. 43). It may be perhaps Cakrapālanagara.
Candrävartapura :- It is said to be a Vidyadhara town. Prince Anandamālin of this place was selected as her husband by Khecari Ahalyā of Ariñjayapura (13.37). Candrapura is identified with modern Candapura which lies to the south of Siwani and to the west of the Wenganga river in the Bilasa pura region (HGAI, p.312; VGA, p.404). It is well placed in the Vindhya region or the Vijayārdha region of the Khecaras, hence it can be identified with Candrāvartapura of the PCV.
China :-The reference to Cināṁsuka (102.21) indicates that China was known to ancient India and fine cloth was imported from there.
Chhaträkärapura:-It is said to be one of the ancient capitals (20.10). According to the Mahābhārala, Chatrāvati or Ahichatra was
1. VGA, p. 404; IK, P 67. 2. Madras va Mysore pranta ke Pracina Jaina Smāraka-p. 46 Sitalprasadji. 3. Ibid. p. 47.

Page #566

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
537
the capital of northern Pañcāla, identified with modern Ramanagar in Barelly district. (LAI, p. 265). Some identify Ahicchatrapura with Nagor in Jodhpur division of Rajasthan (Nāg. Ku. Ca. H. L. Jain, p. XXXIV).
Tamraliptinagara :-(5.99) It is identified with Tamluk in the Midnapur district of Beagal (HGAI, p. 268).
Turukka=Turkey :-The reference to Turuşka (a kind of incense 2.11) indicates that trade flourished between India and Turkey.
Denggiri --Srikantha the first lord of the Vanaradvīpa went there on a pilgrimage (6.8). The PCR calls it Suraparvata (6; 14). Amaragiri and Devagiri should be identical with it. It is identified with Devagiri near Daulatabad near Aurangabad in Andhra (751, p. 390; EHD, p. 3, JHA Comm, Vol. p. 48).
Dhanyapura (Dhanpapura 20 138) :-In the Uttarādhyayana Tīkā it is located in the country of Virāța (LAI, p. 281).
Paitthanayara (Pratişthanagara PCR, 106.25) :-It was a Khecara town (103.138). In the ancient literature Supratisthita or Supratiștha is mentioned. It is identified with modern Paithan, situated on the north bank of the Godavari in the Aurangabad district (HGAI, p. 183).
Padmapura :-It is said that a certain person went from this place to Tamraliptinagara, (5.94). It is identified with modern Padmpur in the Bhandara district of M. P. (SGAMI, p. 153.)
Padminipura (39.37):-It is probably ancient Padmavati identified with Padam Pamaya near Narwar in the Gwaior division (SGAM, 11.242).
Puskalavatı (Pukkhalanayarī 31.9) :-It is the same as Puskaravati, the ancient capital of Gandhāra. It is identified with Charsadda, a little about the junction of the Swat with the Kabul river (HGAI, p. 119).
Puspavatīrṇanagara (77.75):-It can be identified with Puşpapur or Patna (GD, p. 164).
Magahā Janavaya or Magadhadeśa:-King Śreņika is referred to as the king of Magadha with his capital at Rājagrha. Magadha was one of the ancient countries. It comprised the modern Gaya and Patna divisions of Bihar (CAGI, p. 718f; BI, Ch. II), bound by the Ganges, Campa, the Vindhyas and the Sona river.
Majjhadesa (Madhyadeśa) :-From Rajagsha, Rāvana is said to have passed through the Madhyadeśa and then he is said to have sojourned on the bank of the Ganges (11.103-111). According to the

Page #567

538
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Brahmanical sources the Madhyadeśa extended from the Himalayas to the Vindhyas and from Vinaśana to Prayāga. The eastern boundary expanded with the passage of time and the Divyāvadāna includes Pundavardhana (north Bengal) also in the Madhyadeśa (HGAI, p. 12-13).
Mayūramāla:- It is said to be a place to which belonged the Mlechas such as the Kirātas and the Sabaras occupying the transHimalayan region (27.6). Mayūra is identified with Māyāpuri or Hardwar (GD, p. 129).
Maheswaranagara :- It is said to be situated on the northern bank of the river Narmadā. Its Sahasrakirana was subdued and captured by Rāvana (10.34). It is the same as Māhismatīnagari which was the capital of south Avanti. It is identified with the modern Mandhāta region of Malwa (HGAI, p. 322).
Ritthapura=Aristapura (PCR, 20.14):-It was one of the ancient capitals (20.9; See Aristapura).
Lokapura (11.62): The mother of Nārada renounced the Tāpasa dharma and became a Jaina nun at this place. It can be identified with Chanda in the Madhya Pradesha (GD, p. 115).
Vadanagara (105.88) = Nyagrodhanagara (PCR, 108.139) located in the vicinity of the Vindhya forest) :-It can be identified with Anandapura in north Gujerat, 70 miles south of Sidhpur (JASG, p. 18; HGAI, p. 300).
Varunapura :-It was under the rule of Vidyadhara Indra. Its ruler was Varuna, the Lokapāla of the western region (16.17; 19.19; 7.47). It is called as Rasātalapura also (19.8). Salilarāja is another name of Baruna and the Salilarāja Tirtha of the MB. and Padma. Pu. has been identified with the place where the Indus falls into the ocean (GD, p. 175).
Viñjhatthali (73.7) :-It has been referred to along with the Himagiri. Rāvana exclaims that he is the master of the whole world including the Himagiri and the Vindhyasthali. Thus the reference is to the region of the Vindhya system of mountains, which was the abode of the Vidyādharas and Rāvana had brought them all under his subjugation.
Viyabbhanayara (Vidagdhanagara-PCR) :-It fell on the route from Rathanūpura to Saketa (30.13) It may be probably in the Vindhya region. It is probably Vidarbhanagara or Kundinapura, the ancient capital of Vidarbha (GD, p. 108).

Page #568

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
Vennayaḍanagara 48.63 (Veņyatatanagara-PCR):-The Brhatkathakoşa1 locates it in the district of Guntur. It was situated on Krishna. It is identified with Bhattiprohu, a tributary of the Godavari (LAI, p. 271).
539
Vagghapura (Vyaghrapura) :-Śrīvardhita went to this place from Puspavatirṇanagara (Patna) for his education (77.84). It can be identified with Buxar in the district of Sahabad (GD, p. 28).
Samalinagari:-(114.26):-Śalmali is identified with Mallasarul, a village 1 miles from the north bank of Damodara in the Burdwan district (HGAI, p. 258).
Saligrama (105.19):-It is said to be a village in the Magadha
country.
Siddhatthanayara Siddharthanagara:-Muni Deśabhūṣaṇa and Kulabhuṣaṇa to whom Rama paid obeisance on the Vamśagiri, belonged to this place (39.86). It is presumably identified with Siddhangrama in the Birbhum district (LAI, p. 334) which was visited by Mahāvīra.
Sindhunadanagara (8.168):-Cakravartin Hariṣena of Kampilyapura is said to have married a princess of this place. The Bṛhatkathakoşa (33.52) locates Sindhunandana on the bank of the river Sindhu. Can it be probably identified with the capital of Sindhusauvīracalled Vitibhayanagara which is identified with Bheragrāma of Punjab (JASG, p.170).
Sirimalaya (91.5):-It is perhaps Tiru-Malai of the south? (See. Geog. Anc. Med India, p. 189, See SGAMI.)
Sihipura (13.23):-It is named Sikhapadanagara in the PCR (13.55) Panini mentions Sikhavala which is identified with Sihwal on the left bank of the Son in Rewa state (IP, p. 71).
Selapura (Sailanagara):-It is mentioned as the place of previous birth of a Vasudeva (20.169). One Sailakapura is presumed to be situated in Saurastra (JASG, p. 178).
Surodayanagar:-Carkavartin Harişeņa married
a Vidyadhara princess of this town (8.186). It may be perhaps Suryapur identified with Surat or Suryanagara identified with Śrīnagar (GD, p.198).
Hemangapura:-Malin, the grand-uncle of Ravana married a princess of this place (6.237). There is Hemavati, 8 miles to the
1. No. 46 A. N. Upadhye.
2. JSIE, p. 8.

Page #569

540
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
south of Amarapuram in the Anantapura district of Mysore'. It is probably the same.
Mānasavārasra (82.108):- It is the famous Mānasa lake in Tibet, near the Kailasa mountain.
Ratnākara (53.51) :-Sīta tells Mandodarī that Rama would cross the Ratnākara and soon rescue her. Thus the reference is to the sea besween Ceylon and India.
Sindhusägara (112.17):-It can be identified with the conffuence of the Arabian sea and the river Sindhu SGAMI, p. 44).
Jaunā (Yamunā):- It is said to be flowing in the vicinity of Kośámbi (55.43). It is a well known river, a tributary of the Ganges and Kosam (Kośāmbi) is situated on the Yamuna river (CAGI, p. 448).
Manda kini:-The Suras are referred to be playing sports in this river (10.50). It is mentioned as a river of the Kailasa mountain (82. 109). It is identified with the Kāligaügā, one of the tributaries of the Alakananda. It rises in the mountains of Kedara in Garwal (HGAI, p.31; IK, p. 16).
Anjanagiri :-It was referred to in similes (18.39;37.6). It is identified with the Sulaiman range which separates Punjab and N. W. Frontier from Balucistan. It is famous for its source of antimony (HGAI, p. 65; IP, p. 39,40).
Guñjaparvata:-On this mountain Rāvana fought battle with Vaiśravana, the lord of the Yakşas (8.90). There is a hill near Gunji in the Chattisagarh division HGAI, p. 316).
Vindhyagiri:-Rāvana is said to have camped on this hill and to have observed the river Narmadā flowing below (10.27), It is the Vindhya range to the north of the Narmada.
Vindhyapāda (103.16):--It is identified with the Satpura range IK, p. 9).
Vipulagiri :-Lord Mahāvīra is said to have sojourned on this mountain (2.37) near Räjagļha. It is one of the five hills encircling the ancient site of Rajagrha in south Bihar (HGAI, p. 270)).
Vevaddha = Vijayārdha : --It has been already mentioned that according to the Jaina tradition the Bhārata country is the Indian continent. At several places there are references to the Veyaddha or Vijayārdha mountain. The PCV states that it extends to 50 yojanas
1. Madras va Mysore Pränta ke Präcinu Faina Smārka, p.53.

Page #570

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
i. e. nearly 200 to 300 miles in breadth. It is divided into northern Vijayardha and Southern Vijayardha. Both the regions are said to be the territories of the Vidyadharas (3.150-161).
About the position of the Vijayardha the JP (1.12) mentions that it divides India into two halves, Uttarardha and Daksiņārdha1. The TSP (I. p. 173) mentions that it is placed like a measuring rod between the east and the west, touching the waters on both the sides and from north to south spreading to the extent of 50 Yojanas. It is embraced by the rivers Ganges and Sindhu. Thus it is clear that the Vijayardha system of mountains divides India into two parts. It touches waters of the ocean on the east and the west and it contains several Vidyadhara kingdoms.
541
The PCV further mentions that Khemapura (Kşemapura) was situated in Daksinabharata (103.7). The TP (4.114) refers to Kṣemampura situated in the Dakṣiņa Vijayardha. Both the towns seem to be identical and thus Daksinņabharata indicates the region lying to the south of the Vijayardha mountains. Pratiṣṭhānapura is mentioned as a Khecara town (103.138) and it is identified with a place situated on the river Godavari which in the broader sense flows in its upper course through the Vindhya system or the slopes of the Vindhyas terminating into a plateau towards the south. Similarly Candrāvartapura (13.37) is called a town of the Khecaras. It is identified with Candapura in Bilaspura state i. e. the Vindhya region.
The PCV further mentions some towns situated on the Dakṣiņa Vijayārdha. They are Ratnapura, Cakrapalapura and Kancanapura. The first has been identified with a place 16 miles north of Bilasapura, the second with a place near Wardha and the third with Bhuvaneswar. All these places are situated to the south of the great system of mountains spreading from the Vindhya proper onwards to the east.
Guñjavidhananagara ruled by a Vidyadhara lord, is said to be situated on the northern Vijayārdha (101. 56). It can be identified with Gunji a small village in the Chattisagarh division of Madhya Pradehsa. A record of 2nd Cent. A. D. is discovered in this area. This region flourished in the centuries before and after Christian era (HGAI, p. 316).
The TP locates Mekhalag rapura (4. 114) in the Vijayardha. It may be a place to the south of the Maikala mountains.
1.
See GP, (4.107f) also.

Page #571

542
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Thus to the PCV and other Jaina works the Vijayārdha is the great mountainous belt of India stretching east-west, to the south of the Gangetic and the Sindhu plains.
It is stated in the Titthogāli-paiņņaya (16-18) that there occurred great famine in the Madhyadesa so the monks migrated to other countries. Some took shelter under the caves of the Veyaddha (Veyaţthakandarāsu ya nadīsu sedhisamuddakulesu). This reference to the Veyaddha cannot be to the Himalayas. It is a reference to the mountainous region of the Madhyadeśa. Therefore Veyattha stands for the Vindhya system of mountains.
In the Matsya (113.52-54)' and the Vayu Purāņa (45. 132-134) the Janapadas such as Mālava, Daśārņa, Kiskindhaka, Košala, Vaidiša, Avanti, Mekala, Utkala, Aundra, etc. are said to be occupying the Vindhya region. Thus the Vindhyas are here referred to as not only the Vindhya range lying to the north of the Narmadā but the whole system of the mountains spreading from Mālawā up to Orrisā.
In accordance with these evidences it can be safely said that if a line be drawn from the Rajamahal hills passing through the Maikal and Mahadeo hills, up to the Vindhya proper then the hilly region and the plateau region falling to the north and to the south of this line would be called as the north and the south Vijayārdha or Vindhyas. The width of 50 Yojanas i.e. nearly 200 to 300 miles north to south as mentioned in the Jaina works would thus agree with the Vindhyaprstha of the Purāņas.
According to the modern geographers also the Vindhya mountain extends from Gujerat to Bihar, taking different local names at different places (HGAI, p. 310) and B.C. Law also regards the Veyaddha or Vijayārdha of the Jaina tradition as the Vindhya range (stretching from the west to the east (IDETBJ, p. 77) dividing the continent into North India and South India.
It seems that Veyaddha' is the Prakrit name of Vindhyādri' of Indian literature. (Vindhyādri=Viñjhaddha=Viyaddha=Veyaddha), Then the Prakrit name itself became Sanskritised in the form of Vaitādhya and Vijayārdha.
1. Malavāsca Karuşāśca Mekalascotkalaiḥ saha/
Auņdrā Maşā Daśārņāśca Bhojāḥ Kiskindhakaiḥ saha// Stosalo Kosalascaiva Traipurā Va idiśāstathā/ Tumurāstumbarascaiva Padgamā Naişadh aiḥ saha// Arupāḥ Saundikerāśca Vitihotrā Avantayaḥ/ Ete Janapadāḥ khyātā Vindhyaprsthanivasinaḥ//

Page #572

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES 543 Suvarnatunga (14.4) :-On this hill Muni Anantavīrya attained Kevala. The PCR calls it Suvarnaparvata. It can be identified with the Kanakagiri which is also called as (FSI, p. 460) Hemādri, situated in the Camarayanagara district of Mysore (JSI, p. 460). It is said that Pratisūrya while returning from there after paying homage to Muni Anantavirya found on his way his weeping neice Añjanāsundarī. From there he took her to Hanuruhapura (18.44). Both these places are not very far away.
Himagiri (73.7) or Himālaya (10.13) :--Vidyādhara Sáhasagati went there to acquire the rupaparivartanakarividya' for disguising himself as Vānara Sugrīva to establish sexual relations with Tārā (10.13). It is the well known Himalayas.
Kaliñjara (58.9):-It is referred to as a great forest. There is a well known fort of Kalañjara in or Kaliñjara in Bundelkhanda (TAI, p. 51; HGAI, p. 20). The forest of this region is probably the Kaliñjaramahāraṇya.
Naimișa:-It is referred to as a country (55.35). As a forest it is identified with the modern Nimsara, 20 miles from Sitapur and 45 miles to the north-west of Lucknow (HGAI, p. 41).
(3) Unidentified Places
Akşapura (74.31); Angapura (31.7); Ambaratilaka (6.167); Ariñjayapura (13.35;58.12); Aruņapura (1756); Asuranagara (7.49); Asokanagari (20.189); Adityaprabhapura (5.82); Adityapura (15.5); Kambudvīpa (45.32); Kukkudanagara (118.52); Kumbhanagara (8.55, 57); Kuvvaragrāma (41.55); Kusumantapura (7 74); Ksemapura (103. 7); Gaganavallabhapura (5.66); Gandharvagitanagara (5.243); Gandhāvatīnagar (41.45); Ghoșapura (21.91); Dadhimukhanagara (51.2); Dārugrăma (30.60); Durlanghyapura (12.47); Devopagitanagara (85. 27); Dhanyagrāma (77.73); Nityālokapura (9.52); Pitharakhanda tīrth (77.64); Pundarīkini (20.7); Prītipura (6.239); Mandarakuñja (6.170); Mahānagara (20.9); Mrņālakundanagara (103.90): Megharava Tirth (77.61); Rasātalanagara (7.47); Rikșapura (8.255); Varapura (17.52); Vārādaya (5.210); Viradhitapura (1.55); Svayamprabhapura (7.149) Saccaripura (30.65); Saśārkanagara (82.89); Sakatagrāma (5.27); Surasangītapura (8.1,18); Susīmāpuri (20.7); Senāpura (31.4); Sobhapura (77.100).
Lakşmapa is said to have conquered the following towns of the Vidyadharas of Dakšiņa Vijayārdha (91.3-6):

Page #573

544
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Aiccăhaṁ (94.4); Gandharva; Gandhārapura; Jakkhapura; Jyotipura; Tilakapura; Naragitapura; Malayapura; Meghapura; Ravibhūsapura; Laksmidharapura; Siripahurava; Sirimandira; Siriguha; Siricchāya; Sirivijaya; sivamandira.
The grand sons of Vidyadhara Meghavāhana are said to have established the following (Pattanavaraiṁ bahusannivesair) town. settlements, called as dvīpas for themselves (5.246-248) :
Ardhasvarga, Āvarta, Utkata, Kanaka, Tavaņāyavali, Toyavalisa (6.32) (Tata, Toya, Avali-PCR, 5.373), Durgraha, Dhanya (Yodha or Ayodhana 10.15 ; 48.54), Manaprahlāda. Manohara, Megha, Ratna, Vikața, Samudra (Udadhi 48.54), Suvela, Sandhyā. kāra, Harija (Hari) and Hainsadvipa. Amala, Alanghya, Kantā, Kśema, Nabha, Bhānu and Rodhana are also mentioned as the Raksasa settlements (6.31-33).
The following rivers and hills are unidentified:
Harnsāvali (13.41); Karnaparvata (6.218); Kambusaila (45.32); Niguñja (82.105); Pancasangamaya (5.21); Puşpagiri (46.66); Manikānta (9.21); Mahugiri (6.208); Meghavara (8.29); Rathāvarta (13.42); Vasantagiri (21.46); Velandhara (54.39); Sandhyāgiri (18.44); & Suradundubhigiri (108.22).
A general estimate of the above account indicates that the PCV refers to not less than 400 geographical places and tribes. They can be classified approximately as follows-Countries and tribes 100, Islands 50, Towns 150, Mountains 50, Rivers 20 and the rest as seas. lakes, forests etc. Out of them 100 are mythological distinctively while nearly 175 have been identified and the rest of them remain unlocated.
SECTION 6. ANARYAS OR MLECCHAS.
The PCV mentions sometimes such peoples who are distinct from the Aryan, and are called Mlecchas or Anāryas. In connection with the war.campaign of Lavana and Ankuśa, the PCV states in general that they conquered many countries of which some were Aryan and some were non-Aryan, but they have not been specifically distinguished (desā ariyaaņāriyā 98,63). On the occasion of the attack of king Ativīrya of Nandyāvartapura on Bharata, it is said in the PCV (37.5) that the former had his allies in the rulers of many non-Aryan countries. Here also the specific differentiation is not made between the Aryan and the non-Aryan countries. It is on the occasion of the attack of some barbarous

Page #574

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
tribes on the territory of Janaka, that the PCV (27.7-9) mentions Mlecchas, the Sabaras, the Kiratas, and the people of Kamboja, Suka (Saka ?) and Kapota (Kapiśā ? ) as non-Aryan and using both the terms Anarya and Mleccha in the same sense. Further the Kagonnda tribe of the Vindhya forest (34.41-46) is referred to as a Mleccha people and elsewhere there is allusion to a habitation of the Mlecchas lying in the vicinity of the Sammeta mountain (39.64). Thus all these references indicate that the Mlecchas were occupying the trans-Himalayan region N.W. Frontiers and the mountainous region of the Vindhyas spreading from the west up to the east i.e. up to the Sammeta mountain.
The PCV further sporadically refers to the Pulindas and the Bhillas. The Pulindas are mentioned to be inhabiting the forest region of the Simhaninanda-ațavī lying to the south of the Ganges, probably to the north of Chotanagpur where Sita was abondoned being exiled by Rama (94.43). At 104.20 also they are mentioned as forest-people. The Kathasaritsagara locates the kingdom of Pulindas in the Vindhya region (4.22). Their capital was Pulindanagara lying to the south-east of Daśārna (PIIAI, 79 & 258). The VC (8.3) refers to them as Anāryas, Thus They seem to have been occupying some parts of the Vidhya region. About the Bhillas the PCV states that they were also a forest people (12.13). The Bhils (i. e, Bhillas) are said to be a pre-Aryan tribe who inhabited the Vindhya, Satpura and Ajanta hills. At one time they held sway over a major portion of India. Now They are distributed among the regions of Mewar, Malwa, Khandesh, Gujarat and Rajasthan (LAI, p. 359).
545
The line of demarcation between the Aryans and the non-Aryans has been fluctuating from time to time. Senart1 writes that the fair coloured people who conquered the aborigines of this country in ancient time were called as the Aryas while the latter were dark coloured and were subjugated by the former so they were called Anāryas as revealed in the Vedic-literature. Later on those who accepted the Varnasrama Dharma were included into the Aryan fold while those who remained outside that fold and did not accept the Indo-Aryan social structure were classed as non-Aryans.
The evidences from the Buddhist Literature also reveal that those who accepted the four theoretical divisions of people were broadly distinguished as Aryans from the rest of the populace, looked
1.
Caste in India, p, 122f.
35

Page #575

546
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAW
down upon as Milakkhas or Milakkhus=(Mlecchas). According to the Jaina literature those who did not know the language of the Aryans and committed various sins were known as Anāryas. They are also called as Milakkhus or Milakkhas. They were distinguished as Paccantiyas because they resided on the border of the Aryan countries, The classification of people into non-Aryan category has varied in the Jaina literature also. The TP (4.1333f) refers to the Mlecchakhanda which was conquered by Cakravatin Bharata. It puts the three division of Uttara Bhārata and the two divisions of Dakşiņa Bharata into the Mlecchakhanda. The Uttară. (10.16) mentions the Dasyus and the Mlecchas as Non-Aryan people. The Praśnavyākaranasūtra calls the sakas, Yavanas, Sabaras, etc. as non-Aryans (Vide JASG, p. 135, fn.). The Varāngacaritam (8.6) refers to the Kamboja, Kāśmira and the Barbar countries as Mlecchadeśas. How the boundary of the Aryan country has changed from time to time with the Jainas can be known from the following evidences: The BỊhatkalpasūtra? mentions that the Jaina ascetics were allowed to move up to Anga-magadha (East), Kośambī (South), Thuna (West) and Kupāla (North). Later on king Samprati extended the limits and 251 countries were declared to be Aryan. They were Magadha, Arga, Varga, Kalinga, Kāší, Košala, Kuru, Kusatta, Pañcāla, Jangala, Surattha, Videha. Vaccha, Sandilla, Malaya, Vacca, Varana, Dasaņņa, Gedi, Sindhu, Sovīra, Sūrasena, Bhangi, Purivațţa, Kuņāla, Lāda, and Kegaiaddha. Thus the whole of north India up to the Vindhyas as its southern limit was known as Aryan and the rest of the land was considered to be non-Aryan.
To the author of the PCV the hilly tribes of the north, northwest and the Vindhyas were known as the Mleccha people and it seems that those people had not yet been Aryanised,
The PCV further reveals that its author has given a new definition to some of the ancient tribes. It tells us that Vidyādhara king Indra of Rathanūpura or the Vijayārdha mountain (the Vindhya mountains) held sway over many peoples who were known after the name of the place to which they belonged (7.49-50). The people belonging to Asiņapura, Asurapura, Kinnarapura, Gandhavvapura, Jakkhapura and Vaisāṇapura are called as Asiņas, Asuras, Kinnaras, Gandharvas,
1. Vide IDETB7, p. 139, 2. LAI, p. 144. 3. 50; also Niši. Bha, 16. p. 1111, (Vide LAI, p. 250.)

Page #576

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES 547 Yaksas and Vaišas respectively. At 3.154 it mentions that the Vijayārdha region (i. e. the Vindhyas) was occupied by the Kinnaras, Kimpurişas and the Gandharvás.
A study of Indian literature reveals that these people are mentioned in various works. Their identity as some tribes or clans is not clear. Researches carried out by various scholars have proved that they were people of very ancient times. With the passage of time they went into complete oblivion and later on they were relegated to the position of either hobgoblins or demigods. When Vimalasūri defines them on a new basis, i. e. the people belonging to particular places coming to be known after the names of those particular places—it seems to be an attempt to assign some suitable historical place to the peoples forgotten in course of time. In the following lines an attempt has time made to identify them.
Asiņas : Their identity is obscure. However Pāṇini (5.3.117) refers to the Aśanis as a war-like tribe of the North-West Frontier (IP, p. 438).
Asuras :-They can be identified with the Assyrian people of ancient times whose country formed part of the Persian Empire in the fifth century B. C. and that country is mentioned in the old Persian Behistun inscription as Athura, and in Susain as Assura (IP, p. 447). In the Purāņas they are in juxta position with the Suras (gods), their allies and rivals.
Kinnaras :-On the basis of pieces of evidence from the Brahmanical and the Buddhist literature the modern Kanaur in the upper valley of the Sutlez where the head waters of Candrabhaga approach near it, is identified with the country of the Kinnaras (See IK, p. 62).
Gandharvas :-On the evidences from the Raghuvam a the Gandharvas or Gandhāras are said to be the people of that country whose capitals were Takşaśīla and Puşkalāvati (IK, p. 67).
Yakşas :- In the VR we find them settled in the south and were chased off from there by the Rakşasas. Prof. C.V. Vaidya regards them as the aboriginal people of the south, who were later on made to flee to the north (RR. P. 99). But it is also told in the VR that when the Rākşasas vacated Larkā, Brahmā appointed Vaiśravapa, as the Lokapala of Lanká (7,3). Then we find them mentioned in the ancient literature also as the inhabitants of the north, therefore it is possible that they went from north to south.
Vaisas :-Not identified.
Further the PCV reveals that the Vidyadharas, Rākşasas and the Vānaras were very ancient people and we find that they have been

Page #577

548
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
completely Jainised or the Jaina tradition has assimilated them and has depicted them as a cultured people. In the following lines an attempt is made to assess the probability of their historical existence.
Vidyadharas :-According to the Paumacariyam1 Nami and Vinami established the Vidyadhara dynasty. It was Rṣabha, the first Tirthankara who installed them as the first kings of the Vijayardha mountain. They were called Vidyadhara because they were gifted with supernatural powers (Vidyas). It is quite apparent from the study of the PCV that the Vidyadharas were not imaginary people. They had their own territories and kingdoms. In the Valmiki Rāmāyaṇa2, the Vidyadharas are mentioned but sporadically and those references do not give any solid information about their settlements and territories. The Jaina tradition always mentions the Vijayardha or the Vaitāḍhya (Vindhya) mountains as the place of their settlements. An ancient inscription refers to the Vidyadharas and on that basis the Vidhyadharas have been identified with the aboriginal tribes of the Vindhyas by Dr. B.C. law. It will be worthwhile to quote him who records, "In the Hathigumpha inscription of Kharavela the Rathikas and Bhojakas are introduced in such a manner as to have no room for doubt that they were ruling chiefs of the Vidyadhara settlements (Vijadharadhivāśa). The Jambudivapannatti connects the Vidyadharas with the Vaitaḍhya or Vindhya range and speaks of their eighteen settlements. When the Jatakas speak of sixteen Bhojaputtas, one may understand that they were the ruling chiefs of sixteen Vidyadhara tracts along the Vindhyas. From these references it may be inferred that the Vidyadharas were not mythical beings but some aboriginal tribes that settled along the Vindhyas". Even in the seventh cent. A. D. the princes of the Sīlāhāra dynasty are found to be tracing their origin to the Vidyadharas and the Navasahasankacarita vouchsafes to the existence of a Vidyadhara dynasty ruling to the south of the Narmada-i. e. the region of the Vindhyas or Veyaḍḍha1.
Rākṣasas:-The PCV states that Vidyadhara Meghavahana was made the first ruler of the Rākṣasadvīpa". He left his Vidyadhara brethren behind in the Vindhyas and carved out a separate territory in the south. The PCV further mentions twice that the Rākṣasas were
1. See Supra. 'Origin of various Vamsas'.
2. Ibid.
3. IDET BJ, pp. 106-106.
4. See Karakandacariu, Int. pp. 41,46,48 (ED. H. L. Jain).
5.
See Origin of Vidyadhara Dynasty Supra.

