Page #1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________
Ramagiri In Jaina Literature
V. V. MIRASHI
The location of Rāmagiri described in the Meghadūta of Kalidasa has
1 recently become a matter of keen controversy. Many years ago, while editing the Meghadūta, Prof. H. H. Wilson suggested that it might be identical with Rāmțek, about 28 miles north of Nagpur, but beyond stating that the hill was covered with buildings consecrated to Rāma and was periodically visited by numerous pilgrims, he did not substantiate the identification with any evidence. Besides, his identification of Māla with Māldā in the Bilaspur District of Madhya Pradesh, and of Amrakūta with the Amarakantak hill where the Narmadā takes its rise, are not in accordance with the description of those places in the Meghadūta. Prof. K. B. Pathak accepted this identification of Rāmagiri with Rāmțek near Nagpur in his first edition of the Meghadūta but in his second edition of that work published in 1916 he proposed to identify the place with the Rāmgarh hill in the Central Provinces as the place intended by the poet owing to its extreme proximity to
1 Kālidāsa describes Mäla as a table-land situated to the north of
Rāmagiri, while Maldā in the Bilaspur district lies southeast of Ramtek. Amrakūta cannot be Amarkanţak; for the poet describes in the Meghadīta that the Cloud-messenger saw the Narmadā after flying considerable distance from Amrakūta with great speed. (at Ticare ai acestui: i patient etc.) Amarkanţak is, on the other hand, the source of the Narmadā.
Page #2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________
RÁMAGIŘI IN JAINA LITERATURE : 125
Amrakūta or Amarakantak, the source of the Narmada'. The argument advanced for this identification does not bear scrutiny as shown elsewhere. More than twenty years ago we proved the identification of Rāmagiri with Rāmţek in an article published in the Nagpur University Journal, No. IX, pp. 3 f. Recently the controversy has been revived by Shri V. K. Paranjpe of Poona, who, in his Marathi and English books on the subject, has reiterated the identification of Rāmagiri with Rāmgarh, first proposed by Prof. K. B. Pathak. We examined his arguments in several articles in Marathi and also in English and showed how they are extremely fallacious, based as they are on forced interpretations of Kalidāsa's words and wrong identifications of some other places like Māla and Amrakūta. It is not intended to repeat the arguments in favour of Rāmțek or those against Rāmgarh, but to state what light is thrown on the problem by the evidence afforded by Jaina literature. The suggestion for the examination of this evidence was made to us by Prof. V. M. Kulkarni, Gujarat College, Ahmadabad, when he read the controversy on the problem and drew our attention to it some years ago. We propose to deal with the subject here.
The first mention of Rāmagiri in Jaina literature occurs in the Paümacariya (Sanskrit, Padmacarita) of Vimalasūri.5 The date of this work is not certain. If the statement in that Prakrit kävya (118, 103) could be believed, it was completed in the year 530 after the nirvana of the Tirthankara Mahāvira. The date of the Tirthankara is not yet definitely proved. Some place his nirvana in 526 B.C. while Jacobi places it in 467 B.C. According to the former view the work was completed in A.D. 4, while according to the latter it was finished in A.D. 63. But the statement in the Paümacariya is not accepted by scholars. It is pointed out that according to a statement of Vimalasūri himself he was a disciple of Vijaya, who was himself a disciple of Rāhu of the Naila-kula-vamsa. This varsa is usually
2 Studies in Indology, Vol. I, pp. 15 f. 3 See Samsodhana-muktavali, Part IV, pp. 18 f.; Meghadūtāntil
Rāmagiri arthāt Rämțek (Marathi), pp. 50 f. See also its Hindi
version. 4 Studies in Indology, Vol. II, pp. 285 f. 5 For the citations given below I have utilised the edition of this
work recently published in the Prakrit Texts Series, Vol. VI (edited by Jacobi and revised by Muni Jinavijayaji).
Page #3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________
126 : SHRI MAHAVIRA JAINA VIDYALAYA GOLDEN JUBILEE VOLUME
identified with the Nagendra-gaccha, which, according to the Kalpasūtra, was founded in A.D. 93. So Vimala could not have completed his work in A.D. 4 or even in A.D. 63. Besides, the Paümacariya contains references to dināra, lagna etc. which suggest a much later date. So Dr. Jacobi places Vimalasūri in the third century A.D. There is, however, no doubt that his work is the oldest Prakrit kavya now extant.
