Aspects of Brahmanical Influence On Jaina Mythology

SR No.: 011037
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Shaktidhar Jha
Publisher: Bharat Bharti Bhandar
Publication Year: 1978
Total Pages: 315
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 12 MB

Page 121

Dynastic Lists and Genealogical Accounts
103 families of Aryan origin). These Jālyaryas according to TSPC are the Ikşvākus, fiatas, Haris, Videhas, kurus, Ugras, and Rajanyas 80
The representation of the Hari dynasty also does not show a uniform tradition any more There are broadly speaking two schools. One school is represented by Vimalasün, Ravişena and Jinasena I, while the other is represented by Jinasena II, Gunabhadra and Subhacandra The Svetāmbaras follow the first school in many respects The former school places the origin of the line in the age of the tenth Tirthankara Sitalanatha and ascribes its progenitorship to a mythical person of the legendary land called Harvarşa 81 But the authors of the MP make the origin of the dynasty and its founder contemporaneous with Ikşvāku's reign According to the MP the founder of the Hari dynasty was one of Ikşvālu Rşabha's sub-rulers, called Harkānta or Harz 82 Thus, the authors of the MP treat the Ikşvāku dynasty as a sovereign ruling family and consider the rest as subordinate to the former.
Another striking point of difference between the MP on the one hand, and all the other works on the other, is revealed by the diverging representation of the Aditya-Damsa and Somadamsa, for we have already seen that according to the majority of the Puranas the Adityavamsa and Somavamsa were the collateral lines of the Ikşvāku dynasty,83 but the authors of the MP do not consider the Somavamsa as a branch of the latter On the contrary, the Somavamsa is treated as distinct from the
80 Grahat ota-efa-facer: Beatsfall
उग्रा भोजा राजन्याश्च जात्यार्या एवमादय ॥ TSPC, II 3 674 But this list is apparently self-contradictory in 80 far as in the genealogical section the Videhas, Ugras and Bhojas are represented as the sub-lines of the Hanı dynasty and the Kiuru-vam'sa 18 treated as a branch of the Ik spaku dynasty, whereas the Fiālas and Rājanyas, so far as we know, find no mcation as the dynastic names
Vide chapters V-VI infra 81. Sce chap VI 82 Note 58 (ante) 88. Notes 42, 48 (ante), Allo sce chapter V.