Page #578

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
549
not demons but as they protected the islands (rakkhanti Rakkhasā khalu divā 2.25.7; 43.14) hence they came to be known as Raksasas (protectors). The Brahmanical tradition also depicts the same thing. The story of their origin' indicates that they were the protectors of the water-lands.
These references indicate that they were ancient people. Mr. Gustav Opport? regards, them as the original inhabitants of this country. Prof. Rapsono notes that as early as the Řgveda the Rakşasas formed a people of India. Shri C. V. Vaidya on the basis of the name of Salakațankață belonging to the maternal lineage of Rāvana as mentioned in the VR, concludes that an Ādivāsī Jāti (aboriginal tribe) of that name was settled in Laukā before the advent of Rama4. But the Jaina tradition maintains that they migrated from North". Dr. V. S. Agrawal also states that the Raksasas were probably of north-west group and of the same racial character as the Pisacas. The Rākşasas, Nāgas and Pisācas fight in the Bhārata war on both sides. He further states that there is a tribe Rakṣaṇis settled in Chagai district of north Balucistan (IP, p. 448). The VR also reveals that there were three branches of the Rākşasas. One was represented by Virădha occuping the northern part of the Dandakāraṇya, another by Kabandha called as Dānava and the third by Raksasas or Rakşas who occupied Lankā. Thus they occupied a greater part of south India. Their ancestral history? depict that they passed through many political ups and downs and it was Rāvana who made a war compaign to conquer the whole of India. That they had established themselves in Mathurā, is evident from the fact that the son-in-laws of Rāvana was the ruler of Mathura. According to the VR the relatives of Rāvana, namely Tādaka and Márīca had occupied the eastern plains of India between the rivers Sone and Ganges and their atrocities had touched the land between Ayodhyā and Mithilă. All these events depict that they were a strong and powerful tribe.
The PCV speaks highly of their culture, manners and etiquettes. Even the political and the social aspects of their life do not indicate that they were wild and inhuman. Their food habits are said to be
1. Ibid. 2. The Original Inhabitants of India, p. 534. 3. CHI, Vol, I. p. 94 (1955).
The Riddle of the Ramāyaṇa, pp. 99-100. 5. See Origin of various Vamsas (Supra). 6. Rāmāyanakālina Samāja, p. 25. 7. See Rāvana story (Ch. 4). 8. Supra. Ch. 4.I R (XIV).

Page #579

550
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
completely human. Their shapes were not fierce or abominable. In the religious field they have been completely Jainised. But in the VR, they have been painted cruel, wicked and of diabolic nature. They are said to be fierce-looking and are depicted just like demons1. Still there are no less references in the VR which depict them as human beings and of good looking. The descriptions of Lankā, the palace of Rāvana, the luxurious life there and the council of Ravana indicate that they were not always fierce looking and in no way backward2.
Then the question is why the VR at other places should have depicted them as cruel, of abominable look and as devilish whereas the Jaina tradition should describe them as human and religious.
The reason seems to be very clear. It is said in the VR that the Rahṣasas were the inveterate enemies of the Brahmanical cult of sacrifice 'Yajña'. They destroyed and put obstacles in the performance of those rites. The story of Viśvāmitra and the Daṇḍakaranya journey of Rama quite sufficiently depict it. Further it is a well known fact that the Jaina religion always deplored the cult of sacrifice which is quite against its ethics. And as the Rākṣasas also opposed this Vedic cult of Himsa, the Jaina assigned to them a place of respect in their literature and did not make any onslaught on them. There is some truth in not depicting them as devilish because in the VR also there are several references to the effect that they performed penances (5. 59. 4), studied the Vedas and their auxiliaries (5. 18. 2; 6. 10. 8; 6. 109. 23; 6. 92. 60), knew the state-craft (6.71.29; 6. 63. 14-1) and learned Sanskrit (5. 30. 18; 3. 11. 55).
The facts that they (Rākṣasas) obstructed sacrifices, that thay troubled Munis who advocated sacrifices, that they on the strength of their valour opposed the Aryans and did not allow them to enter the south, that they made their own efforts to dominate the north, became responsible for their being depicted as cruel and abominable in the VR. Mr. S. N. Vyas writes that they were depicted so because they were the born enemies of the Aryans3. Mr. C. V. Vidya says that really speaking these tribes were advanced but on account of their opposition to the Aryans they are depicted as cruel. Because they opposed Brahmanical cult therefore they are depicted as Daityas and blood consumers just as the Semitic people depicted their antagonistic tribes as unholy, fierce, cruel and barbaric 5.
1. VR, 3.2, 13, 69.
2. VR, 5.2,5;6.11.
3. Ramayana Kalina Samaja, p. 31.
4. The Riddle of the Ramayana, p- 94. 5. RKSJ, p. 52.

Page #580

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
551
Really speaking they were civilised and had a culture of their own. Pargiter remarks that civilization of the Raksasas was as high as that of north India. Mr. S.N. Vyasa remarks that inspite of their cruel habits the Raksasas occupied an important place in the political history of India before the Mahabharatakāla and their civilization was great and refined?
Dasamukha Rāvana:-It has become a belief that Rāvana had ten heads and twenty arms. The original basis of this belief is the VR in which he has been described as such in the Uttarakända and at some places in the remaining portion of the VR. This tradition has been followed by the later Brahmanical works. But there is the Jaina tradition which depicts Rāvana in the natural human form. The PCV states that when Rāvana was still a child, a locket of nine gems was put round his neck. His face reflected into those gems and thus nine more images of his face became visible so his father named him Dasamukha (7.96). It seems that a wrong belief took root in the Indian literature and art, otherwise why the VR itself should describe him as two eyed and two armed at several places. Hanumat describes Rāvana as one faced and two armed, when for the first time the former sees the latter in Laikas. Sītā mentions two eyes of Rāvana". At other places also he is said to have two arms". At the time of his being killed by Rāma he is described as having one head.
Mr. Pargiter thinks that Rāvana was probably a royal title in the Tamil word 'iraivan' or 'ireivan'=king, lord, god, sovereign and Dasamukha or one of its synonymous forms was probably his personal Dravadian name which was sanskritised and accordingly gave rise to the fable that he had ten heads.?
Mr. S. N. Vyasa says that Dasamukha was merely an address and not that he had ten heads. Similarly we have even at present such persons who are called Chaturbhuja but they do not have four arms, The very name of ancient king Sahasrabāhu did not mean that he had one thousand arms. It only meant that he might have the strength of
1. AIHT, P, 227. 2. Rāmāyaṇa Kalina Samāja p.16. 3. 5.10.15, 24, 25. 4. 5.22.18 See also 5.42. 23. 5. 6.40.13. 6. 6.107.54-57. See also 6,111. 34-36. 7. AIHT, p. 242 fn. 5. 8. Rāmāyana Kalina Samāja, p. 35.

Page #581

552
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM one thousand arms. The name of the father of Rāma was Dasaratha but it never became a belief that he had ten chariots or drove on ten chariots at the same time. It can mean that he possessed the strength of ten chariots and the same explanation is hinted at in the Padmapurāna.
Vänaras: -- According to the PCV the Vanaras originated from the Vidyadharas. Srikantha, their first ancestor migrated to the south and made Kişkindhipuri as his settlement. The Vanaras formed a branch of the Vidyādharas and they had brotherly relations with the Rākşasas. They were human beings. Their dynasty was named Vānaravamsa for they adopted the figure of monkey as their national emblem.
According to the VR, the first Vānara originated from Brahmā on the Meru mountain. He was made to settle at Kiskindhipura in the south. There is no specific reference that the Vanaras and Rakşasas were related filialy. Mr. S. V. Visvanātha on the evidence of MB (Adi. 67. 7) says that the Vānaras were akin to the Raksasas both being descendants of Pulastyao, Even in the VR (5.51.2-3 Rakşaseśa Harišastvām bhrātā kusalamabravit) for this reason perhaps Rāvana and Sugrīva are spoken of as brothers or at least as of the same family. The VR depicts the Vānaras as monkeys with their tails. But this is not the case every time. They are even depicted like human beings.
As regards their migration to the south Mr. Manmathanatha Roy says that the Vánaras were the aboriginal Vrátyas of India who migrated to the southern plateau after the arrival of the Aryans?.
As regards their animal like name it has been taken for granted that in ancient India there were tribes who bore animal names on account of their worshipping some animal deity or on account of having some tribal sign of an animal. The Nägas, and the Rakşas also belong to that type of people.
1. Dasaratho daśarathasamānarathi mahiyasā balena /
sumanasan nama nagaran jigamişayā.........(Pātālakhanda, Ch. 112.
Vol. II, p. 732). 2. See ‘Origin of Various Vanisas' and 'Ravana Carita-(Supra). 3. Ibid. 4. Racial Synthesis in Hindu Culture, p. 83. 5. See AIHT, p. 278. 6. See Rāmāyāna Kalina Samāja, 7. Vide Ibid. p. 73. 8. RKSJ, p. 73; See p. 17 also.

Page #582

GEOGRAPHICAL PLACES, PEOPLES AND TRIBES
553
There are historical evidences to show that some dynasties bore animal names. The Nagal dynasty is said to have ruled at Mathurā and Padmāvati during the 3rd and 4th century A.D. Even in the medieval times many Nāga kings ruled at Bhogavati (Ramtek) from 11th to 14th century A. D. and they had snake as the 'ensign of their banner.2 Figure of monkey also was adopted by a dynasty, King Kandara of Ananda dynasty had his banner ensigned with the figure of Golangūla (a species of monkeys).
The VR for the first time depicts the Vanaras as having tails. Scholars explain it as follows : There was a custom in some royal families that at the time of coronation a tail was attached. There is still a tribe in the Andaman islands, whose people wear tails.
All these evidences prove that the Vanaras were an ancient tribe. Mr. S. N. Vyasa considers them as a Vanavāsī people-forest tribe and they were called Vanaras because of their fickle nature (capalata?'. Such nick names are not strange. The Russians ridiculed the Japanese by calling them "yellow monkeys 8. That the Vānaras were an ancient people, is corroborated by the Vasudevahindi also. It mentions that Vasudeva married many girls belonging to Vanaravāmśa'.
1. VGA, p. 33. 2. See Nayakumāracariu, p. XXXV. 3. VGA, p. 66. 4. Bengali Rāmāyaṇa, D. S. Sen. p. 52. 5. V. D. Savarkara-Rāmāyana Samālocană. 6. RKS7, p. 71. 7. Ibid, p. 72. 8. RR. p. 96. 9. VH, (Gujarati), Int. p. 4. fn.l.

Page #583

CHAPTER XI
LITERARY EVALUATION
SECTION 1. LANGUAGE AND GRAMMAR
The Paumacariyaṁ attracts our attention not only as the first Jaina Rama epic but also as an important work composed in the Middle-Indo-Aryan Language. Study of its language is important for the students of Prakrit languages for it claims to be a composition of the first century A. D. (118.103). The authenticity of its date is doubted by various scholars, therefore, let us see as to what stage it represents in the evolution of the Middle-Indo-Aryan dialects.
Phonology*
The alphabets are represented as follows :ऋ - श्र तण (तृण ३१।५३)
भिच्च ( भृत्य ५३।१८ ) ( ऋषभ २८ ।४७ ) ए गेह (गृह ३५ | १७ ) - रि सरिस ऐ - ए एरावण (ऐरावत ७१ । ३ ) - श्रइ दइव ( देव २८|६० )
इ
- उ उसभ
( सदृश १ | २४ ) [ -इ विहव
( वैभव १।४३ ) ]
श्री - श्री लोइय ( लौकिक ५८।६ ) [ उ ढुक्किउ ढोकितुं २८ । १०५ ) -
- गारव
( गौरव |६६ ) ]
श, ष स विरणास ( विनाश १।२), उसह ( ऋषभ १1१ ) .
Sometimes the sibilants are changed as follows :
दहरह ( दशरथ २३ । १०), घरणुह (धनुष १८/८६), छट्ठोववास (षष्ठोपवास ५।५९ ) . The Visarga is always dropped.
Vowel-Changes
The long vowel before a conjunct is shortened :श्राश्र उवज्झाय ( उपाध्याय १०२ । १४ )
ऊ - उ मुक्ख ( मूर्ख २१।३७ ).
The short vowel is lengthened before a simplified conjuct :श्रश्रा कायव्वं ( कर्त्तव्यं १|१८ ) इ-ई सीह ( सिंह ३३।६) उ—– ऊ ऊसव
( उत्सव २६ ) .
ई - इ कित्ति (कीर्ति २८ । १४१ )
* Readers are further referred to Variant Readings and Orthographic Scribal Tendencies of the PC., Revised edition of Paumacariyam, Pt., II (P. T. S. 1969).

Page #584

LITERARY EVALUATION
555
. Not only indeclinables but nominal and verbal forms also interchange sometimes their long and short vowels for metrical regularity :
आ-अ तह (तथा १६), जह-(यथा ११॥५५), निसयर (निशाचर १२।६५), ई-इ अलिय (अलीक ३२॥५२), आणिग्र (आनीत २८.५२) अ-श्रा प्रारण्ण (अरण्य ९४।२०, पारोह (प्ररोह ३११६७), भाणिउ (भणि
१२।७६) इ-ई जाणसी (जाणसि ४६।१०) उ-ऊ निसेवसू (निसेवसु ७६।२६)
Such changes can be traced in the Upadeśamåla of Dharmadāsagani, the Dhūrtākhyāna (p. 50) and the Samarāic cakaha also. The following example is from Upadeśamālā:
आहरेसु (आहारेसु ४०).
According to Hemacandra (8.4.329) variation between long and short vowel is a general tendency of the Apabhramsa (See Pischel, 100).
In the PCV this variation between short and long is found on an average one instance in every canto. Of them the most common words are 'Aniya', 'Aliya' & 'Anium' and the termination of III. Sing. indicative 'I'.
Sometimes the vowels are entirely replaced by other vowels :प्र–इ मुइंग (मृदंग ११।६), उ-फुसमाण (स्पृशत् १५३५१), पोम (पद्म ५३७६) प्रा—इ जइ (यदा १५।१८), ए—मेत्त (मात्र २१८७), प्रो-जलोल्लिय (जलाद्रित
इ–उ जुण्ण (जीर्ण ६७।४८), ए-वेम्मल (विह्वल ५।१६२), ई-ऊ विहूण (विहीन ४६।५०)
उ-अ अवज्झायो (उपाध्यायः २८।२६), ऊ-ए रहने उर (रथनूपुर २।१५२) . ए-अ नालियर (नालिकेर १।२०), प्रो-ए थेवो (स्त्तोकम् १४।१२४)
Sometimes 'e' is resolved into 'ai' = 'aya':निरवयक्ख (निरपेक्ष ४।३७). Samprasarana:
Its reverse 'Sainprasārana' is also found:
अय-अइ-ए परिकहेमि (परिकथयामि ३।१४), अव-अउ-प्रो समोसरण (समवसरण ११४०).
Sometimes the vowels are dropped:Initial
रण (अरण्य ३।१४१), हं (अहं ७।१६३), वट्ठिया (अवस्थिताः २।३२), त्थि (अस्ति ३।३१).

Page #585

556
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
It is often dropped in enclitics and the consonant following it is doubled:
इति-ति १५।४४, त्ति ४६।१३, इव-व ४४।१०, व्व ३१।११२
Medial
Sometimes the vowel remaining after the elision of the medial consonant is also dropped :
Syncope
पामूल (पाप्रमूल-पादमूल ४।६६), प्रायो (प्रायो-प्रागत: ११।१३)
In some cases the remaining vowel forms Sandhi:
कुम्भार (कुम्भप्रार-कुम्भकार ५।२०७), चक्काय (चक्काय-चक्रवाक २।६६) Haplology
परिव्वान (परिव्वाप्रम-परिब्राजक ४१।२७), उम्बर (उउम्बर = उदुम्बर ३३।२)
Sometimes the vowels exchange their position:विलया (वनिता ७४।२७).
Single Consonants Single consonants can be studied as Initial, Final and Medial.
Initial The only example of initial dental-nasal changing into cerebralnasal is Ņemisa = Nemişa' 55.35. Otherwise as a rule initial dentalnasal is retained. In the compounds the first member of the second word is generally treated as initial in such cases.
This tendency is against the rule of Vararuci (2.40) but it agrees with that of Hemacandra (8.1.229):___ नामावलिय १८, निच्छूढ ८८४, नेमाल ६८।६४, गंगानईए ५।१७२, गुणनिहि ७४।२३.
Initial 'ya' regularly becomes 'ja':___ जम (यम ७।४६), जइ (यदि १।१६), जूह (यूथ १७।६३), जाव (यावत् ५२।१४).
There is only one instance when initial 'ya' is dropped: अहाणुपुग्विं यथानुपूर्व.
Hemacandra calls it a tendency of Arşa=Ardhamāgadhi (8.1.245).
The initial 'bha' of root 'bhū' is regularly changed into 'ha' :हवइ = भवति ६६२१; हवन्ति - भवन्ति ४।२७ ।

Page #586

LITERARY EVALUATION
557
Final Words with final consonants are made to end in vowels by:(i) Dropping the final consonant
जाव (यावत् ४४।१४), अचिरा (अचिरात् ४७४१) (ii) Adding 'a' and 'a' in Masc. and Fem. forms respectively
(see Declensions). Only final nasal exists which is changed into anusvăra:भयवं (भगवन्) २३।१२, चारियं (चरितम् १०४।१), अलं (अलम् ४६।१६).
Medial Yasruti
The following unaspirate medial consonants are usually dropped and the remaining 'a' and 'a' take 'ya’ śruti:
क-अणेय २।१४६, ग--नयर १।४७, च-गोयर ७१।५६, ज-भोयण ७७।३३, त-सीयल ११३, द-हिया १११६, प-विउल ११३४, य-आउ ५२४६, व-लायण्ण ३॥३६.
Vararuci does not allow 'ya'śruti but Hemacandra allows (8.1.180). Vaśruti
Often when 'pa' is dropped it is replaced by 'va' śruti:
मण्डव (मण्डप ३।१), तावी (तापी ३५१), विवन्न (विपन्न ६.१७), ख्व (रूप ४११४०).
It is sanctioned by Vararuci (2.13) and Hemacandra (8.1.211). Instances of initial 'pa' becoming 'va' वहरन्ति (पहरन्ति) ८.५७, ववडन्त (प्रपतत्) ८.२२४.
There are some examples of 'va' Śruti for other consonants :
अवलोवरणी (अवलोकनी ७।१३९), जूवाउलयन्ति (यूकापनयन्ति ६।४४), मारी वि (मारीचि ८।१५), मुरक (मुरज ७।१५६; ४२११९) मारिवव्वा (मारितव्या ११०४२). उवहि (उदधि ४८।५४; १०२।८३), हणुवस्स (हनुमतः ४७।२५), धणुवं (धनुष २८।१०४), कविलास (कैलाश ९५७), पालोव (मालोक २।१२), अज्जव (आर्यक २७।३५), आहीरव (बाहीरक ६८।६४), खेव (खेद ६७।२३), गहिवाए (गृहीतया ५४६), जुवलय (युगलक ६५।२३), ८०६७), पव्वाविन (प्रवाजित ११४।१५), फोडव (स्फोटक ६३।२६),
भुव (भुज १११।१३) and सुरगीव (सुरगीत ६३।१६). Pischel (230, 231, 246, 251) observes 'va'sruti even in the Ardhamagadhi, literature. We can trace it in the Vasudevahindi (I.p. 152, 1.6 avaloviyā=avalokita) and in the TP (4.606 bhuva=bhuja).
The following aspirates are usually changed in to 'ha':ख-दहमुह (दशमुख ११४६), घ–राहव (राघव ४४।५४), थ-महुरा (मथुरा
८६६०), ध–कोह (क्रोध ७११५१), फ–विहल (विफल ७२।१३), भ-सोहा (शोभा ६।१७). Exceptions in-भ-वसभ १२।५.

Page #587

558
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
In some cases 'sa' is changed into 'ha' and rarely into 'cha' :दिह - दिवस ६६ छिव - स्पृश ४६ । ७.
'Ga' is not only sometimes retained (rāga 12.28) but 'ka' is pretty frequently changed into 'ga' :
क - गविस १ । १६ आगास ११।११, जाणगी ११७।१८ गम्पियं ३४।४३.
This softening of 'ka' into 'ga' is sanctioned by Hemacandra (8.1.177). Pischel (202) observes this tendency in the Gaudavaho also.
Similarly hard cerebrals are also softened :
ट-ड कूड १।१६, तड ११६८, ठ-ढ कठिण ३८।२८, पीढ १०/४६.
There are only two instances of softening of 'ta', Udu = Rtu 16.86 & Kīyagaduddesa = Kritakrtauddeśa 4.71 in the PCV. Vararuci (2.7) mentions several instances of the change of 'ta' into 'da' under the principal Prakrit. Hemacandra also notes such instances (8.1.209). Even in the Setubandha 'udu' occurs several times (Pischel. 204 ) .
Sometimes the dentals are cerebralised :
त - पडाय ( पताका ७७।५८ ), थ - पढ़म ( प्रथम २६ | २२ ), द – उप्पाडि ( उत्पादित ४/५५ ) .
‘Ti' of affix ‘prati' is generally cerebralised :
सूर (प्रतिसूर्य १।६१), पडिसुइ ( प्रतिश्रुति ३ । ५० ), पडिलाहि ( प्रतिलभित ३५/७०)
Medial dental nasal is cerebralised regularly :
दसाणण १।६३, माणुस ६१८४, ठाण ३०।४७, अणन्न ३५।४१, प्रणन्द ७१।१८. Exception - नूनं १११ । २३.
In some words 'ra' is often changed into 'la' :
र—मुहल ( मुखर ८।२८०), सुकुमाल ५।१६४, चलण ४१।२६, प्रोरालियं (श्रौदारिकम् १०२८).
Hemacandra (8.1.254; 8.2.68, 123) and Varacuci (2.30) sanction it in the principal Prakrit language.
Sometimes 'da' is changed into 'la' :
ड-तला (तडाग ८६ | ६१ ), वेरूलिय ( वँर्य ३।७५), सोलस ( षोडश २।१२ ), नियल ( निगड २।११३)•
In some cases 'pa' and 'va' are changed into 'ma' :
प - म सुमिरण ( स्वप्न ११४९ ), नेमाल ( नेपाल ६८ । ६४), व – म वेसमण (वैश्रवण २४८)...

Page #588

LITERARY EVALUATION
Sometimes the accented syllable has doubled its consonant :रागद्दोस ११७।४४, समल्लीण २६, विच्चि (वीचि १०६ ४१) ४७।५५).
जोव्वरण ( यौवन
559
Sometimes a nasal is inserted between a compound;ण --- जम्मणविहव ( जन्मवैभव १।४२ ), म – एक्के क्कमविरोहं ४/४६.
Metathesis
वाणासी (वाराणसी ४१।४० ) निडाल ( ललाट ४|३३)
Conjuncts Inital
Initial conjuncts are generally simplified by dropping one of the members:
चुय (च्युत ७५।५५), कोह ( क्रोध ७१।५१), मेच्छ ( म्लेच्छ २८|६०), सयण ( स्वजन १७।२६), वेसा (द्वेष्या १७ । २३), साम ( श्याम ११।१०५), नेह (स्नेह ८ १६३).
Medial
Assimilation
Conjuncts having members of different classes are assimilated to the similar class :
Progressive — वक्कल ( वल्कल ५८ ।११), मग्ग ( मार्ग ५३।८७ ), गुत्त (गुप्त १1७ ) ;
Regressive — मुक्क ( मुक्त २२/६६ ) : पत्त (पत्र १. १४), रम्म ( रम्य १०२. १०६), दिव्व (दिव्य ५४ । ४६).
When the second and the fourth letter of a class is doubled by assimilation, the preceding letter becomes the first and the third letter of the same class respectively :
Progressive - मुच्छा ( मूर्छा ४४।४२), प्रत्थ ( अर्थ १।२३), लद्ध (लब्ध १1७ ), गब्भ (गर्भ ८२।१६),
Regressive - प्रक्खाण ( श्राख्यान ४८।७७), नेवत्थ (नेपथ्य ६६।२६ ), सुरद्धंसी (सुरध्वंशी ७।१३७).
When the sibilant of the conjunct is assimilated the other letter is aspirated:—
Progressive- पच्छा ( पश्चात् १1९०), लट्ठि ( यष्टि ३ | १४७), हत्थ ( हस्त
८३।४);
Regressive —जक्ख ( यक्ष ८२/४ ) .
Conjunct 'kşa' generally changes into 'kkha' or 'ccha' equally and sometimes into 'jjha' or 'ha':

Page #589

560
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN क्ख-पच्चक्ख (प्रत्यक्ष ३१।५३), संखेव (संक्षेप १।१०) खण (क्षण ४४।६१),
खेत्त (क्षेत्र ३।३३) च्छ—दच्छ (दक्ष ४।६०), पेच्छ (प्रेक्ष ९४१३५) छार (क्षार ४१५०) ज्झ-झीण (क्षीण १०८।३३), झरन्त (क्षरत् ६५९२) ह-दाहिण (दक्षिण ३८।३६), दीहपेही (दीर्घप्रेक्षी २६।२२) In the conjuncts sibilants and nasals interchange their positions:तण्हालू (तृष्णालु ८।८७), णहारू (स्नायु ६।८८), गिम्ह (ग्रीष्म २।६६).
Dental consonants forming conjuncts with ‘ya' are generally palatalised :त्य-अणिच्च (अनित्य १।१७), थ्य-नेवच्छ (नेपथ्य ३६।११०), द्य-प्रज्ज
(अद्य ३११५६). ध्य-अज्झयण (अध्ययन ११।१०); Exceptions:-पडणीया (प्रत्यनीका १०५।२१).
Some other conjuncts are also palatalised :त्व-चच्चर (चत्वर २०१३), त्स-उच्छाह (उत्साह ७१।२२), प्स-अच्छरसामो
(अप्सरसः ७१।२०), ह्य-गिज्झ (ग्राह्य २।१७), गुज्झ (गुह्य २६।६२). Sometimes dentals preceded by 'ra' are cerebralised :तं-चक्कवट्टि १।६४, र्थ-एयट्ठ (एतदर्थ ६४।१), ई-छड्डे यइ (छर्दयति ५।२२) र्ध-पढ्ढ (अर्द्ध ३२।१); followed by 'r' द्र--खुड्डा (क्षुद्रक १०४।३२)
Sometimes dentals forming conjuncts with other letters are also cerebralised :त–पट्टण ३३।१४, स्थ-अट्टि २२।४, ग्ध-दड्ढ ४१।३४, द्ध-वुड्ढ
(वृद्ध १०५।२४) Some instances of special assimilation are as follows :वम-प्प रूप्पिणी ७४।८, च्छ--स्स उस्सास (उच्छ्वास २८।१०), न्म-म्म - जम्म (जन्म ४।६). Some other changes are as follows : य्य-ज्ज सेज्जा (शय्या २।११२), र्य-ज्ज भज्जा (भार्या २।२२), र्य-ल्ल पल्लंक
(पर्यंक २।११०). 'Ha' forming coujunct with nasal or a sem-ivowel interchange its position :
गेण्हन्ति ( ग्रह्णन्ति १।१२), पल्हाम (प्रहलाद १५॥३५).
'Jia' is changed to 'pna', 'nna' or 'jja' :ण्ण-गणियण्णु (गणितज्ञ १७।१६६), पइण्णा (प्रतिज्ञा ८।१६१)

Page #590

LITERARY EVALUATION
561
न्न-सव्वन्नु (सर्वज्ञ १।१३), जन्न (यज्ञ११५३), विन्नाण (विज्ञान २५।२५) ज्ज-मणोज्ज (मनोज्ञ ८।५९), अणुज्ज (अरणुज्ञा ३८।२५)
Vararuci (3.44) and Hemacnndra (8.2.42,83) do not sanction the change of Jña' into 'nna', but in the Ardhamagadhi it is observed (Pischel, 105,276).
'Jina' prceded by prohibitive particle 'na' or affix 'pari' is treated as medial consonant (Pischel, 107) and so "ja" drops its consonant:य—याणइ (२।१९), न—याणसि ६४।९९,न—याणसे ११७१, परियाणामि ८६।१४.
The conjuncts are simplified by various processes like :
(i) by dropping one of the member—'vihala' (vihval 71.42); or (ii) by turning one of the member (usually 'ira') into anusvār:दंसण (दर्शन २०६८), अंसु (अश्रु ७८१९), जंप (जल्प ५।१७७); or (iii) by inserting a vowel in the middle of the conjuct:___ अ-रयण (रत्न १.१३), आ-जाणावण (ज्ञापन ११।८८), इ-सहरिस (सहर्ष ७१।२२), अ—सलाह (श्लाघ ७०।१२), इ--सिलेस (श्लेष १।२२), उ-सुमर (स्मर ९६।४३).
SANDHI
The rules of Sandhi are not followed strictly.
There is no Sandhi when the vowel is left by elimination :नउल (नकुल ६६।१४), जइ (यदि ३२।६८),
Exception-बीअो (बिईप्रो-द्वितीय: ५।१४६). Sometimes there is no sandhi in compounds also आणाइस्सरिय ५।२७०, महुगिरिउवरि १।४५, परिवाडीपागसं ३१।१०६; Generally there is no Sandhi in the sentences also:-.. वज्जेह इपं १४।१४८, होही अम्हं ७।६८, इन्दो इव ७११४, मे अइसनाणी ७।१६७
Sometimes the ending vowel of a word disappears when the initial vowel of the next word forms Sandhi:तिजगुत्तम (त्रिजग---उत्तम ११३), भरणइह (भणइ-इह १०।४८),
Sometimes the Sandhi is avoided by inserting a labial nasal between two words:सीहरहमाई ३७।११, सुयसारणमाइएसु ७१।३४, एक्कमेक्का ७१।२५; There are some survivals of Sanskrit Sandhi
पुणरूतं ४७३, निस्संक ६।३२, दुच्चरिय (दुश्चरित ५३।१३१) 36

