________________
Vol. XXII, No. 4
201
person or some one whose head is completely shaved, who has vomited or evacuated bowels several times. The same advice is given to the person who notices an ascetic with matted hair, a monk or an orange-robed. On the other hand the sight of a Brāhmaṇa, a courtesan, a pitcher full of water, mirror, flag, umbrella, palace, fan erc. is recommended as auspicious at the beginning of a journey. That the Buddhist monks were treated as inauspicious sight is hardly surprising because they were monks and they had their heads shaved. If treating a courtesan as auspicious does not prove reverence for her, treating the Buddhist monk as inauspicious cannot prove hatred for him either. There is nothing in the drama to show that Chārudatta hated the Buddhists. He was not a bigot. So we have to explain bis conduct in this case as based on superstition only.
The incident of Act VIII has to be judged in the context of the character of the king's brother-in-law and his entire deeds. He is foolish, vain, intoxicated with power and ill-behaved by nature. As Vasantasenā. the heroine of the drama hates him and loves Chărudatta, be does not hesitate to strangle her. Taking her for dead he goes away and accuses Charudutta of murdering her. Vasantasenā is eventually saved by the Buddhist monk Samvāhaka in the meantime. The judges despite doubts about the statements of Shakära and despite the fact that the Brāhmaṇas are exempted are so afraid of the fellow that they cannot but pronounce death sentences against Charudatta. He is saved simply because Palaka is overthrown in the meantime and Aryaka replaces him as king. The new king favours the Brāhmana Chārudatta as well as the Buddhist monk Samvāhaka. Such a conclusion of the drama demolishes the contention that the Buddhists were hated by all the Hindus in those days as a result of the Brahmapas' propaganda. Even the misbehaviour of Shakāra issues not from hatred for Buddhism That is clear from the passage quoted by Ambedkar himself. There Shakāra's companjon, Vita explajns his misbehaviour as follows:
Because some monk has offended him, he now beats up any monk he happens to meet".
True, nobody comes to the rescue of the monk but that too is explained by fear. Even Vita who accompanies Shakāra does not support his misdeeds but tries to dissuade him with the following plea :
“Friend, it is not proper to beat a monk who has put on the saffron robes, being disgusted with the world".5
The Mfchchakațikam was composed by borrowing the story of Daridra Chārudattam and adding the story of Aryaka's revolt to that. The revolt was not directed against a Buddhist or Jaina ruler.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
