Essay name: Paumacariya (critical study)
Author:
K. R. Chandra
Affiliation: Research institute of Prakrit, Jainology and Ahimsa Vaishali
This is a critical study of the Paumacariya: the earliest Jain version of Rama's life story, written in Prakrit by Vimalasuri dating to the 4th century AD. In this text, Rama (referred to as Padma) is depicted with lotus-like eyes and a blooming face. The Paumacariya places emphasis on the human aspects of characters rooted in Jain values, contrasting with the divine portrayal in Valmiki鈥檚 version.
Page 41 of: Paumacariya (critical study)
41 (of 671)
External source: Shodhganga (Repository of Indian theses)
Download the PDF file of the original publication
12
A CRITICAL STUDY OF PAUMACARIYA峁�
V. S. i. e. 81 or 85 A. D.鹿 Therefore, the specific mention of Svet膩m-
bara or Digambara must not have occurred before 81 or 85 A. D.
Muni Kaly膩峁嘺vijayaji虏 opines that the specific reference to a parti-
cular sect had started not before the 7th century of V. S. i. e. later
half of the 6th cent. A. D. and according to that view Vimala艣uri's date
should not fall earlier than that period. But, the epigraph鲁 of 艢r墨
Vijaya艣ivam峁沢e艣a Varma (470-488 A. D.) at Devagiri refers to the
'Svetapa峁璦mah膩艣rama峁嘺sangha鈥�. It proves that on this basis
Vimala艣uri cannot be relegated to so late a period of the 6th century
A. D. The PCV (22. 24-27) further refers to not less than twenty
kinds of penances. Generally the Jaina Canonical literature and the
M奴l膩c膩ra do not refer to most of them. Dr. S. B. Deo鹿 writes that a
large number of tapas is probably a later development. The pu峁ik膩
at the end of the prasasti of Paumacariyam refers to Vimala as a S奴ri.
The Kalpas奴trasthaviravali and the Nandis眉tra-pattavali do not refer to
any S奴ri. The general epithets are Thera and Ajja (Sthavira and
膧rya). The early Jaina Inscriptions of Mathur膩 also do not refer to
any Jaina S奴ri of early christian era. Dr. S. B. Deo 5 states that it is the
Gacch膩s膩ra which explains 'Suri' as a sole supporter of a gaccha. He
further mentions that S奴ri seems to be a later term for Ac膩rya as it is
seldom found in the earlier portions of the Jaina canon and in the
M奴l膩c膩ra also there are very scanty references to the term 'S奴r铆'. He
says that closer we come to the medieval period we have the pre-
dominance of the S奴ri etc. All these evidences create difficulties in
believing the prasasti's claim that the work was composed in the first
century A. D.
6 The PCV gives the planetary position existing at the time of the
birth of Hanuman (17.107-112). The position of the planets is not
accurate. Are these verses interpolated by some mediocre scribe or
does accurate plenatory position given in the Padmacaritam of Ravi峁峁嘺
indicate that the portion in the PCV is not an interpolation but there
are some defective readings in it ? Prof. N. Shastry writes to me that
in the PCV only seven planets are taken into consideration, so the
system seems to be old whereas the tungatva of the planets in zodiacs
1. See JSI, p. 97.
2. 艢ramana Bhagawan Mahavira, p. 307.
3. Insep. No. 98 vide Jaina Silalekha Songraha, Pt. II; see also VGA p. 219 and
JSIE, p. 193.
4. HJM, p. 187 ff, p. 563.
5. Ibid pp. 232, 237.
6. Ibid. p. 514.