Page #591

562
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
MORPHOLOGY
There is no dual. All the words end in vowels.
Declensions In some instances the gender has changed; Neuter into मणो २।१०५, जसो ६।३२
Nom. Sing. Masculine कुसुमे २६।३, हियया (हृदयानि ५९२) Acc. Plu. Masc. into Neuter दियहाणि (दिवसा: २८८७) Nom. Plu. Feminine into पाउसो २६।४०, सरो ३०१ Nom. Sing: Masculine पुहइम्मि (पुहईए ५।१ Loc. Sing).
Masc. एएसु Loc. Plu. for पुढवी ७५.४८
Table of Case-forms There is no dative, its place has been taken by genitive case.
Masculine Nouns.
(Ending in अ) Singular
Plural Nom. हरिसेणो ८१६२ लक्खणो ७१।११ पुत्ता ५।१६३ नन्दणा १०६।१४ Acc. उसहं १।१ रहं ७१।२ सुहडा ७१।८ रामलक्खणे ४३।३७ Inst. रामेण ३०।८१ (रामेणं ६३।१६) पुत्तेहि ७५।८१ देवेहि २८।६० Dat. सुयस्स २८।५६ वणियस्स ५।३३ सावयाण ४।७३ दीणकिविणाणं २८।११० Gen. पउमस्स ११४ ससुरस्स ७१।५५ मेहाण ७१ह जोहाणं ४४।१४ Abl. नियमा २१५६ बला ४६।३३
__सोहम्माउ ५।११४ नरगाग्रो ११८१२२ Loc. कूवे १०६।३७ समुद्दम्मि ३।१३७ नरएसु ८।२३३ कप्पेसु७५।३७ Voc. दसाणण ८।१०५ जणय २८।५५ जणा ५१२७
विज्जाहरतो 63.32 (Mas. Abl. Sing.) is on the analogy of the pronoun e.g. सर्वत:
___Masc. Nouns ending in इ and उ Sing.
Plu. Nom. मुणी २८।१३ साहू १३।१८ रिसी ४।७३ कइणो १।१३, सत्तू ५।१२५ Acc. मुरिंग १४।१५४ साहुं ८३।२
पसू ४८० Inst. मुणिणा १४।१५१ गुरुणा ५।२१ वइरीहि ७४१२२

Page #592

LITERARY EVALUATION
563
Plural सत्तरिसीज १८३, पडिसत्तूणं २०।२००
Singular Gen. गिरिस्स, ५०१ मेरुस्स ६४।६ Eoc. गिरिम्मि १३५ हेउम्मि ११८७ Voc. गुणनिहि ७४।२२ (वहू ८।१९२)
Neuter Nouns. चित्तं ३१।१०७ चरियं ११५ दियहाणि २८।८७ भूसणाई ४०७ चित्ताई ११८ दुक्खं २८।२५ वत्थु ९।९९ वयणाणि ४६।१ फलाइं ३८।२८ सराइँ ६४।३८
The forms closed in brackets are not given by Vararuci. Hemacandra allows them. Forms marked X have no anusvāra. Such forms are used for metrical regularity and they are just like forms having anunasika (चिताइँ, सराइँ) which is counted as a short syllable.
Feminine Nouns ending in आ, इ, ई, उ ऊ . Singular
Plural Nom. प्रा सीया ३१।१०४ विसल्ला ६३।२९ विज्जायो ६५।३ कन्नाउ ४८।१
इ ई हारणी ३।२३ केगई ३२।३७ सुन्दरीअो ७४७
उ ऊ धेरणू ८२।१४ सुरवहू ४६।७७ अमरवहूओ ३६१ Acc. या सीयं ५३।१० गंगं ६४।५३ कन्नानो ४१७ मालामो २९।३
इ ई उप्पत्ति ४।६७ नारि ४६।८ विहीरो २८।११ जणणीमो १०६।३४
उ ऊ कण्डु ६१।२६ Inst ा कन्नाए ३८।४५ गणियाएँ ५।३२ कन्नाहि ६४१३६ कन्तहिं ७१।१३
इ सत्तीए ७८।१६ निवित्तीएँ ४६।३४ जुवइहि ४६।३६ ई वसुमईए ५।१६६ मन्दोयरीएँ ४६।३७ नारीहि २८८० पणइणीहिं
११८।१०६ उ ऊ रज्जूए ४६।३४ वहूए २१।६७ करेणूहिं ७८।२४ वहूहि ८।२८० Ablative Singular सेज्जाए २।११० भत्तीपो २६।३ नयरीओ ७१।१
करेणूए ६५।१४ Gen. ा उवरम्भाए ११५७ सीयाएँ १००।२८ कन्नाणं ११५० पडिमारणं १०१५३ मन्दोयरीय ११५० जुवईण ११७६ जणीणं ७२।१०
सुरवहूणं २०५५ Loc. प्रा वेलाए ७८।२४ लंकाएँ ११७८ महिलासु ४११५१
पुरीएँ २८।५३ भोगभूमीसु ३।४२
घेमूसु ३।४६ Voc. आ ससिवयणे ३८।१८
इ-सुन्दरि ६।१६ ई-सुन्दरी ३।६५

Page #593

564
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAK
(I) We see that the declension 'ë' is equally used for 'e' in the singular forms. Pischel (385) notes that it is allowed in all dialects for metrical regularity.
(2) Ablative declension 'e' is allowed by Hemacandra (8.3.29) but not by Vararuci.
____ Sometimes 'artha' and 'hetu' are appended to the bases for expressing dative:
दोरत्थे ४।५०, गवेसणठे ४६।५८, वहत्यं ४।४७, कीलणहेउं २८।६. We find some instances of dative having 'ae' declension:japavanatthāe 11.88, See 39.69%; 9.47.9.94.
Pischel notes (363,364) them in Ardhomagadhi. and Jaina Maharastri.
Nouns ending in consonants are simplified by dropping final consonants or by adding some vowels to them and then the declensions are appended :
(1) Dropping the final consonant : Nom. इन्दई ५६
मन्ती ५।१७७ चक्कवट टी २८।६८ Acc. भयवं १७ तपं ५।३०
सराइ६४।३८ Inst. मरोणं ४।७२ नामेण ५२२० Gen. मणस्स ६६ मन्तिस्स १०४।४ Loc. पाउम्मि ३।३६ सिरे ३३५ नामे ५२२७ Voc. सामि ७०।३७ भयवं १४।१०८
(2) Adding of vowel 'a' to Masc. and 'a' to Feminine:Nom. धारिणो ७८८ एगमणसो १०।५३ दिसायो २।३४ अच्छरसायो ७११२० Inst. पियरेण ३११११२ गिराए १०४।११
Gen. पियराण १०६।३५ ।
Loc. दिसासु ८।२८६. Sometimes we find Sanskrit forms with phonological changes : Nom. Sing. पिया माया भाया १०६।३६ राया २८।१५ महप्पा २८८ Nom. Plu. नेयारो १४१६२ पियरो २०११८३ पासण्डिणो ४।८५ मन्तिणो ८।१५
पसवो (पशव : ११।९०), निहो (निघय : ४।६१) Acc. Sing. पियरं २८।२४ अत्ताणं (प्रात्मानं १११८) Inst. Sing. भगवया ३३११४ महया ४।४१ सिरसा १७ मणसा ५३।६२ Abl. Sing. भगवो (भगवतः ४११७) अप्पणो ३८० अत्तणो २४।२२ (प्रात्मनः) Gen. Sing. चक्कवइणो ४।६२ केवलिणो ११७६

Page #594

LITERARY EVALUATION
565
Sometimes masculine nouns ending in 'u' take declensions as if
they were the bases in अव :
Nom.
Nom.
Nom. I
Personal Pronouns Sing.
अहं २६।६७ हं ७५८१ अहह्यं ११३ । ६८ तुमं ८।१६१ तुह २८/४९
II
29
M. F. N. III. सो १४ । १५४ सा८।१६१, तं १२० Acc. I
ममं ९४ ६६ तुमं ४६ । २७
II
M. F. N. III. तं २२।५ तं ३८।१८ तं ६६६
Inst. I
"
II
III
Gen. I
II.
III.
Loc. I.
Sing. साहवो (साधुः ) Loc. गुरवे (गुरौ ) ६।११४
Plu. पसवा (पशवः ) ११.७७
II.
III
७४|४१, Acc. गुरवं २०1१०८ (गुरुं),
मे १९३।४१
मए १४ । १५४ मे ६४।३२
तुमे ६।१७ तए ३७।१४ ते ५।१२३ तेणं १।३० ताए ८।२७७ तीए २८ तेणं ३६८
मे २६|१० मह ९४।७१ महं# ८।१६२ मज्भ ४।७० मज्भं# २८१८१
तुम्हं ३।१४ तुहं तुह ६४८८ तुब्भं तुज्झ ६४ | ३१ ते ६८।२५
से ३।६८ तस्स २।२२ तीए ५।६३ तीऍ
७१।१२
Plu. अम्हे ५६।१३
तुम्हे ११।३१ तुब्भे । ४६ ६३ ते २६।२२ (M)
श्रम्हे ११८।२७
ते ५।१ε२ (M)
म्हेहि ६७ ४ श्रम्हे ३८।४६ तुब्भेहिं# ११३।२
तेहि १०६।३५ तेहि ५।१२५ (M)
अम्ह १०६।३५ अम्हं ५१।१८ अम्हारण ५१।१० म्हं ८।१७ तुब्भ* १०६।३४ तुम्ह ३४/४६ तुब्भं ६।११३ तुज्भं* ६।१३३ (M) ताग ३१।१२२ ताणं ५१ (M)
६६, तुम्ह ६/७७ ७।१०२ तुझं * ६।१७३
म ए ४६ । २६
तुमे ११४ । ६
तम्मि २४ तह ७५।३१ ताए ७८ । २४ तेसु
२८।६४ (M) तेसु ३।१५६ (N)
Hemacandra gives all the above forms in the principal Prakrit. Vararuci does not give those marked with*.
Forms indicated below are also traced in the PCV, which are permitted by Hemacandra
'amha' 39.113 and 'amham' 63.11 used for I Gen. Sing. (Hem. 8.3.111).

Page #595

566
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM "tumam'48.7 and 'tumae' 62.4; 117.37 used for II Inst. Sing (Hem. 8.3.94). 'tume' 16.43; 33.132 used for II Gen. Sing. (Hem. 8.3.99). 'bhe' 39.36; 105.37, seldom used for II Gen. Plu.
The following forms are also used in the PCV, but they aer not noted by Vararuci or Hemacandra.
'tume' II Nom. Sing. 41.52. Pischel (421) notes it in Ardhamāgadhi.
'tumhe' II. Inst. Plu, 46.23 and 'tubbhe' 49. 37; 75.79. It is like 'tubbuhe' of Amg. Inst. Plu. (Pischel, 422).
'mamam'1. Gen. Sing. 28.59. It is more often used in Amg. and JM. (Pischel, 418)
'tuham' II. Nom. Sing. 26.35; 28.48; 70.37; 113.35; 118.71. It is used in Dhakki (Pischel, 421).
'tumaṁ' II. Gen. Sing. 20.130; 48.99; 56.17; 63.52; 65.24; 71.57; 78.30; 86.1; 92.4; 104.17; 111.14; 113.10 (It is seen in Amg, (Pischel 421).
(tuhayam' II. Nom. Sing. 7.57; 13.39; 25.21; 35.63; 33.131; 47.52; 53 26; 77.105. seems to be regulated on the analogy of 'ahayam' I Nom. Sing.
Besides the above case-forms the following peculiarities are equally notable. Masculine nouns ending 'i' and 'u' equally take 'ņa' in the Inst. Sing, and the preceding vowel is lengthened (Such forms are found in the Dhūrta khyāna also Int. p. 32):
.
नाभीण ३।१०६, मारीजीण ७१।३४, मन्तीण १०४।२३, साहूण ६।११३. Sometimes the 'na' is nasalised in the forms such as given below:
चन्दगईणं २८।४५, नरवईणं १६।३२, जुईणं ८६।१८.
In the Apabhraíba such forms are prevalent but the vowel preceding 'na' is short and ina' is not nasalised (See Hem, 8.4.343 and Pischel, 377). Pischel (379) notes 'atthiņa', 'muţthīņa' forms in Amg. but they are used either before the enclitic 'va' or in the end. He further quotes 'mantiņa' (405) used for metrical purposes in the Āvasyaka Erzāhlungen 13.13 (ed. Leumann).
The following examples of Masc. nouns ending in 'a' taking 'u' form in Nom. Singular are rare :जरासन्धु (धू) २०।२०४, तिविठु दुविठु ५।१५५, ७०।३४.

Page #596

LITERARY EVALUATION
567
'Tivitthu' and 'duvitthu' are found in the Samavaya nga (Abhayadeva) also. 'Tivitthu' is found in the VH (p. 276, 277,311) also.
Some instances are observed without the terminations of Nominative. Sing. इक्खाग ५।२, तच्चित्त ८।१६८, चन्दोदयसूरोदय ८२।२५, पीयणपुर
२०.१६६,१८०), Plur. छत्ताइछत्तचामर ४।१८, अरहन्तसिद्ध ४८।१०७, चन्दोदयसूरोदय ८२.११६. ___ In 'garudakesari' 78.42 (Mas. Plu.) the ending vowel is shortened.
This tendency is often seen on occasions of enumeration of the names of some soldiers, illustrious persons or ancestors of some dynasty. See also 5.45; 5.147; 56.29, 36; 57.6; 57.9; 71.36.
A few cases are found without terminations of object:
Acc. Sing. विलीणरयमल ११६, कैवलुब्भव ११३६, संसय २।१०२; तच्चत्थ ३।१३; सम्माण ३६।४२
Acc Plu. नवपल्लव १५।२८; विञ्छिय ३६।१८. 'Nami' and 'nemi' 1.6; 'sukhai' 3.11 and 'riu' 6.82. Masc. Acc. Singular and 'padisattu' 20.204 Acc. Plural are instances of Masc. Noun ending in 'i' and 'u' which have retained their basic forms. These instances are just like Apabhramsa forms (See Hem. 8.4.344).
Instances of nominative forms used for accusative are found in the PCV :Mas. Sing. पिया ४२।२७, वाली (६६) साहसगई (५१।१७,१८), मन्ती
(६६।३२), मेरू १०११४३, साहू १७।४३,
etc. ending in 'a', 'i', '1' and 'u'; Fem. Sing. मरहभूमी ७८।१३ मही, ८।२२, विमूई ७५६४, धम्मबुद्धी ६५.६
___ending in i'; Fem Sing. जा १२।१६ (III Pronoun).
Indeclinable 'Karapattha' is usen for Karapattham' 5.87 and 'niggantha' for 'niggantham' 103.106. It is a tendency of changing short vowel with Anusvāra into long vowel. It is common in Apabhramsa (See Lilavar, Int. p. 81).
It is found in the PCV (by analysing Chs. 15,28,46,52,75 & 78) that Fem. nouns ending in 'a' and 'i', 'i', 'u', 'a' retain their basic forms in Acc. Sing. at the rate of 25% respectively. Examples:
. पडिमा ५।१३६, पया १०१५३, भूमि ६६।१७ लंकानयरी ८।२८५ बहिणी ३६।९५, रणकण्डु ७१७.

Page #597

568 A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Optional used of basic forms in Acc. is a tendency of the Apabhraíśa (Hem. 8.4.344). 'usabhe' (usabhe sumamgalāe jão bharaho 20.106) Inst. Sing. is just like Apabhraíśa (See Hem, 8.4.333 and P. L. Vaidya's notes). Name' is such an example in Lilāvai p. 81.
'Hi' is used as Loc. Sing. in 'mahurahi' at 89.24 (Māgadhi of Mrcchakațika also uses this form-Pischel.).
Kavana (Kim)' as Interrogative pronoun is observed in the PCV at a few places. (71.8, 105. 29, 110.13; 117.28; 118.62.). "Kavaņā' at 79.10 as Fem. Nom. Sing; Kavanam' at 118.61 as Masc. Acc. Sing.; at 118.40 and 77.68 as Fem. Acc. Sing.; and at 94.98 as Neut. Acc. Sing. According to Hemacandra (8.4.367) it is an Apabhramśa (See form Pischel 428) also.
Verbal Terminations There is no distinction between Parasmaipada and Ätmanepada roots. Generally the Parasmaipada terminations are appended to the verbal roots, but some Ātmanepada forms are also found in the Paumacariyam.
The complications of ten conjugations of Sanskrit have been simplified by doing away with their distinctions. All the roots generally end in vowels and the terminations are directly appended to them. Thus there is no necessity of adding conjugational signs before the terminations. Though the system has been simplified yet some of the conjugational signs with the necessary phonetic changes survive in the language of the PCV.
There are generally two tenses-the Present and the Future. The Past is denoted by Past-passive participles.
Present Tense I. Sing. fF-HTPA PiBĘ, I. Plural 1-94531 88313 II. Sing. fa-HTTFET EIEE II. Plural -farat 251€5 III. Sing. इ-बन्धइ २।६७ III. Plural न्ति-रडन्ति ५६।४५
At 102.75 there is 'anumayanti' metri causa. There are three instances of 'mu' turmination for I Plu. 'vacchâmu'17.38; 45.38 'paremu' 117.21. Hemacandra (8.3. 144) permits it.
Termination of Plural for Singular 'Mo' termination is used for 1st Person sing. Example:
अभिरमामो ३३।४८, पन्थेमो ३१।३६, गिहिमो ३१।५१, १०८।३२, भुजिमो ५२।२०; १०५।६१, काहिसिमो ५६।१५.

Page #598

569
LITERARY EVALUATION
Such uses are found in the Amg. They can be observed in the VH. (VH, Tr. p. 17; Lilăvai, p. 82).
Termination of singular for plural
अस्थि ५४।२४ पूएइ ५५/५६ III. Plu, इच्छामि १०६ । २e I. Plu.
In some cases the root 'bhū' is represented by 'hu'. Pischel notes such cases in the Jaina Mahārāstri (476). Examples:
हुन्ति १४.१६ and श्रणुहुन्ति ११८ | १३
Sometimes 'i' is added before the termination. are found in Hala's Sattasaī and Nandisutra ( Pischel in the Upadesamālā (72, 109 ). Examples from PCV:
करिन्ति ३.१६२, अगणिन्तो ४६ ६२, प्रमुणिन्तो ४७.६, भुजिमो ५२.२०, भुञ्जिन्ति १०३.३२, करिणिज्ज ११३.१२, चिन्तिन्तेण ६८.४
Such instances 454, 455 ) and
'kuvvanti' 9.13 is like Skt. 'kurvanti' form of the root 'kṛ'. It can be noted at 8.252; 44.44; 106.36; 118.114; 117.31; 3.89; 3.95; 7.51; 9.13; 9.68; 14.83; 20.39; 22.46; 26.22; 32.28; 36.29; 39.32; 52,23; 59.88; 9484; According to Pischel (508) it is used in the Amg. and the JM.
Past Tense
Only the forms of root 'as' are prevalent :—
III. Sing. प्रसि ३।३५, ५।३०. III Plu. श्रसि ५/४६, २६।२२ श्रासी
३।५६, २०१८
The only instance of Aorist is—
I Plu. इंसु - साहिसु ५१।१६
It is originally III Plural but it is used indiscriminately in the Amg. (Pischel, 516).
'Bhave' or 'have' forms of 'bha' are indiscriminately used for all the tenses. A few instances are traced in the PCV as follows:
Present ‘bhave' १२|११ III Sing. ; 'bhave' ५।२६०, 'have' ३।५५ Past III Sing. &
Future 'bhave' ५। १५० III Plural.
Future Tense
I Sing. स्मामि - कित्तइस्सामि ५।१५१
Plu. सामो— ने सामो २८।१११
II Sing• हिसि - होहिसि ८।१६१, नेहिसि ५।१२५ Plu. सह-विस हिस्सह १०६।३३, हह - पाविहह १४ । १४६
हामि -- करीहामि#
२६।६७, काहामि २९|३३
हामो - दाहामो २८ ।११०, वच्चीहामो# ५।१९०

Page #599

570
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
... III Sing. हिइ-ही-होहिइ ११६।२ नेही–५३।६२, होही–६।१७ Plu. स्सन्ति–वहिस्सन्ति ४।८० हन्ति-भवीहन्ति- ११८७२,
हिन्ति--होहिन्ति ५१११६ Forms marked with* lengthen the vowel before the augment. This kind of lengthening is noticed in the VH also (VH, Tr. p. 19).
Pischel (533) quotes such instances from the Apabhramsa literature. Actually it is lengthening of the short vowel when one of the two members of a conjunct following the short vowl is dropped.
Besides there are some typical (archaic) forms of future tense as indicated:
ham' for I. Sing. = 'hoham' 6.58, 'kaham' 6,72,178312.20;22.6; 31.9;63.67. Pischel (530) observes it in the Amg. and the JM. .... 'ssam' for I Sing. ='pavissam' 109.19, 'maggissam' 24.39, 'vocchain' 20.181, 'pecchissam' 102.2, 'muccissam 102.198. Pischel (531.530) observes it generally in the Sauraseni; and sometimes in the Amg. and the MH.
There is one instance of appending the augment 'hu' for future tense--'havihunti' 118.68, III Plural. .
Out of various moods Imperative is regularly used. Potential is sometimes used otherwise it is expressed by appending the participles of potential to the roots.
Imperative Mood I Sing. मु-माणेमु ७०।५२ II. Sing. -पेच्छ ५।१७८ सु-साहसु २८।१४ हि-एहि ८।२१८
Plu. ह—गेण्हह ३।१४२ परिहरह १४।१४६ III. Sing उ-होउ ४।४३, अच्छउ ६४।१८
___Plu. न्तु-करन्तु ४।७०, रक्खन्तु ११८।११६
'Ha' as plural and 'hi' as singular termination are used for the same II person in the sentence noted below. It is an occasion of panic hence such uses sound natural
भाउय मा जाह लहु नियत्तेहि ६७।२०.
In the sentence quoted below 'ha' is used for II Sing. But here Rama during his madness speaks these words.
_ 'अत्थरह लहुं सेज्ज सोमित्ती १११।१३.
Potential Mood I. Sing. होज्ज ७५॥६४. II. Sing. एज्जसु ४४।२३ गणेज्जासु ६४।६६ III. Sing. हवेज्ज ३५६५ पाविज्जा २।२०.

Page #600

LITERARY EVALUATION
571 Conditional Mood At a few places Conditional Mood is observed. It is formed by applying the persent participle to the verb and then by changing it to the gender of the subject :
जइ सो मुणी महप्पा, एन्तो लंकाहिवम्मि जीवन्ते । तो लक्खणस्स पीई, होन्ती सह रक्खसिन्देणं ।। ७५।२४ ।। जइ हं असमाहीए तत्थ मरन्ति महावणे धोरे । तो तुब्भ कि व सिद्धं, होन्तं महादोग्गइकरस्स ॥१०१॥३३॥
See also 100.36 and 102.5. Such forms are permitted by Hemaandra (8.3.180). In the Avasyakacarni, too, we observe such formations. Compare with Hindi___ "लंकाधिपति के जीते यदि वह मुनि महात्मा पाते तो लक्ष्मण की राक्षसेन्द्र के साथ प्रीति (हो गई) होती, यदि मैं वहाँ मरती तो तुम्हे क्या सिद्ध होता".
Ātmanepada In the passive voice Parasmaipada terminations are generally appended. Some examples of Ātmanepada terminations can be observed:
रखिज्जन्ते ४।६१, कारिज्जन्ते ११८।५, उवगिज्जन्ते ६४।३९. .
In the active voice a few survivals of Ātmanepeda ca observed:
वट्टए (वर्तते) ७४।३६, पेच्छए (प्रेक्षते) १४।१०६, चिट्ठए (तिष्ठते) ३।११३, मुचहसे (मुचिष्यसे ६४।६६).
There are a few examples of Parasmaipada roots taking Ātmanepada terminations:
पुच्छ (पृच्छामि) ७८।२३, प्रागमिस्से (आगमिष्यामि) ३१।१००.
According to Pischel (457) Ātmanepada in large number is a trait of JM.
Participles Pres. Act. स्त-पियन्त १०६।३८, अणुहोन्त ११८।३ ; माण-कुणमाण ३८६४२ Pres. Pass. न्त-रक्खिज्जन्त ४।६१, सुमरिज्जन्त ७४।२५ ; माण-हम्ममाण ४।६३
Also छिन्नन्त for छिन्दन्त ११॥२४ Past. Pass. त-अ कय १।१५, इत-इन परिमहिय १११, लूडिन ३०१६२
Some other forms :-दिन्न ११४०, लद्ध १७, पाढत्त २८१६ ।

Page #601

572
Potential Participle:
य - सक्क (शक्य ) १।१४ तव्व—करेयव्व १४ । १५४ नायव्व - ५।२ अणीज्ज - करणिज्ज २८।५१ रमणिज्ज १०६ । ३२ सलाहणिज्ज ७०।१२.
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Sometimes ‘ania' - ' varanīa 28.104. It is of Mg Saur. & found in JM. also (Pischel, 571).
गन्तव्व ७८|३६
Infinitives
तुं—घेतुं १।१४ उं— सोउं ३८ लहेउ – ८२ । १२१ प्रसासिउ ७३ । ३२ उ - जंपिउ ५।१७७ विलबिउ ७४ । १ (Nasal dropped for metrical purpose).
Sometimes absolute participles are used for infinitives
हरिउण २८ । १०
(Nasalised for metrical purpose).
तूण घेतूण ३१।४ ऊण – विहरेऊण ४। १ ऊणं - छाएऊणं ७११५८ परिचइऊणं ६४।२१
Absolute participles.
तूण - मोतूण १६, घेतूण ३०।६७, ऊण – जेऊण ११८४, नेऊरण ८।१६३, गन्तुणं २८।१२, पण मिऊणं । १५ (Nasalisation for metrical purpose) Sometimes infinitive participles are used for absolutes४६|१; उ - सुणिउ ३१४२, समारुहिउ ७१ ४०, इय – करिय १३/३०, वज्जिय ५८ १६ करितु १०/५३, गेहित्तु ११६ । १२ श्रात्तु ३ । १०३,
तुम्- गन्तु २८३, दट्टु विसज्जेउ ३०।६७ In some cases 'त्तु' in ten cases सुणित्तु ३।६६
See also 2.97; 4.72; 6.79, 145; 5.299; 77.87.
‘Ttā' in seven cases दसगमित्ता ३ । १५४ वन्दित्ता १२।४६ नमसित्ता ३२/२. See also 6.143; 244; 9.97; 97.14.
Vararuci (4.23) permits 'tūpa' and 'ūpa' generally and 'iya' exceptionally in the principal Pkt. Hemacandra permits all the above forms ( 8.2.146).
Pischel notes interchange of Infi. and Abso. in Amg. and JM. (576, 585). Ttu' and 'tta' are Amg. participles (Pischel, 577,578) and are found in JM. also (577, 582).
Three instances of 'evi-karevi' 11.99, 43.48 'suņevi' 41.63 can be noted in the PCV. This participle is peculiar to etc. Apa. (Hem. 8.4.440). The VH, I. has four instances of 'eppi' ('gepheppi' - see VH, Tr. p. 25).

Page #602

LITERARY EVALUATION
573
Causal Forms:
आवेदावेइ ३।१२१ आवि-भुज्जाविज्जन्त २।५ प्रा-कारियाइ ५।१७१. Passive forms:
इन-कीरइ १।१५ (क्रियते) इज्ज -भणिज्ज ८।२७७, पू इज्जइ ३५॥३८ य-डज्झइ ३१३५३, खज्जन्ति ७१।२६ दिज्जउ २८।५६ घोसाविज्जउ २८।१३३ Intensive Forms:
ए एहि ८।२१८ ठाठाहि ७१।५२ गच्छ गच्छ ७०।३२ हणहण १२।११२ Denominatives:
सेणायइ, सीहायइ ८७६,कलहन्तो २८।४ लीलायन्तो ६६।१७ खलियारिया ६६।१२ मउडायए १०८1८
The following forms of some indeclinable which are not given by Vararuci or Hemacandra. Forms in brackets are from Hemacandra:
__ इण्हिं ७३।१२ (एण्हि)-now; इहई ५३।६२ (इहयं), एत्थं २८ ५८ (एत्थ)here; pfect RCICE-yesterday.
'Kiha' for 'Katham' can be noted eight times 17.5%; 26.333; 46.29%B 46.80%; 46.85, 80.19, 333; 82.17. It is found in the VH. (p. 162,310) also. It is popular in Apa. (Hem. 8.4.401).
Some cases of dropping the final nasal of indeclinables are notable:
लहु ६७।२० (लहं), जंवेल-तंवेल ४४।२३ एव १२१८२ (एवं). कह १२।८० (कथं) कल्लि २८८३ (कल्लिं).
Use of 'ma' negative participle with future -'ma me hohi esa' 28.90%; 46.33 is general. (See 22.12; 32.39: 41.38; 48.67; 49.34; 56.15%3B 106.28).
Explitive 'je' 53.54; 1.14; 118.62 with infinitive is notable. The Upadeśamala (35) and the Dhurtākhyāna (p. 53) also have uses.
Explitive 'vo, is also notable. 17.31; 31.53 etc. Suffixes
त्त (त्व) = चोरत्तं ५।२८ क्षण = पोढत्तण ७०।५४ इल्ल = विभारिल्ल ३।६१, लोभिल्ल ४६६ इल्लुग = पढमिल्लुग ९२।११
'ya (ka)':-It is appended not only to the nouns but to the verbal forms also. Nouns सत्तुग्घयं ३४।३, महिसय ६३।६३, दइयय ५३।२८, सुग्गीवय
६२।२३, मेहुणय ६३।२१, कलहय ७८।२८, भासणय १०२।६४ Verbs कायव्वयं ३११८७, वज्जियव्वयं १२.५८, रक्खन्तिया १२७०,
जाणन्तिया ७६.८, आणत्तिया २३.२१.

