Studies in Jain Literature

Author(s): V M Kulkarni
Publisher: Shardaben Chimanbhai Educational Research Centre

Page 70

STUDIES IN JAIN LITERATURE
(ii) The traditions regarding the origin of the Rāma-story recorded by the Jains
in their works are conflicting. If the story of Rāma were told by Mahāvīra, it should have found a place in sacred works of the Jains. The story of Krsna is found in the canonical texts. It is not easy to explain the absence of the Rāma-story in the canon unless we hold that it was taken up later by the
Jain poets to popularize the Jain teachings. (iii) The Jain versions unmistakably point to the influence of Vālmīki Rāmāyana
(or The Rāmopākhyāna of the Mahābhārata). For example, Vimalasûri who criticizes the Hindu Rāmāyaṇa for representing the defeat of Indra, the overlord of the gods, at the hands of Rāvana when, in reality, Indra, the lord of Vidyadharas, was defeated, himself describes that Vidyadhara lord as 'suradhipa', 'surapati', etc., He uses personal names of heroes after Vālmīki
although he gives them different personal names. (iv) The tendency of the human mind to find fault with fanciful and highly
exaggerated and coloured descriptions as absurd and unreasonable found in the Jain works speaks of their ‘modernism'.
(v)
The Jain version idealizes the characters of Kaikeyī, Rāvana and Vālin. If their representation of these characters were more faithful to the original legend, it would be difficult to understand how Vālmīki could distort the idealism of the original, and give touches of realism in representing the part played by Kaikeyi in bringing about Rāma's exile, Rāma's slaying of Vālin in a manner unbefitting a superhuman hero. In view of Vālmīki's intense desire to idealize the character of Rāma and represent him as an ideal warrior, an ideal son, an ideal husband and an ideal king, it is difficult to understand Vālmīki's motives in slightly degrading the character of Rāma in the episode of his fight with Vālin, as also in some others such as his killing of Tāțaka and Khara, his rather unchivalrous treatment of Sūrpanakhā, etc., unless we assume that Vālmīki had felt compelled to retain these incidents because he found them as part of the popular tradition.
(vi) The divergences which the Jain Rāmāyanas show from the Vālmīki Rāmāyana
are easily accounted for, as proceeding from artistic, or religious or ethical motives thus dispensing with the hypothesis that the Jain versions preserve more faithfully the ancient Rāma-story that was prevalent prior to Vālmīki.
Establishing thus firmly that Vālmīki's Rāmāyana is the fountain source of the Jain versions of the story of Rāma we now turn to the development of the story of Rāma in Jain literature.