________________
Rāvana is quite evident from her dialogues. The justice given to Mandodari's character is remarkable.
We find very stray and strange references of Añjanā, the mother of Hanumāna in Vālmīki.
In Kiskindhākānda it is said that Hanumāna is ter of Vāyu and y' of Kesari.40 For removing the blemish on the character of Añjanā, Vimalasūri and particularly Svayambhū have reconstructed and developed the Añjanā episode into a full-fledged 341241'The name of Hanuman's father is Pavanañjaya. In his character, there is a mixture of the characteristics of Vāyu and Kesari. He is a brave egoist Vidyādhara and acts according to his male instincts and free wills. Añjanā bears painful sufferings created by him for twelve years, solacing her mind with the help of Karmasiddhānta. Pavanañjaya realizes his guilt and the episode ends on a happy note. In Jaina tradition, Añjanā is enumerated among the sixteen adorable women.
With this brief account of some female characters in Jaina Rämäyanas, we can conclude that the Jaina approach to them is more humanistic, sympathetic and liberal than the contemporary Brahmanic tradition. It is very apt to note that in Jaina environment, right from the first Tīrthankara Rsabhadeva, the number of Sādhvīs and Srāvikas is almost twice than that of Sādhus
and Srāvakas. 21
The Striking Dissimilarities Found in Various Jaina Versions of Rāmāyaṇa
It is already noted that Paumacariya of Vimalasuri is the first Jaina version of Rāmāyana. He is well-acquainted with Vālmīki Rāmāyana, but has not mentioned his name. The introductory portions of Paumacariya reveal quite openly the purpose of writing the story. The cause of the Jainaification is explained as follows ---
fa fa Yoani, quia 9 PaşUT 461 (PaumCa.3.15) and
अलियं पि सव्वमेयं, उववत्तिविरुद्धपच्चयगुणेहिं । 7 hegfa green, Eaifa aufset 11 (PaumCa.2.117)
It means, 'All this appears to me to be lies, contrary to reasoning and not worthy of belief by wise men'. It is quite clear by this remark that he has deliberately rejected the Brahmanic version of the same story.
Not only Vimalasuri but all Jaina authors have the same reason to refute the accounts of Rāma and Rāvana that they have heard from the Kuśāstra-vadins i.e. expounders of false scriptures. According to them, Lord Mahāvīra had narrated the story to Gautama Ganadhara. They got the story through the tradition of their teachers. If this claim is true then one expects basic minimum similarities in all Jaina versions. The similarities are already noted beforehand. Here some of the striking differences in major Jaina versions are taken into account.