Page #603

574
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
अण-जम्मण १४२, वहण ११४४. कोवण ११४४
प्रणय-मन्तणय ५६६, मज्जरणय ७८।२४, सोसरणय २८1५०, लज्जणय १०४।६ Tautology are also foundसुसुयत्थगन्धगन्धं १।२३, जम्बुदीवदीवे २।१, तमन्धार ४६।५२, रुद्धपहमग्गं ३३।२
Syntax The following peculiar uses of some Case-forms are found in the PCV :(A) Genitive for Accusativeतुम पि वि मे न संभरसि ६४।१०० । Genetive for Ablative
नयरस्स तुरियचलो विणिग्गयो ४।३६, असमत्थो इमस्स दुक्खस्स मोइउ अम्हे ११८।२७; See १७।३३।२११७४; २२।१०२; ३१।१२७; ५६०४१; ८१।६;
५३७५; १०६।४३; १०६।१; ११२।१२. (B) Locative for Accusative
लीलाए वच्चमाणा चउसु वि मासेसु.................. पत्ता अवन्ति विसय ३३।११;
आगया मए दळु २०।१२७; See ६६।२२; १०२।१६; ५६।१६; ११११४. Locative for Instrumental is commonसा वि य बाणेसु पडिरूद्धा ५१।१४; (२।१०६, २८।६४, ७१।४३, १०१।३८).
The above types of uses are sanctioned by Hemacandra (8.3. 134, 135).
Locative for Dative-दाऊण रायलच्छी सुएसु ५।१६ Locative for Ablative-फलाइं गिण्हन्ति पायवगणेसु ३।१४२ (५।१६३, १०२।४६,११३।३०) Locative for Genitive-लक्खणरामेसु का गणना ६८।४८ Inst. for Genitive-का गणणा पाय चारेणं २८१६७
The above types of instances are also observed in the PCV. 'Me' as I Sing. Acc. is observed in the VH also (VH, Tr. p. 25). Instances of Loc. for Inst. and Loc. for Abl. are observed in the Dhūrtakhyāna also (Ibid, Int. p. 53). . . These are the instances of Inst. used for Locative
बज्जन्ति जिणहरेहिं तुराई ६६।२४, सेज्जाहि सुहनिसण्णा १४।१४२, पणिवइया 7 राहवस्स चलणेहिं १०१।२८.
Such instances are found in the Dhūrtakhyana also (Ibid p. 53). Pischel (371) notes that in the Amg., Instrumental stands for Locative too.

Page #604

LITERARY EVALUATION
575
Deviations The following instances of deviation are notable, which seem to be wrong uses :
Plural forms for singular ones : I Acc. F PEIX3; Fem. Loc. ftang FEIR& Teuta RE187; सेज्जासु २६।८०; ६१।३७. Metri causa without declensions :III. Inst. Sing. $441P0; Neut. Inst. Sing. gufaru 901€ €; Gen. Sing. Fem. fout GU18€ & face pige
Metri causa सुणे for सुणेह II. Plu. Imperative ४८।९८. Nom. sing. Masc. arctfA 80173 (arazat). Acc. Sing. Titori S 85187 (Fifitott fas). Ins. Plu. करयलघायाहि ३३।१०६ (करयलघाएहि); साहेहिं १०८।१२
( fa--Chane of gender). Gen. Sgin. III. 1 55125 (ə). II, Imp. Plu. taga 381894 (a=557). III, Sing. Passive जं भण्णसि ६४।१२ (जं भण्णइ) See ६६।२० also.
CONCLUSION The survey of the language of the PCV made above is reproduced below pointing out the salient features of the language.
I A- The general characteristics of the language are as follows:
Phonology Vowels:-(i) R is replaced by A, I, U, E or Ri. (ii) Ai and Au are changed into E and O. (iii) Vowels are sometimes qualitatively replaced by other vowels. (iv) Nasals are optionally changed into anusvāra.
Single Consonants:-(i) Sa and Sa are changed into Sa. (ii) Initial Ya is changed into Ja. (iii) Medial Na is changed in to Ņa. (iv) Medial unaspirate consonants are generally dropped. (v) In a few cases Ra is changed into La. (vi) Medial aspirates are generally changed into Ha.
Conjuncts:-(i) Initial conjuncts are simplified. (ii) Generally conjuncts of similar classes are tolerated. (iii) Kșa is generally changed into Kkha or Ccha almost equally. (iv) Dental consonants forming conjuncts with Ya are generally palatalised and with Ra are optionally cerebralised (v) Jña is changed into Ņņa, or Jja..
Sandhi:-Rules are not followed strictly.

Page #605

576
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYA
Morphology Gender :-In some cases the gender of the nouns has changed.
Case Declensians:--(i) Generally the declensional variations of nouns ending in different vowels have been simplified. (ii) Masculine nouns ending in A take O in Nom. Sing.
Verbal Terminations:-(i) Generally conjugational complications have been simplified. (ii) Generally Present Tense, Future Tense, Imp. Mood and sometimes Potential Mood are used. Other Tenses and Moods have disappeared. (iii) Third Person Sing. indicative takes first (iv) Infinitive participles are Tum, Ur. & U. (v) Absolute participles are Ttapa, Ūņa and Ūņam and in some cases the termination Iya is used.
General:-Many Desi words are used here and there?
These tendencies prove that the language of the PCV represents the middle stage of the Middle Indo-Aryan which is called Prakrta by Vararuci and Hemacandra and is designated by the scholors as Mahārāștri.
I B-Then we find that.........
(1) There is 'Ya'śruti in place of A or A remaining after the elision of medial consonants. (ii) Medial Ka is pretty often changed into Ga. (iii) Initial Na is retained. (iv) We find some case forms of nouns and personal pronouns which are not dealt with by Vararuci but are consented to by Hemacandra. (v) Sometimes there is interchange between Infinitive and Absolute participles and there are a few cases of Absolute Participles in Ttu and Ttā. (vi) There is liberality in syntax which is in some cases sanctioned by Hemacandra.
These tendencies reveal that the dialect of the PCV is akin not to the Prakrta of Vararuci but to that of Hemacandra, the latter being designated by Jaina Mahārāştri.
II–The following peculiarities are noted in the language of the Paumacariyaṁ.
A. Traits of Ardhamā gadhi Canon :(1) There are the following instances: -
Dative in Ae, not less than 20 times as Atthae (jāņāvanatthae) 11.88) and see also 10.4, 11; 11.11, 18; 15.74; 27.12; 29.33; 31.60; 33 37; 39.69; 41.49; 44.3; 59.56; 67,8; 70.27; 98.6; 101.9; 115.1; 117.6; 118.55 and dhanuparikkhãe 28.103. Appending of plural termination
1. A List of Desi words and Onomatopoeic forms is given in Appendix No. 6 of
the revised edition of PCV, Pt. II, (P. T. S, 1968).

Page #606

LITERARY EVALUATION
577
Mo for Mi in a few cases of I sing. (Ginhimo 31.51); Dropping of initial Ya in Ahānupuvvim (1.8); Imsu termination for I plural Sáhiřsu (51.19).
(2) Generally Sva of Svapņa is changed into Su (for 31 times) (Sumiņa 1.49); (Suvina 2.87); and to Si (only once Siviņa 96.47)
(3) Tiriya (Tiryac form 4.27;82.55) is used more than 20 times besides Tirikkha 2.59 (for ten times.)?
(4) Sometimes Jña is changad in to Nna. (5) Sometimes Sandhi consonant Ma is employed.
(6) Sometimes forms of Pronouns like Mamaṁ I Gen. Sing; Tume II Nom. Sing.; Tumhe II Inst. Plu. are noted.
(7) Kuvva form of root Kr is observed not less than twenty times (8) There are instances of Inst, used for Locative.
All these forms reveal that the influence of the Ardhamāgadhi Canon is apparent on the language of the Paumacariyam.
II-B. Apabhranía Influence:(i) Variation between long and short vowels is observed. (ii) Tendency of Vašruti is observed in a few cases.
(iii) Three Instances of Absolute termination Evi and eight of the indeclinable Kiha for Katham and ten instances of Kavana for 'Kim'.
(iv) All those instances which are dealt with under the heading Peculiarities in the subsection of Declensions under Morphology.
All these instances prove that the language of the PCV is to some extent influenced by the colloqual dialect (Spoken language) which was developing to a stage of attaining literary recognition by the name of Apabhraíba.
Most of the cases on the basis of which Dr. H. Jacobi assigns primitiveness to the dialect of Paumacariyam can be explained as the characteristics of Ardhamăgadhi canon and the Apabhramśa dialect. Therefore, in our opinion they do not exhibit primitiveness but there is influence of the Canon and the Apabhramba.
Now we surmise that the language of the Paumacariyam is well developed Jaina Mahārāştri. It has some traits of Ardhamāgadhi Canon and it is influenced by the dialect of the speech (i. e. the spoken
1. See Hem, 1.1.56. 2. Tiriechi, See Hem, 8.2.143.
37

Page #607

578
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
language) which was developing (in evolution) to be later recognised as the Apabhramśa language.
On the basis of these characteristics of the language the Paumacariyam cannot be held to be composed in the first century A. D. But its date should go to some centuries later. (See. Supra Chapter One.).
SECTION 2. PROSODY Metres in the Paumacariyam
There are two classes of Indian metres-viz.. Mātrta-chanda and Varna-chanda. The metres of the former class are measured by the quantity of morae (mātrās) while those of the latter by the number of syllables (varņas). Our epic poem, Paumacariyam is composed mainly in the mātrā-chanda called Gāthā which has its own advantage of greater freedom in construction and more suitability in singing. The poet has stated in the beginning and in the end that he has composed the work in the Gatha-chanda (raiyam gähähi pāyadaphudattham 1.3; gāhānibaddham kayaṁ 118.102). Gathā is the oldest Prakrit metre even as Anuştup is of Sanskrit. The cause of employing the metre in the PCV is quite apparent from the fact that it had become a sacred metre of the Jainas on account of its very common use in the Jaina canonical licerature. Further the introductory chapter of the PCV reveals that the poem is being recited before the audience (ettham ciya parisãe.........bhaņāmi...... sampai.........sankheveņam nisāmeha 1.14,16,31). The reciting can produce an appealing effect upon the audience provided it is done in a sing-song manner and the Mátra-chandas are well suited to it. In addition to the Gatha metre, other matra-chandas also are employed. They are generally used in the ending verse of the chapters and are seldom employed in the main body. For example the use of other matrā-chanda at 28.47 is purposeful, because that verse contains the eulogy of the Jina. But the purpose of departing from the running metre and using some other mätrā. metres at 14.70; 17.107; 53.115 and 106.1 is not clearly under-standable because at these places there is no change of topic. Further the schemes of 14.70 & 53,115 are defective and they need correction for identifying their metres with some of the derived varieties of Gatha-proper. It is just possible that they were composed in Gathā-proper but have got corrupted in the hands of the scribes.
Besides the matră-chandas, the varna-chandas are also employed. Generally the ending verse of every chapter is composed in Varpachanda. These verses are generally devoted to the paise of religion,

Page #608

LITERARY EVALUATION
579
conduct or morality. There are only 12 verses in the main body, which have been composed in the Varna-chandas. They occur on the occasions of the eulogy of the Jina (28.48-50), the destruction of the the garden by Hanumat (53.79), the description of the soldiers of Indrajit fighting with Hanumat (53.107-113) and in the the work in beginning of the Prasasti (118.102) appended to
the end.
Thus we find that the whole work is well planned with Gāhā as the running metre and the metre of the ending verse of every chapter is changed generally into some Varna-chanda and rarely into some Mátra-chanda.
The following table gives an analysis of the Chandas employed in the PCV:
Sl. No.
Name of the Metre
A. Main Prakrit Metre :
1. Gatha (proper) 8499 verses in all
(Prasasti--118.
103-119).
3. Udgatha
4. Simhinī
5. Gǎhinī
6.
B. Derived varieties of Gatha:
2.
Gatha (Gahu)
Skandhaka
7. Gatha-Skandhaka
C.
8. Galitaka
Main body
1. Pramāņikā
2. Dodhaka
3. Indravajra
4. Upendravajrā
106.1; 53.115;
14.70
X
X
X
I Matra-Chanda
X
Other Prakrit Metres :
28.47
17.107
Total 8521
X
X
(53.107-113)
X
Ending verse of the chapter No.
II Varna-Chanda
X
X
(116)
(48, 79, 102, 103, 108, 110-112, 114, 117).
(115)
(16)
(96)
(52)
15
X
(17, 22, 35, 46, 58, 87, 94)
(14, 21, 36, 64, 80, 83, 85, 91)
(49, 60, 62, 63, 113)
Total
8516
3
1
1
1
10
2
2
8536
7885

Page #609

580
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
She Name of the Metre
Main body
Ending verse of the
chapter No.
Total
16
5. Upajāti
(4,9, 27, 32, 34, 40, 41, 43, 57,
69, 71, 81, 86, 89, 90, 104) 6 Drutavilambita
(8, 28) 7. Toțaka
(28.50) 8. Indravaṁsa
(50) 9. Vamśastha (28. 48)
(105) 10. Indrăvamśastha
(31) (Jāgati-Upajāti) 11. Rucirā
(51, 70, 72, 76, 78, 98) 12. Vasantatilakā
(3, 5, 10, 12, 13, 19, 25, 37, 27, 39, 42, 44, 47, 55, 61, 66, 67, 68, 74, 77, 88,
92, 93, 99-101, 106, 118) 13. Sarabha
(28. 49) 14. Malini
(2, 6, 15, 18, 23, 24, 26, 38,
53, 59, 65, 95, 109) 15. Mandākrāntā
X (29, 45, 54, 56) 16. Sardūlavikridita (118. 102 Pra. (1, 11, 20, 30, 75, 97)
śasti's opening
verse) 17. Sragdhara
(7, 33, 73, 82, 107) 18. Dandaka
(53.79)
13
115
Total Grand Total
12 8533
103 118
8651
I Mātrā-chandas
A. Main Prakrit Metre:
1. Gatha proper?:-It has 30 and 27 mātrās in the first and the second line, having either line its caesura at the 12th mātrā. The sixth gana of the first line has either 121 or 1111 scheme and the same gana of the second line has one mātrā only (Every line is divided into the ganas of four mātrās—thus there are seven gaņas in the first line and six ganas in the second line and the whole couplet must have 2 ganas of 2 mátrás and one gaña of 1 mātrā only). In 118.105b one mātrā
1. See PP, 1. 54-57 & GL, vv, 6-9.

Page #610

LITERARY EVALUATION
581
exceeds. In 14.72b 'miha' should be 'miham'. In 43.15 the 'bahave' should be corrected to 'bahavesu' for grammatical correctness and metrical regularity. In 106.1 three matras are wanted in the second foot.4
Types of Gathă proper A. Path yā" :--At the 12th mātrā of each line of the Gathā proper the
___word must terminate (See 6.2133; 48.77; 14.72; 43.15). B. Vipulas :-The above rule is not applicable to it (See 37.50%; 42.6). C. Sarvacapala?:-It has in both the lines the second and the fourth
gana in 121 scheme which is preceded and followed
by a guru (2) (See 33.96%; 48.121). D. Mukhacapalas :-It has the above scheme in the first line only. (See
20.100%; 21.67; 238). E. Jaghanacapatā";-It has the above scheme in the second line
only. (See 26.1;26.12,64,97;27.39;29.39;30.11) B Derived varieties of Gāthā:
The following Chandas are derived from the Gathā proper either by decreasing or increasing the number of mātrās in the first or the second or both the lines of the Gatha proper.
2. Gatha (Gahū)10:-It has 27 mātrā (33 minus 3) in the first line also; the caesura is at 12th mātra and the sixth gana is of one matra only (Ste 106.1). The firstll line of 53.115 and of 14.70 is defectivel2.
1. बहुजुवइसहस्सेहिं, न य पत्तो उवसमं मयणमूढो ।
सो विज्जाहरराया, गयो य नरयं अणियमियप्पा ।। ११८.१०५ मणगुत्ती वयगुत्ती तहेव कायस्स जा हवह गुत्ती। . एयाउ मुणिवरेणं निययमिह धारियव्वानो ॥ १४.७२ 3. अह मेहवाहणाई, रक्खसवंसे नरिन्दवसहेसु ।
कालेण ववगएसु, बहवे महाणुभावेसु ॥ ४३.१५ 4. कञ्चणनयराहिवई, कणय रहो (?) खेयरो सूरो।
. महिला तस्स सयहुया, दोण्णि य धूयाउ कन्नाप्रो ॥ १०६.१ 5. Op. Cit. GL, 18. 6. Ibid. See also-Apabhramsa Metres. II; vide p. 53 of the Journal of the
University of Bombay, Vol. 5, Pt. III, Nov., 1936. 7. GL, 19. 8. Ibid. 20. 9. Ibid. 10. I. PP, 52, 11. अह मारुई वि एन्तं, सरनिवहं रिऊण परिमुक्कं ।
छिन्दइ चलग्गहत्थो, गयणे निसियद्धचन्देहि ॥ ५३.११५ 12. हिंसालियचोरिक्का-मेहुणपरिग्गहस्स नियत्ती।
एयाइं पंचमहन्वयारिण समणाण भणियाणि ।। १४.७०

Page #611

582
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
3. Udgatha:-It has 30 matras in both the lines and caesura at 12th mātrā in each line (See 16.90).
4. Simhini:-It has 32 mātrās in the first and 30 mātrās in the second line (See 96.49).
5. Gahind:-It is just the reverse of the Simhini (See 116.17).
6. Skandhakal-It has 32 ma tras in either line or eight ganas of four matras (see 48.125).
7. Gathāskandha:-It has one line of Gatha and the other of Skandhaka. In 17.107 the first line exceeds by one mātrā”.
C. Other Prakrit Metres:
8. Galitakas:-The verses 28.47 and 52.29 are of Galitaka type. In 28.47 the first three feet have 21 mātrās, the fourth foot has 23 mātrās-its scheme is also defective4 and 'nha' in the first foot should be counted as one matras. In 52 29 every one of the four feet has 22 mātrās. In the first foot vicittayāe should be 'vicittae' as in the fourth foot.
II Varna-Chandas 1. Pramanikar: It has 8 syllables alternately short aud long in each foot.
2. Dodhakas: It contains ll syllables having three Bhaganas and two long letters. In 94.108 the second foot is defective' at 'mahiliya.' In 22.110 the second foot is defective at 'sampanna'lo.
1. PP, I. 73 & GL, 64. 2. सो भणइ अज्ज दियहो, विभावसू बहुल अट्ठमी य चेत्तस्स ।
समणो च्चिय नक्खतं बम्भा उण भण्णए जोगो । १७.१०७ 3. See Jaina Yuga, Pustaka 1, Arka. 5, Poşa 1992, pp. 180-181-K. H. Dhruva. 4. जो तियसाहिवेहि ण्हविप्रो गिरिमत्थए, किन्नरसिद्धजक्खकयमंगलसद्दए ।
जम्मजराविप्रोगघणकम्मविणासए, पणमह, आयरेण सययं उसभजिणिन्दए ।
२८.४७ 5. See PP, 1.5 6. एवं इमं तु पेच्छह कम्मविचित्तयाए सयलजसं उवेइ पियसंगमभत्ताए ।
लंकासुन्दरीएँ हणुवस्स विरोहाए, ववहरियं सिणेहविमलरइ विचित्ताए ।
५२.२६ 7. PP, II. 69. 8. Ibid, 104. 9. तत्थ वणे महयं ति बलं तं. महिलियरुण्णसरं निसूणेउ।
जायभयं अइचंचलनेत्तं, खायजसं विमलं पि निरुद्धं ।। ६४.१०८ 10. जे भरहाइनराहिवसूरा, उत्तमसत्तिसिरीसंपन्ना ।
ते ज्णिधम्मफलेण महप्पा. होन्ति पूणो विमलामल भावा ॥ २२.११०

Page #612

LITERARY EVALUATION
583
3. Indravajral: It has 11 syllables in each foot and has the scheme of Ta, Ta, Ja, and two long syllables (See 14.158).
4. Upendravajrà: It has its first gana in Ja scheme while the rest of the scheme is identical with that of Indravajra (See 60.9).
Upajātia: It is a mixture of Indravajrā and Upendravajrā. Example: 89.64--It has first and third foot of Indravajrā while second and fourth foot of Upendravajra. There are examples of one foot of Indravajrā and the rest of the three feet of Upendravajrā (See 32.79) or vice versa (See 40.16; 57.36; 71 69; 81.15; 90.30). Such a combination is allowed by Virahanka who defines it as Slikatripāda. He names the Upajāti as Misrā”.
6. Drutavilambita4. It has 12 syllables with the scheme of Na, Bha, Bha, Ra, in each foot (See 28.141).
7. Totaka': It has the scheme of four times 'Sa' gana in each foot.
8. Indravansão; It has Ta, Ta, Ja, Ra scheme in each foot.
9. Vaṁśasthai? or Vasantamañjari!; It has Ja, Ta, Ja, Ra scheme in each foot.
10. Indra-Vamsastha: It is a mixture of Indravamśā and Varsastha (See 31.128-Its first foot is of Indrvamśā and the other three of Varśastha. It is also called Jāgati upajāti'.
11. Rucirà or Sada gati 10: It has 13 syllables and the scheme is Bha, Sa, Ja, and a long syllable. It has caesura at 4th syllable. See 70.71-The 'sajjauhā' of the third foot should be saāuha', otherwise that foot is defectivell
12. Vasantatilakä12 : ---It has 14 syllables in each foot. Its scheme is Ta, Bha, Ja, and two long syllables (See 88.43).
1. PP, II. 114. 2. Ibid, 118. 3. See VSJ = Vrttajātisamuccaya 5.2. (J.B.B. Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. 8,
No. 1 & 2, p. 13, 1932.). 4. Ibid. 5.28. 5. Ibid. 5.97. 6. Hem. Chandanuśāsanam p. 7a line 17. 7. Ibid. Adhyāya 2. 159. 8. VS7, 5.26. 9. Op. cit. Taina Yuga. 10. VS7, 5.30. 11. महाभडा कवइयदेहभूसणा, समन्तभो तुरयगइन्द्रसंकुला।
सज्जाउहा दिणयरतेयसनिहा, विणिग्गया विमलजसाहिलासिणो ॥ ७०.७१ 12. PP, II. 150.

Page #613

584
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
13. Sarabha':-It has 15 syllables in each foot. It has all the syllables short except the last one which is long.
14. Malints:-It has 15 syllables with the scheme of Na, Na, Ya, Ya. It has caesura at the eighth syllable (See 2.119). In the fourth foot of the 95.68 'sirihai' is defective. In the second foot of the 109.26 the 'gunagahanam' should be corrected to 'gunagapam', otherwise both the sense and the metre are defective.'
15. Mandākrāntā5:- It has seventeen syllables. It has caesu ras at 4th and 10th syllable. Its scheme is Ma, Bha, Ta, Ta and two long syllables. (See 45.45).
16. Śardūlavikridita® :--It has 19 syllables, caesura at 12th and Ma, Sa, Ja, Sa, Ta, Ta and one long syllable. (See 1.90).
17. Sragdharā? :-It has 21 syllables, caesuras at 7th and 14th syllable and Ma, Ra, Bha, Na, Ya, Ya, Ya scheme (See 73.35). In the fourth foot of the 107.15 'tamha' should be corrected to 'tamhā's.
1: PP, 166. 2. Ibid. 165. 3. अहिगयतवसम्मादिट्ठिदाणेक्कचित्तं, समणामिव गुणड् ढं सीलसंभारपुण्णं ।
परजण उवयारि वच्छलं धम्मबन्धु, विमलजसनिदाणं को ण सिरिहाइ वीरं ।
६५.६८ 4. सुरवइभरिणयं जं तच्चमग्गाणुरत्तं जिणवरगुण गहणं सुप्पसत्थं पवित्तं ।
सूणिय विबूहसंघा तं च इन्दं नमेउ', अइविमलसरोरा जन्ति संसं निकेयं ।।
१०६.२६ 5. VS3, 5.34. 6. VS3, 5.40. 7. Ibtd. 5.45. 8. एवं जो दीहा सुत्तं कुणइ इह नरोऽणेयवावारजुत्तो, निच्च भोगाभिलासी
सयणपरियणे तिब्वनेहाणुरत्तो। सारं सो महन्तं परिभमइ चिरं घोरदुक्खं
लहन्तो, तम्ह रायं पसत्थे ससियरविमले होहि धम्मेक्कचित्तो ॥ १०७.१५ N.B. In the second revised edition of Paumacariyam (P. T. S. Varanasi,
1962, 1968) only five of the above mentioned verses are found corrected as follows: अणिमियप्पा, (Supra, p.581. fn. 1), बहवेसु, (Supra, p. 581.fn. 4), "हो नाम खे, (Supra, p. 581. fn.5), रिउजणेण (Supra, p. 581. fn. 11), तम्हा (Supra, p. 584. fn. 8) And two more can be corrected as indicated below according to Appendix No. 7 of the revised adition of PCV. मेहुन्नपरिग्गहस्स य नियत्तो (Supra, p. 581. fn. 12), सहाउहा (Suppa, p. 583. fn. 11).

Page #614

LITERARY EVALUATION
585
It has 18. Dandaka: It is a variety of Dandaka type of metres. 84+87+87+84 syllables in the successive four feet and the scheimes Na, Na, and 26 times Ra in the first and the fourth foot each while Na, Na, and 27 times Ra gana in the second and the third foot each. Hemacanda1 says that Dandaka has always more than 26 syllables and the Ra ganas may increase up to the extent of 331 times.
SECTION 3. PCV AS A WORK OF ART
A. Title of the work:
The work is named Paumacariyam (Padmacaritam)2. The main theme of the work is about the life of Padma (Rama), eighth Baladeva of the Jaina faith, from his birth to emancipation. The pivotal incidents of the story are the voluntary exile of Padma, the kidnapping of his wife, Sītā by Ravana and Rama's success in rescuing Sita, therefore, the title of the work suits the theme.
B. The work a Carita or a Purana:
The poet introduces the work as a 'carita' and gives it the same nomenclature in the colophons at the end of all the cantos and at other places also. At two places the work is designated as a 'Purāņa5' also. The Jaina tradition does not distinguish between a 'Carita' and a 'Purana'. Raviṣeņa styles his Padmacaritam as Padmapuranam also in the colophons at the end of some of the cantos. Jinasena and Puspandanta name their work dealing with the life of sixty-three illustrious persons of the Jaina faith as Mahapuranas while Hemacandra calls his work on the same subject, a Carita.
Jinasena in his Adipurāna defines 'Purana' as a narrative about ancient persons traditionally recognised as illustrious. He says that there are twenty-four Purāņas dealing with the life of twenty-four Tirthankaras separately and the collection of all these is called a Mahapurana. So a Purana deals with the life of one illustrious person while a Mahapuraṇa deals with the lives of many. Thus Paumacariyam may legitimately be called a Purana because it contains the narrative
1. Chandanusasanam with Vrtti, p. 18a, lines 17 & 18 and p. 19a, line 3.
2. It is only at 1.90 & 118.101 that the work is named 'Ramadevacariyam'
and 'Ramaravinda-cariyam' respectively and in the Prasasti it is called 'Ramacariyam' 118. 102 and 'Rahavacariyam 118.114; 118. 118.
3. 1.8 (Paumacariyam).
4. See above reference No. 2.
5. Satta Puranettha ahigara-1.32; ettha Puraṇammi vaņņiya (Prasasti 118.111). 6. Puratanam Puranam 1.21.
7. 2.134.