Vimalasūri has taken the life of Rāma as the subject for his kāvya. Paüma (Padma) was another name of Rāma. The oldest Sanskrit work that describes the life of Rāma is the Rāmāyana of Vālmiki. The Buddhist and Jaina writers who have dealt with the story of Rāma have introduced several changes into it. Vimalasūri also has omitted or altered several incidents or descriptions in the Rāmāyaṇa story which appeared to be fantastic and unbelieveable such as the killing of the Rākşasas by monkeys, the six-month long sleep of Kumbhakarņa, the ten-headed form of Rävaņa, or has given another explanation of them. He says, for instance, that the Vānaras who helped Rāma in the Battle of Lankā were not monkeys but Vidyādharas. Rāvana had only one face, but as it was reflected in the nine gems of his necklace he appeared to be ten-faced.
Though Vimalasüri has thus altered some incidents in the Rāmāyaṇa, his story of Rāma is by and large the same as in the Rāmāyana. He describes for instance that Dasaratha, being very old, decides to crown Padma (i, e. Rāma) as his successor. But his queen Kaikeyi reminds him of the boon he had given her and asks him to give the kingdom to her son Bharata. So Padma leaves for the forest, accompanied by Lakşmaņa and Sitā. Bharata does not like this, but at the bidding of Kaikeyi and Padma he agrees to administer the kingdom till the return of Rāma.
Vimalasūri has described some events in the life of Rāma as in the Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki, but has altered some others. He describes that in the course of their wandering, Rāma, Lakşmaņa and Sitā reached the place Vamsasthapura. Though they were pressed by the prince of the place to enter the town, they preferred to stay on the adjoining hill called Vasagiri. Vimalasūri thus describes the hill (40, 4) -
नाणाविहतरुछन्ने नाणाविहपक्खिकुलरबुग्गीए।
वरकुसुमगन्धपवणे निज्झरपवहन्तविमलजले ॥ (The hill was densely covered by trees of various kinds; birds of different kinds were singing sweetly there; it was wafted by breezes laden with the fragrance of excellent flowers; and streams of clear water were flowing therefrom.)
Page #4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________
RÁMAGIŘI ÎN JAINA LITERATURE : 127
The prince of the place supplied all the necessaries of life to Rāma and others and at Rāma's bidding, erected many shrines of the Jinendras. 6
तत्थेव वंससेले पउमाणत्तेण नरवरिन्देणं ।
जिणवरभवणाई तओ निवेसियाई पभूयाई ॥ After staying there for some days, Rāma said to Lakşmaņa,?
अह अन्नया कयाई भणिओ रामेण तत्थ सोमित्ती। मोत्तूण इमं ठाणं अन्नं देसं पगच्छामो ॥ निसुणिज्जइ कण्णरवा महाणई तीए अत्थि परएणं ।
मणुयाण दुग्गमं चिय तरुबहलं दण्डयारणं ॥ (Let us now leave this place and move to another. There is said to be a great river named Karṇaravā, after crossing which one comes across the great forest called) Dandakaranya abounding in trees, which is inaccessible to human beings.)
So Rāma, Laksmana and Sitä left the place and proceeded to Dandakāranya. Vimalasűri then says,
रामेण जम्हा भवणोत्तमाणि जिणिन्दचन्दाण निवेसियाणि ।
तत्थेव तुङ्गे विमलप्पभाणि तम्हा जणे रामगिरी पसिद्धो।। (Since Rāma got erected excellent and brilliant temples of the Jinendras on the high hill, it became well-known thereafter by the name of Rāmagiri.)
