________________
74
cariya (868 A. D.). He looks upon, as the title of his work indicates, 54 persons only as mahāpuruṣas (or śalākāpuruṣas)—great or eminent personages. He excludes nine Prativasudevas from the list of 63 salākā-purusas and regards only 54 as Mahāpurusas (or Śalākāpuruṣas). Naturally, he leaves out Rāvaṇa, the Prativasudeva, from the title of the narrative Rāma Lakkhanacariyam (The Narrative of Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa)". He describes Rāvana with such epithets : "Tormentor of the World', 'of impure character', 'conceited (or haughty) because of his vidya (learning)', 'wicked', 'cruel', etc. His narrative shares some features of Valmiki's Rāmāyaṇa and some, of Vimala's Paümacariya. He hardly introduces any innovation. There is nothing special or striking about his version.
STUDIES IN JAIN LITERATURE
6. Puspadanta wrote his Mahāpurāṇa in Apabhramśa in 965 A. D. His version of the Rāma story is identical with that of Gunabhadra. At the beginning of his version he criticises the story of Rāma as presented by Vālmīki and Vyāsa in the form of doubts raised by king Śrenika: "Vyasa and Vālmīki have spread false notions about the great men figuring in the Rāmāyaṇa; thus for example we are told that (i) Rāvaṇa had ten heads, (ii) his son (Indrajit) was older in age than his father, (iii) Rāvaṇa, was a demon and not a human being, (iv) He had twenty eyes and twenty hands and that he worshipped god Śiva with his heads, (v) Rāvana was killed by the arrows of Rāma, (vi) The arms of Lakṣmaṇa were long and unbending, (vii) Vibhīṣaṇa is a cirañjivin and (ix) Kumbhakarna sleeps for six months and feels satisfied by eating one thousand buffaloes."
Most of these doubts were raised in Vimala's Paümacariya (and Raviṣena's Padmapurāṇa). Regarding the doubt that Vibhīṣaṇa is a cirañjīvin we have a passage in Vālmīki's Rāmāyaṇa (vii. 10 vv. 29-35) which describes how Vibhīṣaṇa asks for his boon that "even amid the greater calamities he may think only of righteousness..." The god Brahma grants his request, and in addition bestows the gift of immortality on him. But regarding the doubt that Indrajit, though a son of Rāvaṇa was older in age than Rāvaṇa, his own father, it has not been possible to trace its source in Välmīki's Rāmāyaṇa.
Amitagati in his Dharmaparīkṣā (c. 1014 A. D.) also criticises this absurd element which he describes at some length: Mandodari conceives at the contact of her father's semen, has her foetus restrained in the womb for seven thousand years and delivers Indrajit after being married to Rāvaṇa. Now it is not impossible that an oral tradition is being criticised here.
7. Dhanesvara in his Sanskrit epic, Śatruñjayamāhātmya, (C. 1100 A. D.) deals with the story of Rama (Canto IX). He generally follows Vimala but departs from him in some places: According to Dhaneśvara, Kaikeyī asks for the
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