Page #615

586
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
of Padma, an illustrious ancient person. In the Paumacariyan, there are, no doubt, accounts of the lives of some other great persons but they are subordinated to the main story of Padma. Jinasena further tells us that a Puräna should describe the Universe, the country, the capital, the kingdom, the Tirtha (the establishment of the ford), charities and penances, four states of existence and the fruits of 'punya' and 'papa'.' The Paumacariyaṁ contains descriptions of all these topics. It further in its Praśasti states that the topics of Kāma, Artha, Dharma and Moksa are also described in it?.
Now let us trace the development of the concept of a Purāņa in the Brahmanical tradition. The Vayuand the Matsya+ Purāņa define Purāņa as an ancient tale. Gradually the definition of Purāņa expands. Amarasimha says that a Purāna should contain the description of creation, dissolution and recreation, divine genealogies, ages of Manus and genealogies of kings. Later on five more topics are added to the above list, these being means of livelihood, incarnation of Gods, the final emancipation, Jiva (unmanifest) and Brahman. Thus the Brahmanical concept of a Purana is wider than the Jaina one and a Jaina Mahapurāņa can be fairly compared with a Brahmanical Purāna. Still later on the description of Dharma, Artha. Kama and Mokşa were also considered to be important ingradients of a Brahmanical Purāna?. Our work also states that these four topics are described in it.
C. Planning of the PCV:
The poet begins his work with a deliberate plan. He proposes to deal with the following seven subjects (Adhikaras) the universe, the genesis of Vamsas, departure for forest, battle, birth of Lava and Ankusa, salvation and various past births. In the work proper the poet takes up all these subjects. He also gives an elaborate and systematic list of the contents of the work in the first canto (1.34-88). All those contents or topics are described into the work which is divided
1. 4. 3. See also Mahāpurana of Puşpadanta. (20. 1. 4-5). 2. Kāmatthadhammamokkha ettha Puranammi Vanniyā savve 118.01. 3. Yasmātpurā hyanatidam Purāņam tena hi smstam 1.83. 4. Purātanasya kalpasya Purāņāni-Vidurbudhāḥ-53-62. 5. Vide Studies in Epics and Purānas of India by A. D. Pusalker (1955), Int.
pp. 46 f. 6. Ibid. 7. Ibid & Matsya Pu, 5 3.66 (Dharmaścārth aśca kāmasca mokşascaivātra
kirtyate). 8. Thiivamsasamuppatti, patthāṇaranam Lavankusuppatti/
Nivvānamaneyabhava, satta Purānettha ahigārā//1.32.

Page #616

LITERARY EVALUATION
587
into 118 Cantos. The poet has not devoted seperate cantos for each topic proposed in the list of the contents. Sometimes a topic runs through more than one cantos and sometimes more than one topics have been included in one canto. Thus though the work, not divided into clear-cut Kandas like the VR, systematically follows the plan outlined in the first canto.
D. A Narrative Epic Poem and its style:
The work is a narrative epic poem. In a narrative the emphasis falls on the depiction of incidents which should proceed along in a chain—the ensuing incident naturally emerging from the preceding one. The first incident is just like throwing a stone into a pond and then a series of incidents follows in concentric circles. In this epic poem Kaikeyi's 'svayamvara' is the germinating idea-the initial incident. Dasaratha's fight against his rivals results from it. Then follow the granting of a boon to Kaikeyi, demand of kingdom for Bharata, refusal of throne by Bharata and Rāma's voluntary exile to remove the scruples of Bharata. Thus the incidents are woven into a chain,
In the forest while cutting a thicket of bamboos, Laksmana unknowingly cuts off the head of Sambūka, the son of Candranakhā. This incident results in Candranakhā's asking her husband Kharad. ūşāņa to kill the culprits. Then follow Rāvana's arrival to help Kharadūşana, the former's getting enamoured of Sitā, kidnapping of Sitā, death of Rāvana, rumour against Sitā, her exile, the war-campaign of Lavana and Ankusa against their father and so on. Thus the poet has moulded the whole story uniting and co-relating the incidents in a truly narrative style.
Then there are incidents in the PCV, which strike as being entirely novel to a reader of the Rāma-kāvyas preceding it. These incidents are Bhāmandala's birth and his kidnpping, sham Sugrīva's quarrel with Vánara Sugriva, battle of Lavana and Ankuśa with Rāma, the story of Kañcuki and Rama's madness. At several places there are divergences also from the popular Rāma story and thus we find that the narrative has gained a new pattern at the hands of Vimalasūri.
The narrative runs ahead briskly yet easily. The language is simple, not burdened with complicated compounds and phrases. This simplicity of language and this ease of style make this narrative a successful one. The descriptions are always short so the easy flow of the narrative is never clogged, the curiosity of the reader is ever kept alive. All these are the essential features of a successful narrative.

Page #617

588
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
There are spots where the poet has given discourses in the first person. Here we find a well marked transition in the gradual flow of the rythm. Short periods are introduced, style is shifted to adapt the verses to a natural dialogue. Varying moods of anger, quietude, challenge and counter-challenge have been con veyed by proper sound effects. These spots are dramatic and they have got picturesque qualities. Bharata's thoughtful and calm discourse with his father (31.79-92), Rāvana's imploration to Sítā and her angry retort (46,46-50), Vibhīşana's advice to Rāvana and Indrajita's intervention (55,5-17), the hot exchange of words between Rāvana and Vibhişana (61.14-19) and Lakşmana and Rāvaņa (71.51-57) are examples in question.
Like most Indian classical Epics and Purāņas the Paumacariyan also has not got the unity of plot. The main Rāma-story has been intervened time and again by so many side stories. These side stories bear little or no organic connection with the main story but they add to the success of the narrative as a whole. They break the monotony of the main narrative and thereby save the work from being a cumbersome one, which it might have been because of its voluminous character.
The main Rama-story commences from Canto No. 22. Preceding it, the narrative of Rāvana is related. It depicts the 'utkarşa’ of Rāvana through his heroic achievements. He is the Pratināyaka in the main Rāma-story where the 'vināśa' of Rāvana is depicted. Thus we find that the hero of the main story gets elevated by bringing about the end of the khala-nāyaka. It is a type of style of narration recognised by the rhetoricians.
The main story as already stated above and the story of Rāvana are intercepted with many side stories, of which some are interesting in themselves. It is the previous-birth stories of various characters which simply depict the 'phalas' of Karmas and have no other motive at all. A few of them merely enumerate serially the number of the previous births of one or the other character. The stories of Añjanasundari and Hanumat, Harişeņa, Naghușa and Simhikā, Sodāsa and Prabhava, and Sumitra are the examples of interesting side-stories. Similarly the stories of prudence are also not less interesting. The story of the origin of Brāhmaṇas is quite an amusing one. Of all the intervening stories the story of Añjanasundari and Hanumat is the best from the point of view of its plot and plan.

Page #618

LITERARY EVALUATION
589 Thus the side stories are like the sauces which keep up the appetite of the reader for the main-story, and the highest value of them lies in their motto of imparting some moral instructions to the people. Finally it is also true that the religious discourses intervening at some places hamper the free-flow of the narrative but it should not be forgotten that our work is called a Purāņa or a Carita and the introducing of religious discourses in such a work is a conventional style of the ancient literature.
E. Characterisation :
Generally in the Purānas episodes or events hold the first place while the participant characters are kept in the background, but the author of our work has paid due attention to characterisation. The characters of the PCV are somewhat differently moulded than those of the VR. We find that they are ennobled and are more plausible on account of generally being disconnected with the elements of superstition. Kaikeys of the PCV is no more a wicked and selfish woman. She is only a frail human being tossed by natural desires and affection. Ravana here is not a downright villain. The Vānaras are not monkeys in the literal sense of the term. They are a tribe having monkey as their state-emblem. Similarly the Rākşasas are not fabulously ferocious and grotesque in appearance. They also are a race of ordinary human beings with war-like spirit. Rāvana is one headed. Kumbhakarna is religious, not diabolical by nature. Indra is not a celestial lord. He is the lord of the Vidyadharas, a human race. There is nothing supernatural about the birth of Sugriva, Bāli and Hanumat They are born just like human beings. Sītā is not here born in any supernatural way. She is born of Videhā, the wife of Janaka. Thus we find that the characters in the PCV are plausible and devoid of any element of superstition. It is this due attention on the part of the poet, paid to characterisation that raises the PCV above a simple traditional Purāna and takes it to the plane of a work of art. Now we shall deal with the important characters of the PCV individually,
Rāma :-Rama is the hero of the PCV as he is of the VR and the other Rama-epics. He is a dhīrodātta character, brave and generous, patient and firm in adverse situations, endowed with divine virtues and extraodinary prowess. The Rāma of the PCV and the Rama of the VR are mostly alike but in the PCV there are points where Rāma rises above the Rāma of the VR. In the PCV Rāma accepts exile voluntarily to remove the scruples of Bharata who does not accept the throne considering that it will be an onslanught on the legitimate

Page #619

590
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
right of Rāma. Advising Lakşmana to cut off the ears and nose of Candranakha (Sūrpanakha), a woman in the VR may be said to be derogatory to the character of Rāma. Here this incident does not find any place and thus the slur has been removed from the character of Rāma. Rāma's killing Vali stealthily also does not find mention. Rāma of the VR kills Śambūka while the latter is meditating on the charge that he is a Sadra and no Sūdra is entitled to perform any sort of penance. In the PCV this point is left out and thus Rāma gets saved from a criminal charge. In this way Rāma of the PCV is nobler and more humane than the Rama of the VR.
Bharata :-Bharata is a noble character. We find him with his soul enlightened. He knows that the earthly glory is transitory, lust for power and possession is like running after a mirage. He is bent upon renouncing the world for he knows that liberation from the shackles of Karmas is the real goal of life. When Daśaratha decides to renounce the world he also gets ready for the same. Kaikeyi finds herself helplessboth her husband and son are going to renounce the world. Therefore she asks for a boon that Bharata should succeed Dasaratha and in this way she tries to force Bharata to stay with her. But Bharata's discretion could not allow him to accept the throne which is the right of Rama, his elder brother. It is only on being compelled by the circumstances that he accepts the throne for Rāma voluntarily goes into exile. The seeds of this indifference to worldly life are traceable in the character of Bharata from an earlier period. On the occasion of Sita's 'svayamvara' Kaikeyi suspected that Bharata was developing a passive attitude towards worldly glory and achievements. Later on when Bharata fails to bring back Rāma from exile, he accepts the throne no doubt but only with a firm and determined resolution that he would renounce the world on Rāma's coming back from exile. When Rama returns, Bharata takes Dikșa inspite of Rama's insistance on his continuing as the king. Thus we conclude that indifference to the world and a forceful drift towards asceticism are the recurring traits of his character.
Lakşmana:-Lakṣmaṇa is a passionate character swayed by spontaneous impulse rather than deliberation. He is a mighty force of nature as if it were, of course with a natural drift towards the good, guided by his own right reason and by Rāma who acts as a beacon light for him. When Rama starts for exile, Lakşmaņa gets angry with Daśaratha for he thinks that the latter is unjust, lacking in foresight and is violating

Page #620

LITERARY EVALUATION
591
the tradition of the family. He feels an impulse that he should wipe out all the new and unexpected developments and restore Rama to the throne. But on second thought he is sobered and pacified thinking that he should depend on the judgement of his elders. At one spot Rāma, Lakşmaņa and Sitä enter the residence of Kapila, a brahmin, to quench Sīta's thirst. Kapila insults them saying that they had violated the sanctity of his house by entering into it. Laksmana is at once violently enraged. He catches hold of the brahmin's legs, turns him upside down and keeps him tossing and turning. Rāma intervenes and rescues the brahmin.
Laksmana is wanton and adventurous. When he gets a sword he tries it on a thicket nearby and incidentally cuts off Sambūka's head and thereby invites the enmity of Kharaduşaņa.
In the PCV it is he who killed Kharadūşaņa and Ravana. Chivalry is the dominant characteristic of all the heroes of the ancient and medieval literature. Lakşmaņa also has a large share of it. He can even suffer the blow of king Aridamana's 'sakti' to win the hand of his daughter.
Laksmana's character is ennobled on account of the absence of the episode of disfiguring Candranakha (Śūrpanakha). His character gets raised when he raises a voice of protest against Rāma's deci.. sion of deserting Sitä.
Hanumat:-Hanumat of the PCV is born just in the ordinary way of a human being, he has no supernatural birth. He is a Vánara scion (Vanara being a human race) but not a monkey with a tail. No doubt he is mighty but never a super being. He married like an average man and was not a brahmacārin but quite chivalrous and brave. He was handsome and that was the cause of Lanka-sundari's attraction for him. That he will be a powerful force is indicated from his boyhood. He falls down from the aerial car captivated by Varuņa in a battle. His heroism wins for him the son-in-lawship of Rāvana's sister and that of Sugrīva also. Here he is not a minister of Sugriva as in the Valmiki Rāmāyana. As a recognised character of integrity he is offered the delicate responsibility of meeting Sita in secrecy and that also in a foreign land. He is considered to be a suitable mediator and therefore he is sent to Rāvana for concilia. tion. He is fearless and unshakable in adverse situations. His love for rightness and justice does not allow the interference of any relationship however close it might be. For the right cause he sides with Rāma (Padma) and faces Rāvana though he knows that he (Rāvana)

Page #621

592
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
is the benefactor of his family. His blood boils when he sees injustice. He teaches a lesson even to his grandmaternal-uncle to take revenge of the wrong done to his mother, Añjanāsundarī by exiling her for no fault of her.
Ravana: In the Jaina tradition of the Rama-story, Ravana is the eighth Prativasudeva. He is a mighty conqueror. He attains so many spells (Vidyas) in his young age. The Ravana of the PCV is not a ten headed monster, but a normal human being. He is ambitious, but not beastly cruel. He has imposed on himself certain moral rigorous disciplines. He has taken a vow that he would not establish sex-relations with any women without her consent. He does not molest Sita though he is advised by Mandodari to use force. Even before his taking the vow, he is not an easy victim to the infirmities of the flesh. He does not fall in the trap of Uparambha on the contrary he reproaches her for her frailty. He is humane. Just before the final battle between him and Rama, Sita requests him not to kill Rāma and her brother, Bhamaṇḍala and she faints. Ravana is moved to pity. He curses himself that he brought about a train of miseries for Rama and Sītā. He decides to give up Sītā. But he is a warrior of repute, holding sway over a large part of Bharatavarșa and to yield is beyond his dignity. So he is determined to release Sita, only after having defeated Rama and
Lakṣmaṇa.
SO
many
arts
Kaikey-Kaikeyi's character has got a special treatment in the PCV. She is here free from jealousy and selfishness. She is a beautiful lady certainly younger than Aparajita and Sumitra, trained in She and sciences. had military training also which is apparent from the fact that she drove the warchariot of Dasaratha when the latter fell out with his rivals after the 'svayamvara' of Kaikeyi. Kaikeyi here also demands the throne for Bharata but the motive behind is not jealousy or selfishness. Both Dasaratha and Bharata decide to renounce the world. Kaikeyī finds herself deserted and forlorn. She wants to retain Bharata by throwing on his shoulders the responsibilities of a king. She resorts to the boon granted to her by Dasaratha. Rama along with Laksmana and Sita voluntarily goes into exile to enable Bharata to accept the throne. Dasaratha renounces the world. Aparajita and Sumitra are extremely miserable having neither husband nor childern to rely on. At their plight Kaikeyī is moved to pity. Then she goes to ask Rāma

Page #622

LITERARY EVALUATION
593
to come back. Thus she is tender and sympathetic from being naturally cruel and jealous. She asks Rāma to forgive her praying that it was all brought about by the frailty and fickleness of woman's mind. She never intended any harm.
She is a devoted and affectionate mother. She could never live without Bharata. When finally after Rama's return from Lankā, Bharata renounces the world, she finds that life is no more worth living for her. She gets solace only when she also renounces the world.
Sitā:-Sītā of the PCV has not any divine birth. She is born of the wife of Janaka. She is gentle and virtuous, tender and kind-hearted. She shows a child-like simplicity of nature when she requests Rāvana not to kill her brother and her husband. She prevents Lavana and Ankusa from attacking their father. She is patient and forgiving by nature. She does not accuse Rāma at the time of her banishment. She holds that it is due to her own Karmas that she is thrown into exile. Although she is meek and mild yet she is full of self-respect. When called back from exile, Rāma is not ready to accept her without some definite proof of her constancy. Then the suppressed spirit of womanhood rebels in Sitā. She does undergo the fire-ordeal but does not fail to give Ráma a touching reprimand. After the fire-ordeal Rāma asks her to come home. But by now she has been sufficiently acquainted with the crooked and uncertain ways of the world. Two much embittered to accept the worldly life she downright rejects the proposal of Rāma and renounces the world to get the eternal and infinite bliss of emancipation.
F. Poetic Merits:
The Paumacariyam though a Purāņa yet it is not devoid of poetic beauty. The very opening verses in which the poet pays obeisance to the Jinas indicate that the poet has got an easy grip over music and music is the soul of poetry. There are short and charmingly rythmical descriptions strewn all over the work. They ease the tension of the continued narration by their lullying and soothing effect on the minds of the readers. The style of its narration is not pedantic, rather it is simple and easily comprehensible to even an average reader.
DESCRIPTIONS. As regards the scope of the work it covers a large canvas comprising of both the human world and the world of nature.
38

Page #623

594
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Country :-In the very beginning of the second chapter of PCV there is a conventional description of Magadha (2.1-7). The poet at first speaks of the situation of the Magadha country in Jambūdvīpa. Then the description of the habitats, the people, their economic conditions and social behaviour follow systematically.
It reminds us of Magadha described in the Vasudevahindi (I. p. 2).
Vidyadhara country at 3.157-161 and Vänaradvipa at 6.39-41 also have been described on the same pattern. The descriptions are not mere mechanical reproductions but are interlarded with varieties here and there.
At 33.14-16 there is a short and simple but effective description of a war-ravaged country side of Avanti. The place has been widowed for the inhabitants have deserted it. Everything is in a chaotic state; grains and crops scattered, routes and roads broken, disjointed carts lying uncared and old oxen languishing hither and thither.
City :-At 2.9-14 the city of Rājagpha with its ramparts, magnificent buildings beautified by display of light emitted by rubies and emeralds, pleasure gardens, the humming markets and various spectacles on public roads has been described in a picturesque manner.
It reminds us of the city of Sagala described in the beginning of the Milindapañho and the city of Rājagļha described in the Vasudevahindi (I. p. 2).
At 8.263-270 the description of the city of Lanka is given on the same pattern. There is also a display of colours and sweet smell of incense coming from the houses. The poet fancies (utprekşā) that the temples therein are so lofty as if they are trying to embrace the sky (8.265) and the flags of the fort of Lanká are so waving in the air as if the city is beckoning Rāvana (8.266), to come to her.
Sea:--At 8.258-62 there is an awe-inspiring description of Lavanasamudra'. The mighty sea is agitated with mountainous waves and
1.
#44447+=-aarafufaefaturaal आवत्तविद्दुमाहय-निल्लूरियदलियसंखउलं ।। संखउलसिप्पिसंपुड-विहडियपेरन्तचच्चियत रंग । सतरंगमारुयाहय-सरियामुहभरियकूलयलं ।। कूलयहंससारस-कलमलभरजणियरुद्धतडमग्गं । तडमग्गरयणबहुविह-किरणुज्जोवियदुरुप्पयरं । पयरन्तविसयमोत्तिय-धवलियघणफेणपूजपूजइयं । पूजइयदिव्वपायव-कुसुमसमाइण्ण दिण्णच्चं ॥ दिण्णच्चणं व रेहइ, महल्लहल्लन्तवीइसंघट्ट । संघटटजलाऊरिय, सव्वत्तो गुलगुलायन्तं ॥ ८.२५८-२६२

Page #624

595
LITERARY EVALUATION
acquatic monsters. The conch-shells are crushed to pieces on being continuously pressed on the corals by the surging waves and are washed away towards the mouths of the emptying rivers. The seashore is shining with the rays emitting from the gems. The pearls, foams and the flowers all together bordering the water, are giving such an appearance as a colourful worship has been offered to the sea.
The sound effects in the verses are so designed by the poet that they give an illusion of the surging and roaring waves, coming one after another, breaking on the shore and producing tumultuous sound. The action of the waves is skilfully captured in the rythm of the verses. Suitable sounds have been arranged and the reproduction of the ending sound in the beginning of the following verse gives an idea of the resurgence of the waves one preceding the other and thus continuing in an endless chain.
River-At 94.49-52 there is the description of the Ganges with flashes of novelty here and there.
The description of the sea in the PCV excels that of Kalidas in Raghuvamsa at 12.9-18 in onomatopoeic effects, no doubt Kalidasa excels as regards similes and metaphors and its association with human actions and feelings. In the description of the sea Vimalasūri handles with ease big compounds. Use of such big compounds is an usual feature in the Setubandha specially when the poet describes the sea agitated by the arrows of Rama. These compounds convey an effect of multitude.
In the description of the country of Vijayapura, the Kuvalayamālā* (p. 149) has adopted the same device of repeating the ending word of the preceding foot in the beginning of the following foot.
Mountain :-At 3.79-83 the Mandara mountain is described. There is the radiant glow of the gems and rubies. The tree-tops are beautified by waving creepers. There are the humming bees and murmuring brooks and finally the animals and the celestial beings making merry in the forest. Here we find a mild and gentle aspect of the forest. The verses have got a smooth and musical flow.
Forest-In the description of the Citrakūta (33.5-9) the fearful It is teeming with trees, aspect of the forest has been brought out. wild life, birds and rivulets. The roaring lions are tearing the foreheads of the elephants, the elephants are taking to their heels at the sight of the Sarabhas, the tiger and the bison are attacking each other. At places the monkeys and the birds are shrieking and at places the deers are fleeing away.
* Ed. by Dr. A.N. Upadhye.

Page #625

596
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
A similar aspect af Simhanināda forest is described at 94.37-45. The poet introduces a variety of details also. Somewhere the forest is thick and it is pitch-dark, somewhere the trees and plants have been burnt to ashes, somewhere the bisons are enjoying dips in the river, somewhere the Pulindas are crying 'chu,chu', somewhere the bamboo. thickets are on fire and somewhere the bears are sounding fearful shrieks. This description excels in onomatopoeic effects. Adaptation of sound to the sense-effect is a common feature of the poet's art in the PCV.
Seasons :-At 11. 112-119 the poet describes rainy season with an array of metaphors. The black clouds are elephants, the flying cranes are the flags, the lightning flashes are the golden belts of the elephants, the rainbow is their colourful ornament and the juice flowing from the temples of the elephants is the raining water. 2 These elephants in a war array are welcoming the arrival of victorious Rāvana The sky has gone dark and the land has formed crevices. The way-farers being struck with the torrents of rain fall into swoon but soon get solaced with the hope of uniting with their beloveds. They have been confined to particular places for the roads have been blocked by the rainy
1. कत्थइ तरुघणगहणं, पेच्छइ सा सव्वरीतमसरिच्छं।
कत्थइ पायवरहियं, रणं चिय रण रणायतं ।। कत्थइ वणदवदड्ढं, रणं मसिधूमधूलिधूसरियं । कत्थइ नीलदुमवणं, पवणाहयपचलियदलोहं ।। किलिकिलिकिलन्त कत्थइ, नानाविहस उणमिलियसंघट । कत्थइ वाणरपउरं, वक्कारुत्तसियमयजहं ।। कत्थइ सावयबहविह-अन्नोन्नावडियजज्झसहालं । कत्थइ सीहभउदय-चवलपलायन्लगयनिवहं ।। कत्थइ महिसोरित्किय, कत्थइ ड्रहुडहुडुहन्तनइसलिलं । कत्थइ पुलिन्दपउरं, सहसा छुच्छु त्ति कयबोलं ॥ कत्थइ वेणुसमुठ्ठिय-फुलिंगजालाउलं धगधगेन्तं । कत्थइ खरपवणाहय-कडमडभज्जन्तदुमगहणं ।। कत्थई किरि त्ति कत्थइ, हिरि त्ति कत्थइ छिरि त्ति रिच्छाणं।
सद्दो अइघोरयरो, भयजणो सव्वसत्ताणं ॥ ६४.३६-४५ 2. धवलबलायाधयवड-विज्जुलयाकणयबन्धकच्छा य
इन्दाउहकयभूसा, झरन्तनवसलिलदाणोहा ॥ अंजणगिरिसच्छाया, घणहत्थी पाहुडं व सुरवइणा । संपेसिया पभूया, रक्खसनाहस्स अइगुरुया ॥ ११.११२-११३

Page #626

LITERARY EVALUATION
597
water. Helpless as birds without wings, they are pining for their sweet hearts (beloveds). The earth, a beautiful damsel clothed in bright watery garments is smiling in the blossoming Kuțaja flowers at the arrival of Daśanana
In the description of the rainy season in the Řtusamhara (2.1) Kālidāsa uses similar metaphors. The Rainy season is the king, the clouds the elephants and lighting the flags.
While describing gardens, forest and rivers the poet merely gives an exhaustive list of trees, plants, creepers, acquatic birds and animals without any poetic colouring (53.79; 46.73-76; 21.48-50, 42.6-10; 10.30-32; 34.32-33; 42.15-16; 16.46-47). However it shows that he was quite familiar with the proper names of the forest and animal wealth of the country.
In the description of morning (2,119), sunrise (15.83), evening 2.99-100, 70.49) etc., the poet follows a bookish and conventional method.
Physical Features:- In describing physical features of men and women the poet follows a conventional pattern. The similes and metaphors are mostly borrowed from books and the same epithets are frequently repeated in the same context (See 2.16-18; 11.105-107; 15.61-63; 14.94-98; 26.99-101).
Ceremonies, sports and Stutis: There are colourful flashes of the descriptions of 'svayamvara' ceremonies of Vidyadhari Srimāla (6.159175) and Sitā (28.105-122), the religious ceremonies of the worship of the Jinas (66.20-30; 3.87-92) and the sports of princes with the agitated elephants in rut (8.172-179; 8.217-223). But in all these cases there is a surface description. Howeve the 'stutis' addressed to the Jinas are captivating on account of their smooth and musical flow and inspired and elevated tone (1.1-8; 28.47-50).
Living Conditions:-At 31.42-47 it is very striking to note that the poet has brought out effectively the contrast between the living conditions of the rich and the poor. The rich people lead luxurious life living in magnificent palaces, clad in beautiful robes, feeding on delicious dishes, indulging in varied fleshy pleasures amidst damsels, music, dances and perfumeries. And on the other hand the indigent ones do not get even the bare necessities of life. In chilly winters their bodies are sore, their fattered clothes cannot keep off the cold, fire is their only rescue.
1. ससीकराम्भोधरमत्तकुजरस्तडित्पताकोऽशनिशब्दभर्दलः ।।
समागतो राजवदुद्धतद्युतिर्घनागमः कामिजनप्रियः प्रिये ।। ऋतुसंहार-२.१

Page #627

598
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
Emotions and Feelings and Rasas. Curiosity:-At 8.276-280 the curiosity of the Nagaravadhús flocking at the windows to get a glimpse of Rāvana entering the city after his victory over Yama has been beautifully described. Their gestures, movements and dialogues sound quite natural'. At 100.50-56 there is a similar description with very few new ideas, on the occasion of Lavana and Arkuśa's entry into the city of Ayodhyā. Even the words and phrases of the preceding description have been repeated.
It may be compared with the descriptions of the curiosity of housewives to have a glance at Buddha in the Buddhacarita at 3.13-22 and to have that of the procession of Aja and Indumati in the Raghuvañía at 7.5-11. The point of comparison in these three descriptions is simply that the women in all cases flock to the windows with their lotus-like faces. There is restraint in the Buddhacarita, it is erotic in the Raghuvaṁsa while in the PCV it is simply colloqual.
Panic:--At 67.18-26 the poet describes the panic among the Raksasa women. The Vanara soldier unexpectedly enter the city of Larikā. The women of the city get agitated and confused. There is a sudden flurry and turmoil. Women make a cry of alarm. They lose the awareness of their ornaments and garments. But even here the poet could not lose the sight of the charming physiognomy of beautiful women, because it is traditionally associated with them.
Madness:-At 113.1-12 there is a description of Rāma's insanity. It is quite natural. Rāma loses his hold on the faculty of reason at the sudden death of Laksmana who had been so near and dear to him throughout his life. He embraces the dead body, gets it bathed, brings it to the parlour and proposes to feed it with delicious dishes. He offers wine to it and entertains it. Răm's insanity springs from his
1. नायरवहूहि सिग्घं, दहमुहदरिसणमणाहि अइरेयं ।
संसारिउं गवक्खा, रूद्धा विय वयणकमलेहिं ।। अन्ना अन्न पेल्लइ, करेण मा ठाहि मग्गयो तुरियं । ताए वि सा भरिणज्जइ, कि मज्झ न कोउयं बहिणे ।। मा थरणहरेण पेल्लसु, दहमुहदरिसरणमणासि अइचवले । तीए वि य भणिया सा, मा रुम्भ गवक्खयं एयं ।। भणइ सही धम्मिल्लं, अवसारसु मज्झ नयणमग्गाग्रो । तीए वि य सा भणिया, न य पेच्छसि अन्तरं वि उलं ॥ नायरवहूहि एवं, दसारणणं तत्थ पेच्छमारणीहिं । हलबोलमुहलसद्दा, भवरणगवक्खा कया सब्वे ।। ८.२७६-२८०