It is difficult to say how far the description of Rāmagiri cited above from Vimalasûri's Paümacariya is historically correct. Much of it appears to be imaginary, but it clearly shows that in the age of Vimalasůri (i.e. in circa third century A.D.) there was a hill known by the name of Rāmagiri north of Dandakāranya. Vimalasuri tells us that the hill got this name because Rāma stayed there for some time and got some Jaina temples erected there. The geographical situation of this Rāmagiri suits Rāmțek. That this Rāmagiri (Ramtek) lay to the north of Daņdakāranya appears clear from the description in Bhavabhūti's Uttararāmacarita.9 On the hill of Rāmţek there is still shown the place where the Sūdra ascetic Sambūka was practising
6 Paümacariya, 40, 9. 7 Ibid., 40, 12–13. 8 Ibid., 40, 16. 9 Act II.
Page #5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________
128 : SHRI MAHAVIRA JAINA VIDYALAYA GOLDEN JUBILEE VOLUME
penance. He was beheaded by Rāma, but immediately thereafter he was turned into a Siva-linga, now called Dhumreśvara. This tradition is at least seven hundred years old; for it is mentioned in a stone inscription of the Yādava period fixed in the front wall of the temple of Laksmana on the hill of Rāmţek. His name occurs there in a slightly different form, viz., Dhumrākṣa.10 We learn from Bhavabhūti's Uttararāmacarita that the Dandakāranya containing large hills and dales infested by dreadful ferocious beasts stretched southward from the place of Sambūka's hermitage up to the confines of Janasthāna, on the bank of the Godāvarī.11 The situation of Rāmțek thus answers to the description in the Paümacariya. That the place was known by the name of Rāmagiri in the fourth century A.D. is clear from the Rddhapur plates of the Vākāțaka dowager queen Prabhāvatigupta, who made one of her grants there near the pădukās of Rāmagirisvāmin (i. e. Ramacandra).12 Kalidasa also describes that the hill of Rāmagiri had the venerable pădukās of Raghupati (Rama) installed on it13. The way of the Cloud-messenger described in the Meghadūta suits Rāmțek and no other place, 14 and there are reasons to suppose that Kālidāsa sojourned for some time in the neighbouring Vākāțaka capital Nandivardhana, which lies only about three miles from Rämtek.15 The hill of Rāmțek was thus undoubtedly known as Rāmagiri in the fourth century A.D. and it is not unlikley that the place was known by the same name a century or two before in the age of Vimalasūri. In describing the hill of Rāma's sojourn as Rāmagiri which lay to the north of Dandakāranya, Vimalasūri was not simply drawing on his imagination, but appears to have known the tradition about Ramtek.
In one respect, however, Vimalasūri's description appears to be imaginary. He tells us that at the instance of Räma several temples of Jinendras were erected on the hill, which later became known as Rāmagiri. There are now no remains of any temples of the Jaina
10 See M RT U EEIFTEST: 974 : High: layiqHETSTIST 7914
fa: 11 Ep. Ind., Vol. XXX, p. 17. See एतानि खलु सर्वभूतरोमहर्षणान्युन्मत्तचण्डश्वापदकुलसंकुलगिरिगह्वराणि जनस्थानपर्यन्तदीर्धारण्यानि दक्षिणां
fra i Act. II. 12 See Thattaifa: Tqara I C.I.I., Vol. V, p. 35. 13 See qre: gal gafavec Heli V. 12. 14 See Studies in Indology, Vol. I, pp. 15 f. 15 Ibid., pp. 19 f.
Page #6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
________________ RAMAGIRI IN JAINA LITERATURE : 129 Tirthankaras on the hill of Ramtek. But there were evidently some in the vicinity of Ramtek. A huge and beautiful image of santinatha about 15 ft. in height, was discovered some years ago in the vicinity of Ramtek and has now been installed in a magnificent temple erected by the munificence of the Jaina community at Ramtek. In the same temple are also installed the images of the Tirthankaras Parsvanatha and Candraprabha. Ramtek has been known as a sacred place from very early times. There are several temples of Hindu gods and goddesses on the hill of Ramtek. On one of the off-shoots of the hill there is a cave known from very early times as the cave of Nagarjuna. At Mansar, which lies in the vicinity of Ramtek, there are remnants of a Buddhist Vihara. Its Jaina images have been mentioned above. The place was thus regarded as sacred by the followers of all the three great religions, Hindu, Bauddha and Jaina. The description of Ramagiri in the Paumacariya, on the other hand, definitely goes against the identification of Ramgarh with Ramagiri of Kalidasa's Meghaduta, for, firstly, there are no remains or vestiges of Jaina temples on or in the vicinity of Ramgarh and, secondly, there is no evidence that Ramgarh lay to the north of ancient Dandakaranya. JE U how G.J.V. 9