Life of Hemchandracharya

Author(s): Manilal Patel
Publisher: Singhi Jain Shastra Shiksha Pith Mumbai

Page 64

45
CHAPTER VII.-THE CONSEQUENCES OF KUMARAPALA'S CONVERSION
on a perfectly equal footing with the Brahmanical fellowships of faith. This last point is mentioned only in the Mahdviracarita; verse 76 says that Kumarapala everywhere "ordered to carry in a procession the statues of the Arhat in solemn dresses on cars." We must understand this expression in this way that the king did not himself institute Jaina-Rathayatras in all places but he gave permission to celebrate these to the small communities throughout the country. As is well-known, Indians are never so enthusiastic as when they carry in public processions images of gods placed on high cars. Now the minority sects are, whenever possible, prevented to carry on their yaträs by those in majority and particularly the Jainas suffer in this respect from the pressure of other sects. Even in recent years there took place a keen fight in Delhi between the Vaisnavas and the Digambaras on account of the rathaydird which the latter wanted to organize. There is no doubt that during the time of the orthodox kings, the Svetämbaras of Gujarat were not permitted to exhibit their divine images in public and that Kumürapäla was the first king to grant that privilege to them. If this explanation be accepted, the assertion of the Mahaviracarita that the rathayātrās took place in every village is not unbelievable. For, almost every village in Gujarat has its small Jaina samghes which consists of dealers in money and merchants. As regards the temple-buildings, the Dvyās rayakāvya speaks of only two, namely, the Kumaravihara in Aphilväd and another, also equally important, in Devapattana. The Mahaviracarita, on the contrary, opines in verse 75 that "almost every" village maintained a Jaina Caitya, but it refers particularly to a single one in Aphilväd, which must be the Kumāravihära. The first assertion is naturaiiy an exaggeration as befits the prophetic style. One must understand the statements of the Mahavtracarita probably to mean that Kumarapala had a great number of small public edifices erected, which apparently were not important enough to be given separate names, and, besides these, the great, beautiful temple in Aphilväd. With the help of this interpretation, the temples mentioned in the Mahaviracarita may well be reconciled with those mentioned in the Dryasraya, if we accept that the latter wants to mention. only the most noteworthy edifices and that it was written somewhat later than the Mahaviracarita. The Prabandhas also mention many of these temples. The Prabhavakacaritra speaks, first of all, of the Kumāravihara at Aphilvad, whose foundation it ascribes to the minister Vägbhata. Afterwards, it relates that the king ordered to be erected 32 small Viharas as penance for the sins of his teeth; that he erected moreover a statue of Neminatha in the temple of his father, Tihunapala or Tribhuvanapala; that he had a temple built on the mountain Satrunjaya; and that he adorned all des asthanas, i. e. the main places in each province, with the Jaina-Caityas. Right at the end of this work, we find also the story from the Mahdviracarita about the discovery of the image of the Arhat in the ruins of Vitabhays.
Merutunga's numbers are still greater. First of all he speaks about 1440 temples which were built in various provinces. Further on, it is said that Kumarapala had in Vägbhatapura near Satruñjaya an image of Parsvanatha erected in a temple, Tribhuvanpälavihära, so named in honour of his father. Then, the thirty-two 'atonement" temples are also mentioned, as also the Kumaravihara whose building, however, is not described. Finally, four more temples are mentioned: (1) the Müşakavihara which was built at Aphilväd in order to atone for the death of a mouse which died out of despair