Page #628

LITERARY EVALUATION
599
failure to believe that Lakşman is really dead, one is so reluctant to believe such hard realities even though they are wrought before one's bare eyes.
One may not be aware of failing of one's own reason but he is likely to perceive such failings in others. Rāma perceives the insanity of others-deliberately enacted and then gradually he comes to realise his own by perceiving similarity between his own and their deeds. How natural is the psychological treatment by which Rāma gets cured (113.28-45).
Sentiments or Rasas. It is a religious epic poem so it is "Śanta-rasa' the sentiment of quietude that dominates in it. But Rasas like Sșngāra, Karunā and Vira have also been emphasised and the other Rasas also have not altogether been left.
Sentiment of Love:-In the PCV at 10.36-43 and 70 51-59 we find charming descriptions of the water-sports of king Sahasrakirana with his wives and the amorous activities of the Raksasa couples respectively. Here the Sambhoga aspect of Śșrgāra Rasa is at its climax.
In the water sports at 10.36-43 the gestures and the activities of the damsels who are sporting with the king are sensuous. Some damsel conceals her breasts with her Uttariya, the king snatches it away and she has no other alternative but to take a dip into the water. Someone hides the scratch on her breast with her hands, out of bashfulness. Others throw water on the king to attract his attention. Someone gets angry with the king at the latter's negligence of her, the king then appeases her and thus follows many sweet sports?.
At 70.51-57 there is a description of the revels of the Raksasa couples. The Rākşasas are going to do or die on the morrow, so on
एक्का तत्थ वरतणू, थणयुयलं अंसुएण छायन्ती। अवहरियउत्तरिज्जा, सहसत्ति जले अह निवुड्डा ।। ईसावसेण कुविया, उदयं घेतूण कोमलकरेसु । कन्तस्स हरिसियमणा, घत्तइ वच्छत्थलाभोए । इन्दीवरदलनयणा, घेत्तुं इन्दीवरं हणइ अन्ना। अन्नाए सा वि तुरियं, प्राहम्मइ सहस्सवत्तेहिं । अन्ना. दठूण उरे, नहक्खयं बालचन्दसंठाणं। अवहरियउत्तरिज्जा, छाएइ थणं करयलेणं ।। काएत्थ पणयकुविया, मोणं परिगिण्हिऊण वरजुवई । तीसं पुण उवणीया, दइएण सिरप्पणामेणं ॥१०.३७-४१

Page #629

600
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
the previous night they are drinking the cup of life to their fill for it may be their last sip. It is a vivid and powerful picture of extreme indulgence in flesh. Someone is embracing her beloved. Some damsel with her delicate body is lying in her husband's lap. The bālas, young women are made drunken so that they might get rid of their bashfulness.
These descriptions indicate poet's familiarity with the Kāmasūtra.
Similarly Rama's watersport with Sita in the Kroñcaravā river and Pavanañjaya's amorous sports with Añjanā are described at 42.18-22 and 16.77-80 with slight varieties here and there. At 117. 25-29 the coquettish gestures of divine damsels making amorous antics are described. They were conjured up by Sitā who then was a celestial being to distract Rāma from meditation. This device of diverting attention from meditation has become conventional. In the Kirātărjuniya əlso we find a similar description at 10.45-63 but there it is more sensuous.
We have glimpses of Sambhoga Srågāra in Sita's coming to Rāma after the (28.121-122) 'svayanvara' ceremony, Laikāsundari's surrender to Hanumat (52.19-23) and Rāma's reunion with Sita at Lanka (76.12-16).
There are instances of Vipralambha Spågāra also.
At 56.13-19 the Rakşasīs in Laikā are bidding farewell to their men proceeding to the battlefield. Here we find a juxtaposition of the super-ego on one hand and an urge to live an instinctive and spontaneous life on the other. Some Rākşași is asking her husband not to flee away from the battlefield. Others try to prevent their going to the battlefield, for a life in the flesh is sweeter to them than honour and heroic glory. It is the pang of separation that dominates the scene
One is led to think that the revels of Rākşasa. couples and bidding of farewell by Raksasīs described in the PCV have their genesis in the similar descriptions of the Setubandha at 10.56-82 and 12.45-52 respectively.
The sorrow of separation from one's beloved is exemplified in Rāma's and Sítā’s pining for each other, at 44.51-66 and 53.2126 also.
At 15.49-51 in the description of love lorn Pavaņañjaya there is a mere enumeration of the ten stages of love.
The sufferings of Bhämandala and Rāvana from the pangs of separation from Sita, described at 28.10-11 and 46.81-84 are the

Page #630

LITERARY EVALUATION
601 examples of Śrngärabhasa. Simply the conventional stages of love sickness have been mechanically produced, therefore, they do not touch the deeper chords of our hearts.
Sentiment of Pity: - In the PCV there are many spots where the effects of Pathos have been brought out.
___At 29.20.29 the old Kancuki of Dasaratha gives a vivid and pictursque description of his own decrepitude with striking similes. He is like an old and worn out cart, his eyes deceive him like selfish friends, his ears are like disobedient sons, his teeth have fallen down like the seeds of a gourd, his arms are like the trunks of elephants hardly able to raise food to his mouth. his legs cannot carry him fast because they are like unfaithful wives and above all he has got none to rely on except his walking stick. This pitiable condition of the chamberlain stirs the heart of Dasaratha fot old age with all its pity is bound to come to him also?.
At 16.1-9 Añjana's silent and isolated suffering is described. She has been deserted by her husband for years together. She is burning in her lonely anguish. Her life is dull and monotonous. Her plight moves the readers to pity.
___ At 78. 1-6 Aparajita's suffering is described. She has been separated from her dear son Rāma. Her mental unrest verges on to insanity. Sometimes she fixes her hollow gaze on the streets, then again she speaks to the crow asking it to carry her message to Rāma,
1. एयं जराए अंगं, मज्झ कयं विगयदप्पउच्छाहं ।
तुरन्तस्स वि धणियं, न वहइ परिजुण्णसयडं व ॥ जे पासि मज्झ नयणा, सामिय पढमं वियारदिल्लिा । ते वि य न दीहपेही, संपइ जाया कुमित्त व्व ।। कण्णा वि पढमवयणं, निसुणन्ता मम्मणं पि उल्लाबं । तेस् महयं पि सह, न सुणन्ति पह दूपत्त, व्व ॥ जंघायो वि य मज्झं, आसि पुरा चलणगमणदच्छाप्रो । नाह अणायत्ताओ, संपइ जह दुट्ठमहिलामो ॥ नवरं चिय हिय इट्ठा. दइया विव नरवई महं लट्ठी। जा कुणइ अवठ्ठम्भं, घुलन्तविवसुन्तदेहस्स ।। तुरन्तस्स य अंग, कम्पइ बहुला हवन्ति नीसासा । खेयो य समुप्पज्ज इ, गई वि मन्दं समुव्वहइ ॥ कत्तो च्चिय वक्खेवो. सामिय अहयं जराए परिगद्वियो। ग्राणाए तुज्झ एन्तो, इमाए वेलाए संपत्तो ॥ २६.२२-२९

Page #631

602
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN promising it to pay a dish of milk-gruel as a reward. It is a simple and natural description,
At 94. 54-101 the effect of pathos is most intense. Rama sends Sitā with Kệtāntavadana on a pretence of pilgrimage. She is carried to a dense and frightful forest far away from Ayodhyā and there her escort almost choked with pity breaks to her the most cruel news that by the orders of Rāma he has brought her to leave her behind in the forest. She is instantly shocked because it is a bolt from the blue. She complaints bitterly but the very next moment she revives her patience and sends her message to Rāma to pacify him. She is most calm and collected even in her sorrow. Here is a magnanimous suffering. It burns within but does not fume without. She shines in the white heat of her suffering. Pathos here is controlled. Serenity and sobriety of her character come on the forefront. She does not complain, on the contrary she asks Rāma to forgive her blaming her own fate. Her infinite capacity to bear the sorrow rakes up the sympathy of the readers and thereby intensifies the effect of pathos. The poet has handled the situation with sincerity.
At 62. 1-23 Rāma expresses his deep remorse at the swooning of Lakşmaņa being struck by the Sakti of Rāvana in the battlefield. It is a pathetic spot. He has lost his enthusiasm. He is ready to bid good bye to the war. Now life is no more worth living for him. His heart sinks with the fear of losing his most precious gem which he can never regain.
Another spot of pathos can be traced at 74.12-26 where women raise a hue and cry on the death of Rāvana. It is a conventional stereotyped description. It remains superficial because it fails to touch the deeper chords of our heart.
The description of the women weeping bitterly at the death of Lakşmaņa follows on the same pattern. Words and phrases also have been repeated (110.30-36).
Sentiment of Heroism:— There are frequent displays of enthusiasm in war-messages, counter retorts, marchings of the armies and battle scenes where the sentiment of heroism is brought out. At some places Vīra and Raudra (sentiment of Wrath or Fury) are overlapping as a result of the simultaneous display of the feelings of enthusiasm and anger on the part of the characters.
In the description at 56.21-25 the Raksasa soldiers are depicted to be so actuated upon by super-ego that they would die in the battlefield for the sake of honour. The fire of their enthusiasm would not be quenched by the tears of their wives.

Page #632

603
LITERARY EVALUATION
Ravana's overflowing pride and enthusiasm and his uncontrolled wrath have been brought out in his retorts under-mining the advice of Vibhiṣana and in his counter challenges to Laksmana at 73.13-23.
sent
tolerate
At 8.68-84 in connection with Kumbhakarna's plundering the country of Vaiśravana there is a spirited warning of the messenger to Sumalin by Vaiśravana. This warning verges on threatening. Naturally Ravana's spirited youth does not it because Lanka was his hereditary possession which was usurped Vaisravana. by Vaisravana deprecates He angrily retorts and He even raises his sword to sever off the head of the messenger but Vibhişana saves the situation.
to
Such hot exchange of words between the messenger of a king on one hand and another king or his army head on the other is an usual feature preceding a war at 37.19-25; 53.129f and 65.12-34.
Non-compliance with the messages frequently lead to a call for battle. In such calls there is a vigorous display of caurage and enthusiasm in the belligerent parties.
At 8.89-92, 12.82-87 and 70.63-71 there are brisk preparations for battle by Vaisravana, Indra and Ravana's soldiers respectively. Then follow their marchings and consequently fierce battles between the Soldiers parties concerned. These are the spots of heroic sentiment. are thrilled and enthused at the very name of war. At the final call The fierce they at once rush to the battlefield with a positive will. weapons they are equipped with, the sky rending cheers that they raise, the music of the trumpets and the wardrums, their fearful march which sometimes is said to throw into chaos the entire earth-all these are vividly described.
At 56.27-44 and 57.1-27 there is similar description of marching soldiers of Ravana and Rāma respectively. Here merely a long list of
proper names is appended.
The descriptions of the war scenes at above places are realistic and concrete but all are based on the same pattern.
At 61.32-42 there is a fierce neck to neck fight between the armies of the Vanaras and the Rākṣasas. Various critical positions arising in the battlefield follow in a pictursque succession. Some soldier entangled in a serious fight catches his sword between his teeth and girlds up his loins with both his hands. Soldiers challenge one

Page #633

604
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
another during their fight and pounce down upon one another with fury and rashness1.
At 71.23-33 the operation of various weapons is described. Fire sparks are emitting from the striking weapons. Crackling sound is heard. The horses, elephants and chariots are seen without their riders. Banners have been torn off. It also contains a loathsome description of the soldiers wounded and killed in the battle.
There is variety in the description of hurling of missiles and countermissiles by the fighting parties at 12.126-130, 5960-66; 61.4348 end 71.60-68, but they all are described on the one and the same pattern.
Another variety is introduced by describing individual fight between Vaiśravana and Ravana ( 8.110-120), Rāvana and Indra (12. 131-137), Rāma and Rāvana (61.64-68). The fights between Lakşmana _and_Kharadüşana ( 45.9-11), Indrajit and Sugriva (59.52-56), Lakşmana and Rāvana ( 71.51-57 ) are usually preceded by challenge and counter challenge.
The poet has enhanced the effect of the heroic sentiment by the use of onomatopoeia and rythmic devices. The commotion in the battlefield has been vividly represented by sound effects. Action
1. हण छिन्द भिन्द निक्खिव, उत्तिष्ठुत्तिट्ठ लहु पडिच्छाहि ।
परफोड ताड मारय,
11
सूरासूराण इमो, वट्टइ अहियं परिक्खणाकालो । जह भुज्जइ प्रहारो, न तहा जुज्झिज्जए समरे ॥ मा भाहि कायर तुमं, दीरणं न हणामि जं च परहुत्तं । ते विसो पडिणिश्रो, प्रज्ज तुमं चेव नट्ठासि ॥ कोइ भडो सन्नाहं, सहसा विच्छिन्नबन्धणं दठ्ठे । संधेइ साहुपुरिसो, जह नेहं विहडियं सन्तं ॥ दन्तेसु धरियखग्गं, प्रबन्धेऊण, परियरं सुहडो । जुज्झइ प्रविसन्न मणो, सामियपरितोसणुज्जुत्तो ॥ सीएक्मेक्का छुरियापहरेसु केइ पहरन्ति । असिक यतोमरेहिं, सुहडा धायन्ति अन्नोन्नं ॥ केएत्थ गलियसत्था, गरुयपहाराहया हिमाणेणं । पट्टि करेन्ता, अन्ने लोलन्ति महिवट्टे || हत्थी जज्जरियतरणू, मुचन्ता रुहिरकद्दमुद्दामं । छज्जन्ति जलयकाले, गिरि व्व जह गेरुयालिद्धा ।। ६१.३१-४१

Page #634

LITERARY EVALUATION
605
and movement of soldiers, their marching and rushing at each other has been caught successfully of the verses at 53.107-1131.
Sentiment of Terror :-We come across some thrilling descriptions of horrible scenes. At such spots sentiment of fear is evoked. At 7.117-26 Ravana while meditating is disturbed by the Yaksas, the Vetālas and evil spirits. They conjure up large serpents and lions fearful visages. The latter roar and scratch the ground with their forepaws. All they create an atmosphere of awe. But the reader is aware of the fact that this awe is simply illusory.
At 46.42 similar is the case with the scene conjured up by Ravana to frighten Sita.
Unlike the previous ones the scene of Citrakūta forest at 33.5-8 is on the real canvas. It is teeming with wild and fearful beasts engaged in mutual fight. The chaotic conditions evoke terror. Similar is the description of Simhaninada forest at 94.37-45 with slight variety. The density and darkness of the forest and ashes left out after conflagration has been emphasised. To them can be added the description of Lavapa. ocean at 8.258-63. All these three have already been dealt with.
Sentiment of Disgust: The scene of cemetery ground described at 105.53-61 creates a feeling of disgust. There are ghosts and hobgoblins eating human fresh and munching bones, fire is burning with diverse coloured flames, everywhere there is a nauseating display of ugly
-
-
1. पयण्डदण्डसासणा, विइण्णहेमकंकणा ।
चलन्तकण्णकुण्डला, सुवण्णबद्धसुत्तया ॥ बिचित्तवत्थभूसणा, सुयन्धपुप्फसेहरा । सकुकुमंगराइया, तिरीडदित्तमोत्तिया ॥ सचक्कखग्गमोग्गरा, तिसूलचावपट्टिसा । जलन्तसत्तिसव्वला, महन्तकुन्ततोमरा ।। ससामिकज्झउज्झया, पवंगघायदारिया । विमुक्कजीयबन्धणा, पडन्ति तो महाभडा । सहावतिक्खनक्खया, लसन्तचारुचामरा । पवंगमाउहाहया, खयं गया तुरंगमा ।। पवंगभिन्नमत्थया, खुडन्तदित्तमोत्तिया । पणट्ठदाणदुद्दिणा, पडन्ति मत्तकुजरा ॥ विचित्तहेमनिम्मिया, विणिट्ठकंचणट्ठया। पवंगवायचुण्णिया, खयं गया महारहा ॥ ५३.१०७-११३

Page #635

606
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM and repulsive sights and sounds. The poet here displays visual imagination'.
At 26.48-57 there is a description of hell-following the pattern of the Āgamas. The tortures, suffering and repulsive things are described here.
At 39.24-28 hobgoblins and ghosts with their ugly visages try to distract munis from meditation. They emit fire and throw blood and severed limbs. In these two cases there is a mixture of fear and disgust.
The important difference between the first, second and the third one is that the first is on the real canvas while the second is imaginary and the third one is conjured up. They are on conventional pattern. However the effective use of onomatopoea and rythmic devices in the first two descriptions enhance the effect of hatred and repulsion,
Sentiment of Wonder:—The sentiment of wonder also can be traced at some places.
When Räma breaks the bow, entire universe is thrown into a state of chaos. The rivers flow upwards, the mountains shake and the sea is agitated with mountainous waves. It is all calm and quiet again,
1. बहुविहचिया पलीविय, जलन्तडज्झन्तमडयसंघायं ।
गहभूयबम्भरक्खस-डाइणिवेयालभीसणयं ॥ किलिकिलिकिलन्त रक्खस-सिवामहज्जलियपेयसंघायं । कव्वायसत्थपउर, मडयसमोत्थ इयमहिवी ढं ।। पच्चन्तमडयपुप्फस-सिमिसिमियगलन्तरुहिरविच्छ डढं। डाइणिकबन्धकढिय-भीम रुण्टन्तभूय गणं ॥ कडपूयणगहियरडन्तडिम्भयं कयतिगिच्छमन्तरवं । मण्डलरयपवणुद्ध य-इन्दाउहजणियनहमग्गं ।। विज्जासाहणसुट्रिय-जंगुलियातारजणियमन्तरवं । वायसअवहियमासं, उद्धमुहुन्नइयजम्बुगणं ।। कत्थइ पेयायड्ढिय-मडयविकिरन्तपेयसद्दालं । कत्थइ वेयालयं, रुणुरुणियभमन्तभूयगणं ।। कत्थइ रडन्तरिठें, अन्नत्तां भुगुभुगन्तजाम्बुगणं । घुघुघुघुघुघेन्तघूयं, कत्थइ कयपिंगलाबोल ॥ कत्थइ कढोरहुयवह-तडतडफुट्टन्तप्रसिद्दालं । कत्थइ साणायढिय-मडयामिसलग्गजुद्धधाणं ॥ कत्थइ कवालधवलं, कत्थइ मसिधूमधूलिधूसरियं । किसूयवणं व कत्थइ, जालामालाउलं दित्तं ।। १०५.५३-६१

Page #636

LITERARY EVALUATION
607 celestial beings shower flowers and sing praises (28.116-119). The description is conventional.
There is an elements of surprise in the description of the multiplying of Rāvana's heads when severed off by Lakşmana at 72. 16-19.
At 102.10-30 Sítā's fire ordeal is described. A fire pit is prepared. The gust of smoke rises therefrom and darkens the sky. The fearful fire bursts into flames like thousand suns. People are in a breath taking suspense as Sita steps towards the fire-gaping death as it were. But no sooner Sitā enters the pit, it is converted into a pond of cool and clear water. It rises up and lo, it is a deluge. People are afraid again but finally cosmos prevails. The water shrinks below the banks and is beautified with smelling lotuses. Sită is seated on a divine throne floating on the surface of the water. There is a striking contrast between the previous and the latter scene. This contrast is enhanced by rythmic and sound effects. It is a wonder, a miracle indeed.
Besides these there are several occasions when supernatural qualities and events associated with Tirtharkaras and other great persons are described. They evoke a sense of wonder, but they are all traditional and conventional.
Sentiment of Humour :-Examples of Humour are not missing in the epic. Episodes of Batuka Kapila, Nárada's entry into Sita's palace and Angada's and his soldiers' exploring into the palace of Rāvaņa are such instances.
At 35.61 Baţuka Kapila is ridiculed. First he drives away Rāma, Lakşmana and Sitā when they enter his house to ask for some water to quench Sīta's thirst. He thinks that the sanctity of his Agnihotrihouse is violated (35. 5-16). But he goes to the palace conjured up by the Yakşa for he has been told that he will be given some wealth by the wealthy occupants of the house. Although Jainism is not his faith, he would chant Namaskāra mantra so that he might be allowed to enter the palace. Then in the palace he is dumbfound to see there Laksmana who had manhandled him previously, in his own house. He suddenly retreats. His excessive anger and intolerance, his lust for wealth and his headlong retreat-all produce an effect of ridicule and laughter.
Muni Nārada (28. 1-5) wistfully visits the palace of Sita. Sitä is frightened to look at Nárada with his long whiskers and matted hair. She shrieks and consequently Narada finds himself surrounded by women-guards of the harem. Poor muni is really in an embarrassed

Page #637

A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
situation. He tries to free himself but the clamour of the women attracts the attention of the palace men who rush at at him with threateing and catch hold of him. Foor muni however takes to his heels. The muni has been put in a poor plight indeed, but we hardly feel any pity for him. We simply laugh at him for his own wistful desires are responsible for bringing him in this tight corner.
608
The humour in the first example is sarcastic, in the latter a bitter one to some extent but at 68. 9-15 there is pure and harmless humour. Angada with his followers explores into the palace of Ravaṇa, Time and again they are deceived by appearances. Somewhere there is such a crystalline wall as cannot be perceived by them so naturally they dash against it. Then again they look at a piece of sculpture. They take it to be a real woman and so they begin to talk to her. They realise their mistake only when they touch the effigy, These gross blunders of theirs evoke laughter in the readers. In the previous two examples there are short flashes of humour and here the effect is somewhat sustained.
This description compares with that of the palace of Yudhisthira built by Maya Danava. There Duryodhana is also deceived in the same way (MB, 2.47.1-15). But there is bitterness and deliberate ridiculing of Duryodhana while in the PCV it is a pure humour.
Sentiment of Quietism :-On account of the religious nature of the epic, the idea of renunciation has been the chief preoccupation of the poet. It is the only possible way that leads to real happiness which is a state of tranquility-calming down of all passions and desires. It is this sentiment of quietism that dominates the whole work. Other sentiments like that of Śṛngara, Vira, Karuna, Bibhatsa etc. are there but they finally resolve into a feeling of detachment from the world. Soul freed from passions gets peace "the seas are calm when the winds are no more."
His
At 5.178-201 Sagara bemoans the death of his sons. ministers console him emphasising the ephemeral nature of life. Human ralations are as temporary as the refuge of the birds in a bough for a night. Life is like rainbow, colourful yet temporary, short lived like foam, deceptive like dreams, and fleeting like lightning. It is bound to fade as a flower fadeth. It is like a bubble on the surface of time. Neither wisdom nor strength, nor riches are armour against death. Sagar perceives that life is languishing under the dark shade of sorrow. This perception results in 'nirveda'-indifference to worldly life. The sentiment of indifference here is intense. It has been gradually and consistently built up.

Page #638

LITERARY EVALUATION
609 At 29.20-23 there is already quoted) an effective description of old age and extreme decreptitude of Dasaratha's Kancuki. This kindles in Dasaratha a desire for renouncing the world. Again at 31.37 he is acquainted with his previous birth by some muni and at 31.43-49 he finds that in life there is 'unrest, lack of peace as a result of Karmas, so he decides to shake off the shackles of worldly life. There is a gradual enlightenment and consummation of 'nirveda'.
King Vijayaparvata who has got a deep rooted lust for life is instructed at 39.53-61 by a muni. The latter tries to create in him the feeling of repugnance against life in flesh by stressing the fact that human body is an accumulation of dirts. The performance of physical functions is abominable. Mind keeps swerving towards the physical life like an unruly elephant. It needs be controlled by the "ankuśa' of wisdom and strength of detachment. Finally the seeds of nirveda are sown in the king and he prepares for renunciation.
At 106.15-46 the disappointment of Laksamana's sons in the 'svayamvara' of Mandakini and Candramukhi results in their renouncing the world. At first they are hostile to Lavana and Ankusa who have been selected. But later their mother teaches them that search for happiness in worldly life is searching for a kernel in the trunk (106.22) of a plaintain tree. At this Lakşmana's sons get enlightened. Now they cannot be held back by various temptations of luxuries and comforts that a kingly life affords. They have realised that the worldly life is like a sea full of sufferings which constitute its water. There are crocodiles of passions, waves of evil modes of existence and eddies of birth and death. They finally renounce the world.
At 102.36-46 after her fire ordeal Sita realises the transitory character of human relations. She develops an aversion to the
1.
Trautfaranfeat, gurzfa hota at EU HETTI पुरिसो पावइ दुक्खं, चिरकालं दीहसंसारे ॥ दुक्खसलिलावगाढे, कसायगाहुक्कडे भवावत्ते । घणदोग्गइविच्चीए, जरमरणकिलेसकल्लोले ।। एयारिसे महायस, भमिया संसारसायरे अम्हे । दुक्खाइ अणुहवन्ता, कहकहवि इहं समुत्तिण्णा ॥ संसारियदुक्खाणं, भीया जरमरणविप्पोगाणं । अणुमन्नसु ताय तुमं, पव्वज गिण्हिमो अज्ज ॥ १०६.४०-४३
39

Page #639

610
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
rooted unrest in life which is like rainbow, foam or bubble. She blames her own karmas. She is established in quietude. Inspite of Rama's request to her to continue worldly life, she renounces it.
At 108.23f Hanu is led to the feeling of detachment on observing the dark sky devoid of any splendour in absence of stars and moon. He realises that death is all pervading, that men are taken in a trap laid by women as the elephants are entrapped by sheelephants. The world is like a fruit of Kimpaka seemingly beautiful but bitter in taste1.
At 113.44-52 Rama realises his folly when he recovers from madness which was rooted in the delusion of excessive affection for Lakṣmaṇa. He at once realises the falseness of human relations and gets enlightened. The feeling of 'nirveda' intensifies and he renounces the world.
There are several spots where a defeat (13.44-47) or even a triumph (4.49-51) and a sense of despair (75.80-82; 82.12) or frustration at the unholy human nature (39.96; 105.108) leads to the feeling of nirveda. The scenes at such spots finally gives an effect of quietude though the sentiment is not gradually and elaborately worked out.
The poet seems to be quite at home in working out the sentiment of quietude. It is here that he has poured out the striking similes and metaphors.
Figures of Speech
The work is resplendant with Upamās (similes) and Rupakas (metaphors). Those occurring in the preceding section have been already pointed out. Some other striking similes and metaphors as well as fancies can be noted as follows:
Upama :-The head that is not devoted to the religion is like the covering of a coconut (1.20) and the tongue that does not praise religion is only a knife having the sharp edge of evil speech (1.25). Anjana in her anguish is like a lotus struck with snow-fall (16.59),
1. महिला करेणुयाणं, लुद्धो घरवारिनियल पडिबद्धो । अणुहव तत्थ दुक्खं, पुरिसगो वम्महासत्तो ॥ पासेण पंजरे य, बज्झन्ति चउप्पया य पक्खी य । इह जुवइपंजरेणं, बद्धा पुरिसा किलिस्सन्ति ||
किंपाग फलसरिच्छा, भोगा पमुहे हवन्ति गुणमहुरा । ते चैव उ परिणामे, जायन्ति विसमविससरिसा ।। १०८.२६-३१

Page #640

LITERARY EVALUATION
611
Vasantamāla afraid of the lion in the forest, moving about Añjanā is like a Kurali (osprey bird 17.79). Kaikeyi in separation of her son, Bharata, who has renounced the world is like a cow separated from the calf (83.9). Sitä сomes out shining from the fire pit as pure gold (101.46). Hanumat encircled by the Rākşasas is like the sun surrounded by dark clouds (53.81). Fair damsel embracing the dead body of Rāvana is like lightning around the Añjanagiri (74.14). Sitā clasping Rāma at the time of their reunion at Lanká is like a Kanakalatā about a Kalpataru (76.16). Argada's creating commotion among the damsels of Rāvana is like a bull in a cow-pen (68.35).
There are ‘Malopamās' at 17.79-80 and 7.60 when various qualities of śramaņas and king Ratnāśrava are mentioned respectively.
Rupaka :-Metaphors also are found in abundance. Disrespectful words uttered by Baţuka Kapila to Rama are fire (35.10). Exiled Añjana's newly born babe is the rising sun (17.89).
There are 'Sanga-rupakas' in the description of the spring-season as a lion and various vegetations compiled together as the limbs of that animal (92.6-8), in the description of the world as the sea (106.41-42)" and the lake as the sky (30.2). The last description has point to point similarity with a similar description in the Řtusamhāra of Kalidasa at 3.218.
There are 'Paramparita-rūpakas' also. Sita is a flame and Rāvana a moth is going to seek his ruin in her (46.7); Sita is moon-faced. Rāvana needs the water of her eyes to quench the fire of his desire4. Darkness of ignorance is allayed by the light of enlightenment (3.13); Jina is the sun for the darkness of delusion and is the moon for the lilies of 'bhavya-Jivas' (3.101); Pavanañjaya is bitten by the serpent of cupid and is overpowered by the poison of separation. Only a glance at Añjanā would be a suitable antedote (15.49).
1. Egout po. 2. Tatari, fara sa arcutsyH 1
लोगस्स कुणइ पीई, नभसलिलं पेच्छिउ सरए ॥३०.२ 3. स्फुटकुमुदचितानां राजहंसाश्रितानां मरकतमणिभासा वारिणा भूषितानाम् । . श्रियमतिशयरूपां व्योमतोयाशयानां वहति विगतमेघं चन्द्रतारावकीर्णम् ॥
ऋतु० सं० ३.२१ 4. Ef har qaft, i fagt af hafauti __जेण मयणाणलो मे, पसमइ तुह चक्खुसलिलेणं ॥ ४६.२

