________________
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.
