Mahavira Jain Vidyalay Suvarna Mahotsav Granth Part 1

Author(s): Mahavir Jain Vidyalaya Mumbai
Publisher: Mahavir Jain Vidyalay

Page 586

RAMAGIRI 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 Ramagiri with Ramtek 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 Ramagiri with Ramgarh, 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 Kalidasa's words and wrong identifications of some other places like Mala and Amrakūta. It is not intended to repeat the arguments in favour of Ramtek or those against Ramgarh, 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 Ramagiri 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 Mahavira. 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 Vimalasuri himself he was a disciple of Vijaya, who was himself a disciple of Rahu of the Naila-kula-vamsa. This vamia is usually
2 Studies in Indology, Vol. I, pp. 15 f.
3 See Samsodhana-muktavali, Part IV, pp. 18 f.; Meghadütäntil Ramagiri arthat Rämtek (Marathi), pp. 50 1. 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).