Page #641

612
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
There is a mixture of Sanga and Paramparita Rupaka at 117.36,37,40.
In describing the beauty of Sītā the poet has heaped similes and metaphors (26.99-101) which are conventional.
Besides that, similes and metaphors like Rati and Ananga for beautiful couples (6.167; 28.123), the sun for radiance (5.141; 9.90), the moon for agreeableness (7.60), the cooing of peacocks for agreeable sound (6.116), the torrents of rain for showering of arrows (10.59;27.29), the earth for forgiveness, wind for detachment, sky for clarity, sea for sobriety, mountain for patience, birds for non-amassing nature (14.7980;68.45), Vrsabha (bull) for excellence (2.21;4.33;112.1) either in penance or valour, lion for patience and dauntless courage (2.94;7.164), bubble, lightning and dream for ephemeral nature of life and worldly things (1.17;39.54) and heaven and heavenly beings for beauty (3.159;6.48,219;7.155;34.15%B73.29 and 102.51) are often repeated.
Thus we find that our poet in generally using popular, traditional and Purāṇic material for the embellishment of his work,
Utpreksā:-There are examples of fancy (Utpreksa) also. Thick darkness palls the world as if the evil cature of the wicked supersedes the nability of the good (2.100). The sun set as if he were afraid of the befalling calamity (39.23), or he fled away as if he were unable to bear the sight of Sita's fire-ordeal (102.9).
Mudrālankāra:- In the ending verse of every canto word 'Vimala' occurs. The poet has deliberately introduced his name (2.119). It is here that we come across a device which has been so employed for the first time. It is called Mudralankara.
1. वरकमलपत्तनयणा, कोमुइरय णियरसरिसमुहसोहा ।
कुन्ददलसरिसदसणा, दाडिमफुल्लाहरच्छाया । कोमलबाहालइया, रत्तासोउज्जलाभकरजुयला । करयलसुगेज्झमज्झा, वित्थिण्णनियम्बकरभोरू । रत्तुप्पलसमचलणा, कोमुइरयणियरकिरणसंघाया।
मोहासिउ व नज्जइ, रयणियरं चेव कन्तीए ॥२६.६६-१०१ 2. उच्छरइ तमो गयणे, मइलन्तो दिसिवहे कसिणवण्णो। __सज्जणचरिउज्जोयं नज्जइ ता दुज्जरणसहावो ॥२.१०० 3. वरकमलनिबद्धा निग्गयालीसमत्ता, महुरसरनिनायाच्चन्तरम्मा पदेसा। तरुपवणवलग्गा पुप्फरेणु मुयन्ता, विमलकिरणमन्ताइच्चभासा विसुद्धा ॥
२.११६

Page #642

LITERARY EVALUATION
613
A few examples of other figures of speech can be traced in the work as follows:
Vyatireka can be traced at 26.101 in the statement that Sită in comeliness supersedes the moon.
Sandeha is found at 94.106.7. Sita is left alone in the terrible forest. The soldiers of Vajrajangha are dumb-found at the sudden sight of this divine beauty who may be a cursed divine damsel or the Rati separated from Kamadeva'. At 102.10-11 in the fire-ordeal scene the sudden blaze of fire leads one to suspect that a thousand sunis' shine simultaneously or a mountain of chaos raises its head suddenly from under the earths.
Bhrāntimana is exemplified in Síta's face being mistaken' bý the honey bees for a lotus flower at 42.21.
Udaharana;--There are many popular illustrations (Udaharana) here and there. They add to the effectiveness and exact comprehension of the statements concerned. There can be no rain without clouds or no plant without seed. Similarly there cannot be any happiness without the practice of religion (4.26). Even many soldiers cannot achieve triumph without a chief as the most starry night is without the moon4. Birds shelter in a bough for a night and desert it in the morning so is the case with human relationship (5.184). The fire cannot be quenched with fuels similarly the desires cannot be satiated by indulging into worldly pleasures (80.47; 103.73). Only a fool can burn sandal-wood for getting ashes (4.50) or grind the pearls for getting the thread so is the case with a person who spoils his valuable life in the pursuit of wordly pleasures and rejects the attainment of salvation.
1. दृष्टव्य नं० १६. 2. किं होज्ज देवकन्ना, सुरवइसावेण महियले पडिया ।
कुसुमाउहस्स कि वा, कुविया य रई इहोइण्णा॥ एवं सवियक्कमणा, नवि ते वच्चन्ति तत्थ पुरहुत्ता।
सव्वे वि भउव्विग्गा, वग्गीभूया य चिट्ठन्ति ॥६४.१०६-१०७ 3. धगधगधगेन्तसद्दो, पज्जलियो हुयवहो कणयवण्णो ।
गाउयपरिमाणासु य, जालासु नहं पदीवेन्तो ॥ किं होज्ज दिणयरसयं, समुग्गयं किं व महियलं भेतु।
उप्पायनगवरिन्दो, विणिग्गो दूसहपयावो ॥१०२.१०-११ 4. एवं पहाणेण विणा न कज्जं, उवेइ सिद्धि ववसिज्जमाणं ।
जहा निसा रिक्खगहाणुवन्ना न होइ जोहाविमलंसुहीणा ।।५७.३६

Page #643

614
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAṀ
Drstanta:-When a thread can pass through a diamond which has already been bored by a diamond-cutter then why not the poet can reproduce easily what has already been narrated by the omniscient1. It can be compared with that in the Raghuvāṁśa2.
Crows can do no harm to the Garuda. Can a lion not subdue even an agitated elephant ? ( 8.45).
Drops gradually amass into the sea and knowledge also reaches perfection gradually (14.124). Bharata not accept the suzerainty of Ativīrya, how can a lion live under a jackal ? (37.21)
Nidarsana:-If human life is not employed in the practice of religion it is like throwing away a piece of diamond which is in one's hand (288). Those who contaminate penance by assigning certain object to it exchange diamond for vegetables (103.110), destrory camphor to plant Kodrava plant, smash gem for the thread (103.111) and burn sandal for the sake of ashes (103. 112). Sumalin's adventure against Indra is a frog playing in the mouth of serpent (8.72). Laksmana's insistance to keep his sons in the harness of worldly glory is pushing one knowingly into a dark abyss (106.37 ). Persons attached to worldly pleasures leaving aside moral discipline and penance exchange a diamond for a cowrie (118.107).
Arthāntaranyasa :-Both Sugrīva and Rama's wives are lost. Sugrīva seeks Rama's help assuming that there is friendship between persons put in similar circumstances ( 47.4-5 ). Similarly see 113.41; 12.101; 105.106).
Prativastupama :-Even the brave meet their death at the exhaustion of their 'punya' as the sun also has to set after having lighted the whole world 4 ( 73.35).
1. सव्वन्नुभासियत्थं भणन्ति कइगो जहागमगुरोणं । किं वज्जसूइभिन्ने, न रियइ तन्तु महारयणे ।। १.१३ 2. प्रथवा कृतवाग्द्वारे वंशेऽस्मिन्पूर्व सूरिभिः ।
मणी वज्रसमुत्कीर्णे सूत्रस्येवास्ति मे गतिः ॥ रघु० १.४ 3. चिन्तेइ वाणवरवई, निस्रो खरदूसणो रणे जेणं ।
वच्चामि तस्स सरणं, सो वि हु सन्तीकरोहोउ || तुल्लावत्थाण जए, होइ सिणेहो नराण निययं पि । कारणवसेण सो मे, काही पक्खं न संदेहो ॥। ४७.४-५ 4. एवं पुण्णावसाणे तुरयगयघडाडोवमज्झे वि सूरा,
संपत्ते मच्चुकाले असिकरणयकरा जन्ति नासं मस्स ॥ उज्जोउ सतेश्रो सयलजयमिणं सो वि अत्थाइ,
भागू, जाए सोक्खपोसे स विमलकिरणो किं न चन्दो उवेइ ।।७३.३५

Page #644

LITERARY EVALUATION
615
Tulyayogita :-King is the source of moral discipline as the mountain is of the river (53.4).
One thing that can be noted in the above mentioned examples is that generally the examples are not very much striking and thus these figures of speech remain in a rudimentary stage.
Sabdalankāras :-Among Sabdalankāras Onomatopoeia has frequently been used. Anuprāsa can be seen (1.1-6; 7.173; 10.53; 28.110; 89.53; 97.22) here and there. There is Yamaka at 28 50 in the word 'guru' and at 96.49 in 'Cakkahara'. At 92.8 the only example of Sleşa can be traced in the word 'gayavaiyāpam' meaning the elephants (gajapatikānām) and the women in separation (gatapatikānām) from their husbands. The spring season is painful to the latter and the lion to the former (patto Vasantasiho gayavaiyāņām bhayam dento). Ślesa is based on the metaphor 'spring lion''Vasantasiha'.
Maxims Proverbs and Sayings The poet has specially been preoccupied with a sense of moral values hence he has strewn maxims all over the work :
Religion is the strength of the weak (75.18). Non can save the unrighteous (106-36). One is saved from disaster by virtue of his previous good deeds (96.40). The śramaņas, animals, cows, the women, youngsters and the decrepits should not be tortured (35.15). King is the root of social discipline (53.4). Modesty is the ornament of a wornan (46.50). Daughters are destined to render their services to another family (6.22). Sons are the supports of the parents (31.97). The brave must not retreat (39.10). The wise should not care for a thing lost (30.35).
There are short and pithy statements that are almost proverbial:
One's own beauty is adornment enough (7.63). As the king so the subjects (105, 106). It is useless to hold a lamp to the sun (70.27). At the time of one's doom wisdom vanishes (53.138).
There are metaphorical statements so exact and compact that they almost seem to be popular sayings :
1.
teafaretat #FETATOTT TETTE कुरबयकरालदसणो, सहयारसुकेसरारुणियो । कुसुमरयपिंजरंगो, अइमुत्तलयासमूसियकरग्गो। पत्तो वसन्तसीहो, गयवइयाणं भयं देन्तो ॥६२.८-६

Page #645

616
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
To get the treasures of the world but to lose one's eyes (15.86; 26.80). A diamond dropped in the sea (is not to be regained 14.106; 45.34). To dig well when the house is on fire (5.239; 86.60). (See 4.50; 103.110; 111.112; 118.107 already referred to in the preceding lines).
CONCLUSION On the basis of the above analysis we may conclude that in the PCV there are the lingering traits of the Puranic style and the embers of the Agama style are dying out. The figures of speech specially those other than the similes, metaphors and onomatopoeia are in their rudimentary stage. Even in the similes and metaphors the poet is mostly conventional, but he has decidedly excelled in bringing out onomatopoeic effects. His claim 'visuddhalaliyakkharaheujuttam' (118.101) is quite justified. The Rasas frequently have failed to reach the culmination which they attain in the ornate works of classical age. The poet has not followed the style of the classical ornate poetry, rather he has deliberately adhered to the popular style so that he might catch the attention of the general people.
The work does not fulfil all the requirements of a Mahākāvya in so far as subject matter of the story has not become subservient to form i.e. long descriptions of nature and sentiments, but there are elements of Mahākāvya such as the theme being that of a Puranic hero, charming descriptions of nature and human world, planning into systematic cantos, 'stuti' in the beginning, 'Ābirvacana' at the end of the work and the change of metre at the close of every canto.
Thus, Vimalasūri was the first author among the Jainas, who presented a Puranic narrative into the charming poetic style.

Page #646

CHAPTER XII
CONCLUSION
Part One It contains a critical study of the narrative material of the PCV in six chapters.
In the first chapter it has been shown that there are some defects in the text of Paumacariyain edited by Dr. H. Jacobi. It is imperative that after examining various available manuscripts, a critical text of Paumacariyam is published. Thereby, it will be clear whether there is any interpolation in it".
Following that we have examined the internal evidences of Paumacariyan and have come to the conclusion that Vimalasüri had no bias for any particular sect, but he was a liberal Jaina author: Further a critical examination of external evidences as well as the views of various scholars assigning the Paumacariyam with different dates, ranging from 1st century A.D. to 8th century A.D., has been made. Some fresh evidences in the form of historical data and political situations have been put forth for settling its date. Referencess to the Śrīparvatiyas, Kilakilas and the Anandas, the political situations around Daśapura and Nandyāvartapura (Nagardhan), the nature of the language of Paumcariyam and some influence of Apabhrarśa on it reveal that our work was not composed earlier than the 5th century A.D. and not later than 677 A.D., the date of Padmacaritam of Ravişeņa, which is a Sanskrit recast of Paumacariyam: Further it is worth consideration that an apprehension of the charge of plagiarism must have prevented Ravişena from recasting Paumacariyan within one or two decades of its composition. Some considerable period of time, say, one or two centuries would have elapsed between them. Therefore, the 530th year of the Nirvāpa Era as mentioned in the PCV, should be that of Vikrama Era and thus 473 A.D. seems to be the correct date of composition of Paumacariyaṁ.
In the second chapter first hand knowledge of the Rama narrative of Paumacariyam is available in summary-form.
1. In the revised edition of Paumacariyam published by Prakrit Text Society in
1902 and 1968, there still remains some textual defects.

Page #647

618
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
T
In the third chapter there is a comparison of various episodes of the Rāma-kathā of Paumacariyam with those of the Valmiki Rāmājana and the Rāmacaritamānasa of Tulasidasa. The Răma-stories of Vasudevahindi and Uttarapur āņa comprising two currents of a different Jaina tradition have been also compared in it. Along with that various other Jaina and non-Jaina works on Rāma-story have been quoted showing some traditional backing of Paumacariyaṁ or its influence on them.
In the fourth chapter 63 intervening stories of Paum acariyam have been summarised and similar stories from other Jaina and Brahmanical works have been add uced showing the source or influence of Paumacariyam.
In the fifth chapter we have come to the conclusion that the genealogical list of the Ikşvāku Vamóa given in the Paumacariyam is influenced by the Valmiki Rāmāyaṇa and the Brahmanical Purānas, Other five dynasties, namely, Soma, Hari, Vidyādhara, Rākşasa and Vanara have independent genealogical lists. Subsequent Jaina works have generally drawn upon Paumacariyam as regards these dynasties.
In the sixth chapter there is a critical estimate of the preceding three chapters showing the sources, contribution and influence of Paumacariyaṁ. It can be summarised as follows :
Vimalasūri's Ramakathā has its basic foundation on the Jaina and Popular tradition because we find that in its certain features it takes us back to the Adi Rāmāyana and in one case even before it. Sita is the legal daughter of Janaka born of his wife; there is no golden deer incident; Lanka has not been set on fire and Hanumat here neither jumps across the sea, nor changes his form, nor brings any mountain peak. These features take us back to the original Adi Rāmāyana. Bhāmandala as the brother of Sítā has no mention in the Valmiki Ramayana but it is a historical element and thus it takes us even prior to the Adi-Rāmāyana.
In the PCV there is absence of the depiction of the Raksasas as demons, the Vanaras as monkeys. Kumbhakarna as a diabolical character and Rāvaņa as a cruel and ten-faced monster. They are all exaggerations in the VR, which did not form the part of the original story.
Now this querry may safely be posed : How could Vimālasûri come to know that the above elements were not the ingredients of the orginal Ramakatha ? During his time i. e. 5th century A. D. when the

Page #648

CONCLUSION
619
inflated Valmiki Rāmāyaṇa and other Brahmanical works based on it had become so much popular that it would not have been possible for anyone to distinguish between the original and the inflated Rama-story. It cannot be presumed that he would have been conversant with some version of the Adi Rāmāyaṇa at so late a date. Therefore, the only plausible possibility is that he inherited the Rāma-story from some other tradition. The predecessors and specially the preceptors of Vimalasūri might have carefully preserved and helped in disseminating that tradition. Thus he might have received a lot of information about the story from the oral tradition of the line of his preceptors as he mentions in his work. And that tradition was based on the 'nāmāvli sūtras' given in the Samaväyānga, Sthānā nga and the Tiloyapannatti. The Sthānanga and Samavāyānga date some centuries prior to the Christian era and approximately to the time of the composition of the Adi Rāmāyana.
The divine elements and others giving Brahmanical colouring to the Rāma story were introduced later by the rhapsodists and interpolators of Rāma's incarnation, his meeting with various Brāhmaṇa Rşis, his promise to annihilate the Rákşasas etc, are later creations. In the original story Rāma was a man and man only, an ideal Ksatriya. As the Valmīki Rāmāyana was Brahmanised, similarly Vimalasūri Jainised the Rāma story for the propagation of Jainism.
Some of the elements of PCV's Rāmakathā have their traditional backing in other early works. They are Lakşmaņa's seniority to Bharata; Defeating of the Anāryas by Rāma; Absence of demanding of exile of Rāma by Kaikeyi; Filial relationship between the Raksasas and the Vanaras and the Doubtful authenticity of the construction of the bridge across the sea.
Thus we find that in certain respects the Rāma-kathā of Paumacariyam has originality having its basic foundation on the Jaina or Popular tradition and in certain respects it is backed by some tradition other than that of Valmiki Rāmāyana. Besides, in its details it has been greatly influenced by the Vālmīki Rāmāyana whose Rāma-story was so much popular that Vimalasūri could not escape its impact on his work.
In the planning of his work Vimalasūri, at certain places, is influenced by the Rāmopākhyāna of Mahābhārata also, specially in placing Rāvanacarita in the beginning of the story.
Now it can be said that his critical reference to some portions of popular Rāmāyaṇa, alleged by him as unbelievable and inconsistent, was not merely for the sake of criticism and for recasting the story into

Page #649

620
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
a realistic form but he had some authentic traditional backing for the
same.
Thereafter, it has been brought out that on account of the Rāma story having its merely 'nāmāvali' form in the old literature of the Jainas and on account of its oral tradition, its details differed with various preceptors. Therefore, we find that there are two main Jaina traditions of Rama story, one of the Paumacariyam and the other of the Vasudevahindi and the Uttarapurana. The latter two currents of the other tradition.
As regards the intervening stories of Paumacariyam we find that some stories, especially concerning the great personages of the Jaina mythology, have their sources in the canonical literature and the Jaina tradition. Some have their sources in the Valmiki Rāmāyaṇa, Mahābharata and the Puranas while some are based on popular sources and some are most probably invented by the author himself.
The author's special contribution is that he has preserved a historical element in the fact that Sita had a brother. There is semihistorical material about the Rākṣasas and the Vanaras as some aboriginal races. The superstitious aspect of Rama story which was a later growth, has not been given place by him. He has advocated in the cultural field, racial tolerance and respect for other races, specially for a hero of a different race. There is also a message for free mixing of different races. Under various circumstances the characters have been elevated. Finally Vimalasūri has given the first Jaina and Prākṛta Rāma epic to the Indian literature by including tens of stories in his Rama narrative.
The Paumacariyam has been a source for many subsequent Jaina works such as Padmacaritam of Raviṣena, Paumacariu of Svayambhu, Ramakatha in the TSP of Hemacandra, Ramapurana of Bh. Somasena and many others. One thing specially noted during our studies is that various Jaina authors freely consulted works of their predecessors without having any sectarian prejudice.
The Paumacariyam has influenced non-Jaina Ramakatha works also. Generally Brahmanical works are noteworthy. They are Puranas, sectarian Rāmāyaṇas as well as ornate Sanskrit works. Besides, the Ramayanas composed in even modern Indian languages have been influenced. Its impact is also seen on the works composed outside India i.e. South Asia and Western Europe.
The greatest influence of the tradition of Paumacariyam is seen on the Ananda Rāmāyaṇa, Tulasi's works on Rama-story; Seri-Rama (of Malaya), Padmapurana, Adhyatma Rāmāyaṇa and Ramakiyen (of Shyam).

Page #650

621
Tulasidasa's Ramacaritamanasa has been influenced by the stlye of the Jaina works, specially the Pauma cariu of Svayambhu. Its pattern of narrating the previous birth stories of Rama, Ravana and Sītā show an influence of the Jaina carita works. The influence of the tradition of Paumacariyam on Indian and foreign works is reproduced in the following pages in a tabular form. Along with that the influence of the Vasudevahindi and Uttarapurana has also been tabulated. (See Infra the table attached).
CONCLUSION
Part Two.
The cultural study of Paumacariyam made in the chapters VII to XI can be summarised as follows :
Organisation of Society -The Paumacariyam in the social field reveals that ancient society was mainly based on Varaṇāśrama dharma. But there was flexibility in following different professions and the last two stages of asramadharma were not followed rigidly. As for the Jaina community no aśramadharma was followed. A person's inclination for renouncing the world counted more than the consideration of age. The Brahmins, Kṣatriyas and the mercantile class among the Vaisyas held high position in the society. The Vaisyas formed the pillar of the prosperity of nation. The principle that law treats all equally was at the base of the organisation of society and none was exempted from punishment if he committed any crime.
Family:-The family was the fundamental unit of the society. All its members lived harmoniously co-operating with each other and obeying the head of the family i. e. the father or the eldest brother. The wife was the mistress of the household. Parents took due care of the welfare of their children while the children were obedient to their parents. There was a great circle of relations and friends. To show hospitality to the guests was a must for the inmates of the family.
Marriage:-Marital relations were settled mainly on the consideration of family status, character, age and physique of the candidates. Parity in age was an important factor. There was no rigidity as regards inter-caste and inter-racial marriages. Prajapatya was the most prevalent form of marriage among the Aryans and the Raksasa form among the Rākṣasas. 'Svayamvara' type of marriage was common with the Ksatriyas. Gandharva type of marriages were also performed. Portraits of candidates played an important part in settling marital alliances. Among the Vaisyas sometimes Asura form of marriage was celebrated. Polygamy was prevalent among the ruling class. Religion

Page #651

622
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
was no bar in marrying women belonging to different faiths. The Paumacari yaṁ gives a very emphatic picture of inter-racial marriages and it is corroborated by the inscriptional evidences of the Vākāțaka Gupta Age.
Position of Women:-Women occupied a high position in the society. As a maiden, as a wife and as a mother, woman was respected in each of the phases of her life. Female education was not neglected. Music and dance was a subject of very common learning. Education in sciences and arts was also imparted to them. Generally girls of noble families are referred to in this connection. Kşatriya girls were given training in warfare also. Men were so particular about the character of women that on the slightest suspicion they deserted their wives but there are equally evidences of male excesses over women. The state of widow was not happy. Women are generally found to be expressing their dependence on their husbands and children. It was due to lack of economic freedom to them. Jealousy among cowives and other human weaknesses were the common traits of women. In the social and political field we find them sometimes working as administrators, fighters, physicians and generally as nurses. These were the professions of high status. Then there were maid servants, attendants, messengers, musicians, dancers and entertaining girls. The lowest position was that of harlots and prostitutes. In the religious field women enjoyed equal rank with men in the Jaina society. In the Brahmanical fold commonly we do not find that liberality for them. As regards the freedom of movement the Paumacariyaṁ reveals a good picture. It shows that women were not confined to the Zenana. They openly took part in social activities. In this work there is no evidence of the existence of the purdah system.
Games and Sports :-People took interest in games. Playing with ball was common among the children and so were water-sports among the young women and married couples. Boxing and dice-playing were other sports and games. Princely sports were subduing of and riding the horses and elephants. Welcome celebrations and Madanotsava were enjoyed. Storytelling was an usual pastime. Then there were the public performances such as of acrobats, umbrellaplayers, musicians and dancers.
Manners and Customs: -People addressed their elders as well as persons of the higher status with reverence and the younger ones as well as persons of lower status with regards and sympathy. Modesty and affection was the guiding principle in establishing contacts with different

Page #652

CONCLUSION
623
kinds of persons. Salutes and blessings were expressed to different grades of persons. As a rule people paid obeisance to the monks. Showing hospitality to others was the basic duty of every citizen.
Faith in Supernatural Elements : - People had great faith in astrology, fatalism, prophecies, omens, auguries, dreams, charms and supernatural elements. It was believed that those who commit wrong go to hell and those who perform good deeds attain heaven. Illustrious and great persons were believed to be endowed with supernatural powers. Celestial being and evil spirits were regarded as influencing the day to day life of the people. For acquiring superhuman powers penances were performed and austerities were observed.
Education :- In the field of education boys and girls received almost equal attention. Teachers were held in high esteem and they were suitably rewarded by the parents of the pupils. Sometimes male students went to other places for their further education. Rajagpha, Vyāghrapura and Kusumapura (Patna) are mentioned as famous places of learning. Co-education was not altogether absent. Education was manifold. It consisted of studying of the Vedas and its auxiliaries, Jaina śruta and other laukika Šāstras-science, arts and handicrafts. Writing was fully developed. Astronomy and medical science also seem to be well developed. Vaidyas diagnosed diseases and administered drugs. Preparations of sandal wood were very commonly used for medical purposes, Veterinary science also was known to the people. Surgery was performed generally on the wounded soldiers. Charms and austerities were equally taken help of in curing diseases. Cooking, music and dance were the very common subjects of the female education. The rich information available about the flora and fauna indicates that people had good knowledge of them and they utilised them in their daily life.
Articles of Food :--The main diet of the people was two fold, solid and liquid. Rice was the main food. Barley, various types of pulses and oil seeds were also used as food materials. Spices and fruits were common. Milk preparations, sweets, sugar and honey were also used. Various kinds of tasteful preparations of food were made. Meat eating and taking wines of various kinds were prevalent. The Jainas were prohibited from taking them. Costly utensils were used by the nobles and well-to-do families.
Cloths and Dresses :- Various types of cloths referred to are cotton, woolen and silken. Dyeing and printing was prevalent. The male dress consisted of an (Uttariya) upper garment while the bodice was an

Page #653

624
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
additional garment for women. Men and women both were very fond of ornaments of head, neck, ears, arms, fingers and waist. Besides, ornaments of ankle were worn by the women.
Toilet:-Various powders, unguents, pastes and perfumes were used in bath and toilet. Hair dressing was an important part of decoration. Flowers and saffron were very commonly used, specially by women.
Arts: Among the fine arts music, dance and drama were very popular. They were cultivated and well patronised by the royal and the noble families. Playing on the Viņa was very common. Various kinds of instruments were played on social, religious and political occasions. Dance and music were very popular with the royal and noble ladies. Artists and professionals provided entertainment to the public in general. There were regular prekṣāgrahas (theatres) for the performance of music, dance and drama.
Other fine arts which were commonly patronised, were drawing, painting, terracota and plastic. Pictures of human beings and animals were drawn and shaded with colours. Portraits played an important part in arranging marital alliances. Land-scape painting was also prevalent. Palaces and temples were decorated with cloth paintings. Royal mansions were furnished with clay and lac modellings of animals and human beings. Sculpture had reached an advanced stage. Idols of Jinas, some surprisingly small while others sufficiently big were carved out of jewels, gold and stones. Even finger rings were set with images of Jinas.
Towns and Buildings :-We find a picture of systematic town planning with bazaras and mansions, palaces and buildings. roads and streets, gardens and pleasure resorts, and fortifications and gates. Buildings as high as eight storied with separate quarters, rooms, courtyards, windows and spires have been referred to. Royal palace was set with various rooms for the household as well as for the administrative purpose. Special gallaries were constructed on the occasion of any public show. Costly articles of furniture for lying down and sitting on were used by the rich and the noble. Articles of decoration such as flags, canopies, festoons, strings of pearls, metal designs etc. are referred to.
Conditions of Life :-The noble and the rich lived a happy and luxurious life, but people at the lower strata of the society led a miserable life. Generally there was peace but occasional battles and wars and epidemics tormented the social life. The bulk of the population lived on agriculture and animal husbandry. Small industries like
7

Page #654

CONCLUSION
625 weaving, gold-smithery, iron-smithery and capentry were prevalent. Trade and commerce engaged a sufficient portion of the populace. People engaged in other professions were preceptors, teachers, astrologers, interpretors of signs, omens and dreams, physicians, masons, sculptors, musicians, dancers, charcoal makers, wood gatherers, fishermen, hunters, fowlers and trappers. Some people derived their sustenance from state and private services. Valuable metals and minerals, jewels and precious stones enriched the economic conditions of the rich and the nobles. Trade and commerce flourished in big cities and capital.. Main routes of trade were by land and water. Carts, oxen. bisons and donkeys were the main conveyances for trade while passenger vehicles and palanquins for journeys.
Political conditions :--India was divided into several monarchical states with the king as the head administrator who was helped by various organs of Government. The Paumacariyam generally gives us a picture of feudalism. Kings followed the policy of aggrandisement and annexed the weaker kingdoms and principalities to their own states by conquering them. Powerful kings were dominated by the idea of becoming Cakravartin kings i.e. Paramount lords. Sometimes barbarian tribes are evidenced as invading north India and the Vindhya region, There was proper arrangement of judiciary for maintaining law and order. Kings maintained fourfold army for defence and invasion. Various kinds of weapons and missiles were used in battles, the bow holding a prominent place.
Religious conditions :- Jain monks and nuns travelled from place to place and instructed the lay devotees in religion and ethics. They performed various types of austerities and sojourned in caves, jungles, gardens and temples. Idol worship was very common among the Jainas. Salutation, eulogy and worship of the Jinas was the daily routine of them. Worship of the Saptarsis (other than those of Brahmanical following) had also become popular. Aştāhnika parva was celebrated thrice a year. Pilgrimage to holy places was popular.
Among the non-Jainas the Tapasas were commonly seen staying in aśramas and sometimes moving outside. Rudra, Siva, Caturmukha, Indra, Skanda and Soma were the chief deities which were worshipped by the followers of Brahmanism. The cult of animal sacrifice was also prevale among them. Besides, forest deities and Yakşas were the deities popular worship.
On the whole there was a religious tolerance as we find that the Jainas addressed their Tīrthankaras even with the names of Brahmanical deities.
40

Page #655

626
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
Geographical Horizon :-People were familiar with the geography of north and south India. Important countries, towns, rivers, and hills were known to them. It shows that there was a free passage between the north and the south. India was inhabited by various tribes and peoples, Aryan as well as non-Aryan. South India is said to have been chiefly dominated by the Vidyadharas, the Raksasas and the Vanaras who were the ancient tribes of India. In this respect the Paumacariyam has preserved valuable information about the authenticity of the the existence of these peoples in ancient times.
Literary Importance: The Paumacariyam is the first Jaina as well as Prakṛta Epic on Rama-story. It is composed in Mahārāṣṭrī Prakṛta. Vimalasari is the first Jaina poet who has presented to us a Puranic narrative in a charming popular style. Its language is easily comprehensible and the style is simple so the work is accessible even to an average reader. The linguistic material in the work is very valuable for the study of the development of the Middle-Indo-Aryan language. Varieties of metres have their own importance for the history of prosody.
Thus we find that the Paumacariyam besides its linguistic and literary importance, provides us with a lot of cultural and historical information comprising of social, political, economic and religious conditions of the people of its time and furnishes us with a good data about various geographical places, peoples and tribes of India. In this respect it is a mirror that reflects the society of its time. Hence the work occupies an important place in the ancient literature of India.

Page #656

1. Table Showing Influence of the Tradition of Paum acariyan :
SI, No. TOPICS
INDIA
ABROAD Sanskrit (1) Modern Languages. (2) | South Asia. (3) | Western Europe. (4)
1. Rāvana's attempt to foil
the birth of Rama.
Ananda Rāmāyana.
Bengali Kittivāsa Rāmāyana Asssamese Rāmāyana Madhava
of
2. Predominance of Kai
keyi's willingness in her Satyopākhyāna. marriage with Dasaratha.
or her svayamvara. 3. Association of Kaikeyi Brahmapurana;
with the war-chariot of Padmapurana; AdhDasaratha.
yātma & Ananda
Rāmāyana. 4. Bharata & Šatrughna as
uterine brothers.
Seri Rama (Malaya) Hikayata Mahārāja Rāvana (Malaya) & Rama Kiyen(śyāma).
CONCLUSION
Marathi Bhāvārtha Rāmāyapa.
5. Initial betrothal of Sītā
with Rāma.
Padma Purana.
ow
6. Introduction of the Bow
specially for the Padmapurana : svayamvara of Sita. Satyopākhyāna.
Kašmiri Rāmāyapa.

Page #657

Sl. No. TOPICS
INDIA Sanskrit (1) Modern Languages (2)
ABROAD South Asia (3) / Western Europe (4)
7. At Sītā's svayamvara Nșsimha ? Bhāga- Ramacaritamanasa; Sert Rama (Malaya), Western Acco
Rāma's success among vata, Śrīmaddevi Tamila Rāmāyapa of Hikāyata Mahārāja unts No. 3, 4, various candidates ? Bhagavata & Padma- Kambana; Telugu Rāvana (Malaya), 7,8 & 13.
purāņa; Adhyatma Dvipada Rāmāyana. Seratakanda (Java), & Ananda Rāmā- Marathi Bhāvārtha- Reamker (Combodia). yana; Satyopakhyāna; Rāmāyana, Gujarāti & Brahmacakra (Laos) Mahāvīracarita; Rāmāyana of PremaAnargharāghava; nanda. Bala-Rāmāyana; Mahanataka; Prasannarāghava; Rāmarahasya & Ramal
ingåmsta. 8. Elevation of the Mahānāțaka.
Ramacaritamanasa. character af Dasaratha (on the occasion of enthroning Rama).
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
9. A. Exonerating of Kaikeyi Adhyātma & Ananda Torāve Rāmāyana
from the charge of Rāmāyana, Mahāvīr. Ramacaritamanasa & exiing Rama, & acarita; Anargha Kaśmiri Ramayana.
Raghava & Balaramāyapa; Ramalinga mrta.

Page #658

B. Kaikeyi's
efforts to Rama.
personal Dhamarkhanda call back (Part of Skanda.
purāņa), Tattvasangraharāmāyapa'
10. Voluntary exlile of Rama
(a special favour for Bharata).
Tibetan Rāmāyaṇa West. Acct. & Seri Rama No. 14. (Malaya).
11. Sambūka as the nephew Ānada Rāmāyana.
of Ravana & his killing by Lakşmapa.
Telugu Dvipāda Seri Rama (Malaya) Western Acco Rāmāyana & Kann- Seratakānda (Java) ount No. 19. arese Toráve Rămă. Rāmakiyen (Syāma) yapa. Oriyan Mahabharata, Bhāvārtha Rāmāyana, Vicitra Rāmāyana (oriyan).
CONCLUSION
12. Hanumat's love episode, Ramacarita of Abhi
nanda.
Ramakiyen (Śyāma).
13. Child (ren) of Hanumat Ananda Rāmāyana, Marāthi Bhāvartha Seri Ráma (Malaya),
Jaimini Bharara & Rāmāyaṇa; Kanna- Hikayata Mahārāja West. Acct. Rāmalingamệta. rese Mairavana Rāvana (Malaya), No. 7 & 8.
Kalaga; & Gujarati Rāmakiyen (Śyāma) Narmakathakośa.
629

Page #659

INDIA Sanskrit (1) | Modern Languages (2)
ABROAD South Asia (3) | Western Europe (4)
630
Sl. No. TOPICS
14. Prophecy about the Nșsimha Purāņa ? &
West. Acct. destined killer of Vali Ananda Rāmāyaṇa.
No. 13. (Rāvana in PCV) ? 15. Association of Lakşmana
Seri Rama (Malaya), West Acct. with the episode of
Reāmker (Cambodia) no. 1 "Killing of (sham Sugrīva
in PCV) Vali by Rama. 16. Hanu's meeting wtih or Ananda Rāmāyana. Ramacaritamanasa &
West. Acct. observing Vibhīşapa's
Gujarati Rāmāyaṇa
No .13. attitude favourable for
sāra. Marathi Bhāvā. Rama at Larika.
rtha Rāmāyana. 17. Taking of shelter by
Rāmāyana Kakāvin Vibhișaņa along with
(Java). his army, 18. Appearance of Garuda Bhattikāvya
at the request of Rama
in the battlefield. 19. Meeting of Hanu with Gaudiya Version of Ramacaritamanasa;
Bharata while bringing Valmīki Rāmāyana Bangali Kịttivāsa & the Oşadhi. . . Ramarahasya & Kāśmiri Ramayana.
· Mahānațaka.
A CRITICAL STUDY OF ÞAUMACARIYAN

Page #660

20. Procuring of the medi
cinal water specially from Bharata.
21. Delivering of the Oṣadhi Mahānāṭaka. before the sunrise.
22. Sending of a peace pro
posal to Rāma by Mahānāṭaka. Ravana through his
envoy.
23. Disturbing of Ravana's N. Yajña.
24. Killing of Ravana by Lakṣmaṇa,
25. Digvijaya by Rama
(Lakṣmaṇa in PCV)
Ananda Rāmāyaṇa.
W. Version of Ramacarita mānasa; Valmiki Rāmāyaṇa, Telugu Dvipăda Padmapurapa, Adh- Rāmāyaṇa; Kannyatma & Ananda arese Torave RāmāRāmāyaṇa. yana; Kasmiri Rāmāyana & Guj. Rāmāyanasara.
Birhor Kathā.
26. Lava as elder brother of Kathasaritsagara ? Kuśa ?
Rāmacaritamānasa & Bangali Rāmāyaṇa.
27. Marriages of Lava and Ananda Rāmāyaṇa. Kuśa.
Ramakiyen (Śyama).
Khotānī Rāmāyaṇa
(Eastern Turkeystan), West. Acct. Seri Rama (Malaya), No. 3. Reamker (Combodia), Ramakiyen (Śyama).
Rāmacaritamanasa & Tibetan Rāmāyaṇa; Kasmiri Rāmāyaṇa.
Simhalese Ramakatha
West. Acct.
No. 8 & 17
CONCLUSION
631

Page #661

Sl. No. TOPICS
Modern Languages (2)
Gitavali, Krttiväsa. Padmapurāņa, Ananda Rāmāyaṇa, Kāśmīrī Rāmāyaṇa; Jaimini Rāmāyaṇa, GujarāBharata; Uttararama- rātī Ramāyaṇasāra. carita, Chalitarāma. Bhāvārtha Rāmāyaṇa Ramacandrikā, Govindarāmāyaṇa and Rāmāyaṇa masihi (Persian)
Sanskrit (1)
28, Lava and Kusa's battle Kathasaritsagara ? with Rama?
29. Narada as the instigator Ramalingamṛta.
of a battle between
Rama & his sons.
INDIA
30. Association of the water Kathasaritsagara? reservoir with Sita's
ordeal ?
31. Penances of Rama,
Brahmapurāņa.
Brahmapurāņa.
ABROAD
South Asia (3) Western Europe (4)
Rāmacaritamānasa.
Simhalese Ramakatha,
Seri Rama (Malaya), Western Seratakanda (Java), Account No. Reamker (Combodia), 6,7,8,14 & 17. Ramakiyen (Syama). Rāmajātaka (Syama) & Brahmacakrā (Laos)
32. Penances of Sītā.
33. Penances of Hanumat. 34. Enmity of Rama as well as Sītā with Rāvana their previous
since
births.
* See Bulcke. (Second Edition 1962). pp. 237, 256, 280, 281, 204, 402, 175, 211, 254, 259, 404, 503, 619-652, 71'-713.
Serī Rāma (Malaya), Seratakanda (Jāvā). Serī Rāma (Malaya), Seratakanda (Java). Ramakiyen (Syama);
632
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM

Page #662

2. Table showing Influence of the Tradition of Vasudevahinḍi*
1. Sită, Daughter of Mahābhāgavata (Devi) Kaśmīrī Rāmāyana. Tibetan & Khotani Western
Rāmāyaṇa, Serī Rāma, No. 16.
Mandodari &
Purana. Svayambhuva Rama
Rāvana.
Seratakanda, RāmaReamker,
kiyen, Ramakelinga HikaMahārāja
yata Rāvana, Rāmajātaka and Palaka Pālāma of Shyama, Laňkānoy of Laos.
Serī Rāma.
2. Granting of two
boons to Kaikeyī
on two occasions.
yana.
3. Disfiguring of Garuḍapurapa, Śrī
Śūrpanakha by maddevī Bhāgavata & Padmapuraņa.
Rama.
Bangāli Kṛttivasa
Rāmāyaṇa, Assamese Ramayana of Madhava, Telugu Bhaskara Rāmāyaṇa, Telugu Varada-rāju Rāmāyaṇa.
4. Four wives of Kurmapurāņa. Ravana's father &
their progeny.
*See Bulcke, pp. 291, 305, 322. & 2nd ed. 1962, pp. 188, 280, 376, 402.
Account
West. Acct. No. 13.
CONCLUSION
633

Page #663

-
3. Table showing Influence of the Tradition of Uttarapurāņa of Guņabhadra. **
634
1. Instigation of Ramalingâmsta.
Ravana by Narada for abducting Sita.
2. Sending of a letter
& his finger-ring by Rama through Hanumān.
Rāmāyana Kākāvin of Jāvá (Sitā sends a letter and her braid jewel through Hanuman).
3. Abduction of Sītā Ascarya Cūdāmapi
by Ravana in the of Śaktibhadra. disguise of Rāma.
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN
4. Hanuman's entry
into Lankā, in the disguise of a bee.
Western Account. No. 3 & 13.
**
See Bulcke, pp. 338, 342, 343, 362 & 369.

Page #664

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Jaina Works: Ācārängacūrņi of Jinadāsaganivarya, Ratlam-1941. Ācārasāra of Viranandi, ed, Pannalal Soni, Agra. Adipurāpa of Jinasena, Bhartiya Jnānapitha, Kashi—1951. Angavijjā, Prakrit Text Society-1957. Antagadadasão & Anuttarovavāiya dasão-Ed. M.C. Modi-1932. Anuyogadvāra Sūtra-Bhavnagar--1939. Āvaśyaka-niryukti-Vijaydansuri, Jain Series, Surat 1939-41. Āvasyakacũrpi of Jinadasaganimahattara, Ratlam-1928. Bhadrabahu Samhitā (S. J. Series -1949). Bhagavatīsūtram with Abhayadeva's commentary, Āgamoday asamiti
1919. Bhavasangraha of Devasena (M.DJ.G.-V. S, 1978). Bșhat Kathakośa of Harişeņa, Ed. A.N. Upadhye, Bombay-1943. Caritrapahuda of KundakundaCaritrasāra of Camundarāya (M.D.J.G. v.s. 1974). Caturvimšati Jinendra Sankṣipta Caritāni by Amaracandrasuri
(Gaekwad Oriental Series—Vol. LVIII-1932). Daśavaikálika Sútra Dhûrtākhyāna of Haribhadrasūri, Ed. A.N. Upadhye-1944. Harivamśapurāna of Jinasenasūri, (M.D.J.G.). Sri Jaina Pūjā pātha-sangraha by Pt. Kasturchand Chawada (A.V.
2474). Jambūdivapanpatti, Nirnayasāgara Press -- 1920. Jambūdīvapannatti Sangaho, Ed. H.L. Jain Jinasahasranama of Āfadhara, Ed. Pt. Hiralal Jain-1954. Kalpasūtram (Mafatlal Jhaverchand. Bhavanagara v.s. 1994.) Kalpasūtra with Sukhabodhika Tikā of Panyasamukti Vimalagani,
Rāja nagar-1990, Karakan da-cariu, Ed. H.L. Jain-1934. Kuvalayamala, Ed. A.N. Upadhye--1959. Lilavai of Kowhala, Introduction, Ed. A. N. Upadhye-1949. Mahāpurāņa of Puşpadanta, Ed. P. L. Vaidya. Maithili Kalyāņa of Hastimalla. Mūlācāra of Vattakera (M. D. J. G.). Nandi Sūtra with Malayagiri's commentary, Nirnayasāgar Press-1917. Nāyādhammakahão, Ed. N. V. Vaidya-1940.

Page #665

636
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARİYAM
Nayakumara Cariu, Ed. H. L. Jain, 1933.
Niśitha Curpi of Jinadasgani, Ed. Vijaya Prem Surishwar v.s. 1995. Niyamasara of Kundakundacarya.
Ovavāiyasutta, Ed. N. G. Suru-1931.
Padmacaritam of Ravişeņa (M. D. J. G. V.S. 1985).
Padmananda Mahākāvya of Amaracandra Suri (G. O. S., Baroda
1932.).
Parisiṣṭaparvan of Hemacandra, Ed. H. Jacobi.
Paumacariu of Svayambhudeva, Ed. Dr. H. C. Bhayani (S. J. S). Paumacariyam of Vimalaśuri, Ed. Dr. Herman Jacobi-1914. Paumacariyam-Chs. 27 & 28, Ed. S. C. Upadhyaya-Ahmedabad
1934.
Prabandhakośa of Rajasekharasuri (S. J. S.-1935).
Pravacanasara of Kundakunda, Ed. A. N. Upadhye-1935. Pravacanasaroddhāra, Nirnayasagar Press-1922-26.
Rajavārtika of Akalanka, Ed. Dr. Mahendra Kumar Jain-1958. Ramapurāņa of Bhaṭṭāraka Somasena (Hindi Translation) by Pt. Lalabahadur Shastri-1952.
Ratnakaranḍaka Śrāvakācāra of Samantabhadra.
Rāyapaseņaijjam, I. Ed. N. V. Vaidya (Ahmedabad).
Sāgāradharmāmṛta of Aśadhara.
Samavāyānga with Abhayadeva's Commentary-Agamodayasamiti
1920.
Sankhayana Śrauta Sutra, Ed. Lokeshcandra, Nagpur, 1953. Sarvarthasiddhi of Acarya Pujyapada, Bharatiya Jnanapith, Kashi
1955.
Satkhandagama, Ed. H. L. Jain.
Satprabhṛtādisangraha of Kundakunda (M.D. J.G.). Śravakācāra of Vasunandi.
Śravakaprajñapti of Haribhadrasuri-Bombay-1961.
Sthaviravalicarita of Parisiṣṭaparvan of Hemacandra, Ed. H. Jacobi
1932.
Sukhabodhika Tikā on Kalpasūtra-By Vimalagani v. s. 1990.
Rajnagar.
Tattvärthasūtra of Umaswati, Ed. Pt. Sukhalalji Sanghavi, Tattvärthadhigama Sutra of Umaswati (Sabhāṣya) Bombay-1932. Thānanga (Sthānāngasūtram), Ahmedabad-1937.
Thananga with the Commentary of Abhayadevasūri. Tiloyapappatti, Ed. H. L. Jain & Dr. A. N. Upadhye. Trişaṣṭiśalakāpuruşa carita of Hemacandra, English Translation By
Helen M. Johnson. Upadesamālā of Dharmadasgaņi.

Page #666

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Upamitibhavaprapañcakatha of Siddharși, Ed. Peter Peterson, Calcutta. Upasakācāra of Amitagati.
Uttaradhyayanasūtram.
Uttaradhyayana with Commentary of Nemicandrasuri (Devendragani), Bombay-1937.
Uttaradhyayana with the commentary of Shanti Acarya (Devendra Lalbhai Series No. 41).
Uttaradhyayana, Ed. J. Charpentier, Uppsala-1922).
Uttarapurana of Gunabhadra, (Bhartiya Jnanapith, Kashi-1951). Uvasagadasão, Ed. P. L. Vaidya-1930.
Uväsagadasão, Hoernle's Edition 1890.
637
Varangacaritam of Jață Simhanandi, Ed. Dr. A. N. Upadhye, 1938. Vasudevahindi, Vol. I, of Sanghadasgani, Ed. Muni Punyavijayaji
1930,
Vasudevahindi, Introduction of, Translated in Gujarati by B. J. Sandesara, Bhavnagara v.s. 2003).
Vividha Tirthakalpa of Jinaprabhasūri, S. J. Series-1934. Yogaśastra of Hemacandra.
Buddhist Works:
Anamakaṁ Jātaka, Rāmāyaṇa in China By Dr. Raghubir.
Buddhacarita of Asvaghosa.
Dasaratha Jātaka (No. 461).
Brahmanical Works:
Abhişeka Nataka by Bhasa (Oriental Book Agency, Poona-1951),
Adhyatma Rāmāyaṇa (Gita Press, Gorakhpur).
Anandarāmāyaṇa (Pandita Pustakalaya, Kashi-1958).
Anargha Raghava of Murarī Miśra (Jivananda Vidyasagara, Sarasvati Press, Calcutta-1889).
Apastamba Grhya Sutras (S. B. E. Vol. xxx).
Arthaśastra of Kautilya (Mahābhārata Karyalaya, Delhi v. s. 2010). Arthaśāstra of Kautilya, Translated by Shama Shastry-1956.
Balaramāyaṇa of Rajashekhar (Jivananda Vidyasagara, Sarasvati
Press, Calcutta).
Bhagavata Mahāpurāņa-Gita Press, Gorakhapur.
Bhaṭṭikavyam (Chaukhamba Sanskrit Series, Benaras).
Brhat Samhita of Varahamihir (Laxmi Venkateśvar Press-Bombay
v. s. 1983).
Brahma Purana (Ananda Ashrama).
Caraka Samhita-Nirnaya Sagar Press-1922).
Caraka Samhita-Translated by Avinashchandra Kaviratna, Calcutta.

Page #667

638
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAN Gita Rahasya by Lokamanya Tilaka, Poona--1955. Gitāvali of Tulsidas. Gobhila Gșhya Stūras (S. B. E. XXX). Harivarśa Purāņa (Tejkumar Book Depot, Lucknow). Hiranyakesin Gșhya Sūtāas (S. B. E. Vol. xxx). Kalikā Purāņa. Kathasaritsägara of Somadeva Bhatta, Ed. Pt. Durgaprasad, Bombay
1930. Kavyamīmāṁsā, Ed. Pt. Kedarnath Sharma (1954). Kūrma Purana (Venkateswar Press, Bombay). Mahabharata (Chitrashala Press, Poona-1929-33). Mahānāțaka (Madhusudana's Version) - Jivananda Vidyasagara,
Narayana Press, Calcutta--1890). Mahāvīracaritam of Bhavabhati. Manusmrti (Nirnaya Sagar Press-1946). Márkandeya Purăņa-Jivanand Vidyasagar, Calcutta-1879). Márkandeya Purāņa, Translated by F.E. Pargiter. Narasimhapurāņa (Gopal Narain Co., Bombay-1911). Padmapuranam (Anandaśrama-1893-94). Paraskara Gșhya Sutras. Prasanna Rāgha vam of Jayadeva. Pratima Nataka of Bhāsa (Oriental Book Agency, Poona-1951). Raghuvamsa of Kalidás. Ramacaritamanasa of Tulasidas (Gita Press, Gorakhpur, v.s. 2013). Rāmāyana of Tulasidasa with Interpolated portions, Ed. Pt. Jvala
Prasad Misra, Venkateswara Press, Bombay-1957). Rāmāyaṇa Mañjarī of Kșemendra. Rtusamhāra of Kalidas. Setubandha of Pravarasena. Śūkraniti, Ed. Khemraj Shri Krisnadas, Bombay-v.s. 2012. Susruta Samhita ( Jivananda Vidyasagar, Calcutta–3rd Edition. Uttara Ramacaritam of Bhavabhūti (Chaukhambha Sanskrit Series
-1953) Valmiki Rāmāyaṇa with the commentary (Tilaka) of Rama, Nirnaya
Sagar Press, Bombay-1930). Vālmīki Rāmāyaṇa, Critical Edition, Vol. I, Baroda-1960. Vayu Purāna, Venkateswar Press, Bombay. Vişnupurāpam-Gita Press, Gorakhpur, Yajña Paribhāsa Satra of Āpastamba (S. B. E. Vol. Xxx). Yajñavalkya Smộti.
.

Page #668

BIBLIOGRAPHY
639
General Works : The Age of Imperial Unity (Bharatiya Vidya Bhawan, Bombay-1953). Age of the Nandas and Mauryas by K. A. Nilakant Sastri-1952). Ancient and Medeval Nepal by Dr. R. Regmi-1952. Ancient Indian Historical Tradition by F. E. Pargiter, London-1922. Bambar Prānta ke Prachina Jaina Smāraka by Br. Shital Prasadji. Bhārata Savitrí by. V. S. Agrawala-1957. Buddhist India by T. W. R. Davids. The bambridge History of India by E. J. Rapson-1955. The Canonical Literature of the Jainas by H. R. Kapadia. Coins of India by C. J. Brown. Collected Works of R. G. Bhandarkar (Bhandarkar Oriental Research
Institute, Poona-1933). Comprative Grammar of the Prakrit Languages by R. Pischel (Trans
lated by Subhadra Jha, 1957). Cunningham's Ancient Geography of India. Dynasties of the Kali Age by F. E. Pargiter. Early History of the Deccan by R. G. Bhandarkar, Poona--1927. The Early History of the Vaishnava Sect by H. C. Ray Choudhary
-1936. Education in Ancient India by Dr. A. S. Altekar-1951. An Encyclopaedia of Hindu Architecture by P. K. Acarya-Oxford
University Press, 1946. Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, Vol. VII. Gangānātha Jha Commemoration Volume. Geographical Dictionary of Ancient and Medieval India by Nundolal
Dey-1927. Geographical and Economic Studies in the Mahabhārata-Upayana
parva by Motichandra (1945). Geographical Essays Vol. I by B. C. Law, Luzac & Co., London
1937. Gupta Art by V. S. Agrawala-1948. Harşacarita eka Samskstika Adhyayana by V. S. Agrawal-1953. The Heroic Age of India by N. K. Siddhanta. Hindu Religion, Customs and Manner by P. Thomas, (2nd Revised
Edition, Bombay). Hindu Social Organisation by P. N. Prabhu-1954. Historical Geography of Ancient India by B.C. Law, 1954. A History of the Canonical Literature of the Jainas by H. R. Kapadia,
1941. A History of the Early Dynasties of Andhradesa by Bhavaraju Venkata
Krishnarao, Madras-1942. A History of Indian Literature Vol. II by M. Winternitz, Calcutta
Edition-1933.

Page #669

640
History of Jaina Monachism by S.B. Deo-1956.
A History of Sanskrit Literature by A.B. Keith-1953.
A History of South India by K.A. Nilakanta Sastri -1955.
India as Described in Early Texts of Buddhism and Jainism by B.C. Law-1941.
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYAM
India as Known to Panini by V.S. Agrawala. 1953
India in Kalidasa by B.S. Upadhyaya - 1947.
Jaina Acāryo kā Sāsnabheda by Jugal Kishor Mukhtar (V.S. 1985). Jaina Agama Sahityaman Gujarāta by Chogilal Sandesara-1952. Jaina Dharma by Shri Kailashchandra Shastri-1955.
The Jaina Religion & Literature Vol. I, pt I by H.R. Kapada-1944. Jaina Sahitya our Itihasa by Nathurama Premi-1957.
Jaina Sahityano Sankṣipta Itihasa by M.D. Desai-Bombay-1933. Jainasilalekhasangraha Vol. I Ed. H.L. Jain (M.D.J.G. 1928). Jaina Silalekha sangraha Vol. II. III Ed. Pt. Vijayamurti (M.D.J.G.). Jainism in South India and Some Jaina Epigraphs by P.B. Desai
1957.
Jain Philosophy and Modern Science by Muni Sri Nagrajji 1959. The Jinist Studies by Otto Stein, Ed. Muni Jinavijayaji-1948. Life in Ancient India by J.G. Jain-1947.
Madrasa va Mysore Pranta ke Prăcina Jaina Smaraka-by
T
Br. Sitalprasadji A.V. 2454.
Maitraka Kālīna Gujarāta by H.C. Shastri (Gujarata Vidyasabha, Ahmedabad).
The Original Inhabitants of India by Gustav Opert.
Origin and Growth of Gaste in India by N. K. Dutta.
Outlines of Jaina Philosophy by M. L. Mehta-1954.
Political History of Ancient India by H. C. Ray Chaudhuri-1953. Prăcina Tirthamālasañgraha of Vijaya Dharmasūri, Bhavnagar-1978
V. S.
Prakrita aur Usaka Itihasa by Haradeva Bahari.
Puranic Chronology by Dr. D. R. Manked, 1961.
Racial Synthesis in Hindu Culture by S. V. Viswanatha.
Rama-katha By Dr. C. Bulcke (Hindi Parisad, Visvavidyalaya prayag
first Edition-1950, Second edition. 1962).
The Rāmāyaṇa (English Translation of Das Ramayana-Dr. H. Jacobi-by Dr, S. N. Ghosal, Oriental Institute, Baroda-1960.
Rāmāyaṇa Kālīna Samāja by S. N. Vyas-1958.
Rāmāyaṇa Kālīna Samskṛti by S. N. Vyas-1958.
The Riddle of the Rāmāyana by C. V. Vaidya-1906. Rivers of India by B. C. Law-1944.

Page #670

BIBILIOGRAPHY
641
Select Inscriptions, Ed. D. C. Sircar-1942.
Significa nee and Importance of Jatakas by Gokuladas De, 1951. Social and Religious Life in the Grhyasutras by V. M. Apte, 1954. Social Life in Ancient India or A study in Vatsyayana's Kama Sutra by H, C Chakladar-1929 & 1951.
The Status of Women in Ancient India by Indra-1955.
Studies in Epice and Puranas of India by A, D. Pusalker, Bhartiya Vidya Bhawan, Bombay 1965.
Studies in the Geography of Ancient and Medieval India by Dr. D. C. Sircar-1960.
The Successors of the Satavahanas by D. C. Sircar-1939, Tribes in Antient India-B. C. Law, Poona-1943. Tulasidăsa by Dr. Mataprasad Gupta, M. A., D. Litt-1953. Vaidika Sahitya aur Samskriti by Baladeva Upadhyaya-1955. The Vakataka Age by Dr. A. S. Altekar-1954.
Valmiki Rāmāyaṇa ke Tīna Patha by Dr. C. Bulcke (Nagari Pracāriņi Patrika, Varsa 58, Añka 1; v. s. 2010).
Vīra Nirvana Samvat aur Jaina Kala-ganana by Muni Kalyanavijayaji, (Nagari Pracarini Patrika, Pt. 10-11).
Yasastilaka and Indian Culture by K. K. Handiqui-1949.
Abhidhanacintamaņikośa of Hemacandra-Nirnaya Sagar Press-1946. Abhidhana Rajendra Kośa.
Anekanta, Varsa 5, Kirana 10-11.
Chandonuśāsanam of Hemacandra-Nirnayasagar Press, Bombay-1912. Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology by J. Dowson.
Desīnāmamāla of Hemachandra, Ed. R. Pischel-1933.
Gāthā Lakṣaṇa of Nanditadhya (B. O. R. Instt. Vol. XIV, Oct.-Jan.). Jaina Yuga, Pustaka 1, Aika 5. Posa-1922.
Paia-sadda-mahanņavo by Pandit Hargovind Das T. Seth, Calcutta
1928.
Prakṛta Paingalam-Asiatic Society Calcutta-1902. Prākṛtaprakāśa of Vararuci by Dr. P. L. Vridya.
Prākṛtavyākaranam of Hemacandra, Ed. Dr. P. L. Vaidya-1928.
Monier-Williams,
A Sanskrit English Dictionary by Sir Monier
Oxford, 1951. *
Vṛttajatisamuccaya of Virhāika (J. B. B., R. A. S. Vol. 8 No. 1 & 2).

Page #671


Page #672
_