Hemchandracharya Mate Pravarteli Bhramanao Ane Tenu Nirasan - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary in English of the provided Gujarati Jain text, "Hemchandracharya mate Pravarteli Bhramanao ane tenu Nirasan" (Misconceptions and Their Refutation Regarding Hemchandracharya) by Vijayshilchandrasuri:

This article aims to address and clarify misconceptions that have arisen over time regarding the renowned Jain scholar and monk, Acharya Hemchandracharya. The author, Vijayshilchandrasuri, acknowledges that a vast amount of literature exists about Hemchandracharya in various languages and across different historical periods, and his stature only grows with further study of his life, works, and the literature surrounding him.

The article focuses not on recounting known biographical details, but on clarifying prevalent misconceptions and sometimes misleading narratives about the Acharya. The author posits that history often treats great personalities unjustly, and this is certainly true for Hemchandracharya. During his lifetime, he faced significant opposition from Shaivas, Brahmins, and others who did not adhere to Jainism and considered Jains atheists. Similar to the stories of Birbal in the Akbar-Birbal tales, where Birbal cleverly overcomes challenges posed by others' envy, Hemchandracharya also had to constantly navigate and overcome such situations, though his were not fictional but real struggles. His intellectual prowess, inherent goodness, and detached generosity allowed him to establish his supremacy in every situation, often causing envy in others. However, his life was marked by continuous struggle, evident from various incidents.

The author notes that this injustice didn't cease with Hemchandracharya's death; many events have occurred posthumously that misrepresent him. The intention of this article is not to refute or create controversy but to foster historical understanding.

The article then delves into specific points of contention:

1. Hemkhad (Hem's Mound):

Hemchandracharya passed away in Patan in VS 1229 (1172 CE). The place where his final rites were performed saw King Kumarpal applying a tilak with the ashes from the pyre. Inspired by this, thousands of people did the same, creating a mound of earth, which became known as 'Hemkhad'.
This place is still recognized as Hemkhad by the public in Patan. Unfortunately, due to historical changes, the land, originally under Jain control, is now in Muslim possession and contains their dargahs, graves, and mosques.
A local journalist tried to bring attention to this issue in a newspaper but was suppressed by "hardline communal forces" who destroyed the newspaper copies and silenced the journalist.
The author's late friend, the poet Makrand Dave, shared this story and showed him the newspaper clipping. Dave expressed his sorrow and urged the author to find a way to reclaim this sacred land and establish a place of spiritual practice there, recognizing its energetic potential.
The author then cites an excerpt from an 89-page book titled "Hazrat Makhdoom Hisamuddin Multani R.A. wa Duniyadin ki Roshni mein" by Shujauddin Farooqui. This book focuses on a Muslim saint and includes stories about Hemchandracharya in a derogatory manner.

The Book Excerpt and Its Discrepancies: The book recounts a story where Hemchandracharya, a prominent Jain ascetic with 400 disciples, resided near the mosque of Hazrat Hisamuddin. One day, his disciples, carrying bags filled with sweets, were standing near the mosque wall. Due to a gust of wind, a dried excrement block placed on the mosque wall fell into one of the disciples' bags. The disciples, disgusted, threw the bag away and ran to their Guru, Hemchandracharya. Enraged, Hemchandracharya ordered his disciples to seize the Muslims. When some disciples went to the mosque, they were struck with fear and lost their ability to speak. Subsequent attempts by more disciples also failed. Finally, Hemchandracharya himself, seated on a jeweled stone platform, flew through the air to confront Hazrat. He demanded the Muslims leave. When Hazrat tried to strike him, Hemchandracharya, seated on his platform, flew upwards. The disciples rejoiced. Hazrat then threw his shoes upwards, causing the platform to flip, and Hemchandracharya was swallowed by the earth. The text claims a mark of the black stone platform still exists near Hazrat's shrine. Hemchandracharya's disciples then informed King Kumarpal, who attacked the mosque with his army. However, their feet and horses' feet turned stiff like wood and stone. When Hazrat came out again, he beckoned the king and asked him to recite the Kalima, converting him and some others to Islam.

The author then highlights numerous discrepancies in this narrative:

Hemchandracharya likely didn't have 400 disciples.
Jain monks do not openly accept food in their bags.
Jain monks would not stand near a mosque in such a manner.
If a stone fell, a monk would not discard the bag but present it to their Guru.
Hemchandracharya becoming enraged and ordering the capture of Hazrat is illogical and displays foolishness, as he had the king's authority.
The story of Hemchandracharya flying on a stone platform is absurd. If he came to capture, why fly away?
If Hazrat's shoes caused Hemchandracharya to sink into the earth, it invalidates all subsequent accounts of his life and death.
The claim of Kumarpal converting to Islam is a childish attempt to elevate their own religion. The author concludes that none of these points are credible and this narrative exemplifies the propaganda and fabrications used by extremist elements for religious propagation.

Further Excerpt from the same Book: The book further states that near the mosque, Hemchandracharya had his residence and school. There's a story about a packet of sweets. Some disciples of Hazrat Makhdoom were outside when Hemchandracharya's disciples, carrying sweets, were returning to their school. When the sweets did not finish, Hemchandracharya, believing it to be the work of the fakir Hazrat Makhdoom Hisamuddin, summoned him and challenged him to show his miracle. Hazrat replied he had nothing, and Hemchandracharya should show his feat. Hemchandracharya sat on a black stone slab and flew away, claiming to bring fruits from heaven. Hazrat then gestured to his Guru's wooden sandals, which flew, struck Hemchandracharya on the head along with the stone, and brought him down, causing him to be buried. The book attributes this to Hemchandracharya having subdued a being named Narasanga Vir.

The author notes that these two accounts are likely variations of the same incident. The first has Acharya going to Hazrat, the second has Hazrat being summoned. The first mentions Kumarpal, the second Narasanga Vir. The author points out the inconsistency and states that the author seems to be following common folk tales.

Discrepancies in the Second Account:

The author asserts that Hemchandracharya having an upashraya (monastery) near the mosque proves that during their aggressive occupation, Muslims seized the land near the upashraya and built their structures there, possibly the 'Hemkhad'.
Sweets not finishing, moving stones, and flying are all considered illusions (indrajala). The author argues that Hemchandracharya was a yogi, not a magician, and his yogic powers, while potentially miraculous, did not involve trickery or illusion. The story paints him as equal to Hazrat for self-aggrandizement, which is historically and traditionally false.
The claim of the Acharya being buried underground is again present. The author criticizes how religious zealotry leads to a loss of factual discernment.
Hemchandracharya was a yogi and had no need to perform rituals with Narasanga Vir; there is no historical evidence for this. It's possible Hazrat subdued Narasanga Vir and used him to perform miracles.

Chronological Discrepancy: A significant point is raised about the birth and death dates of Hazrat Makhdoom Shah. The book states he was born in Hijri 634 and died in Hijri 736. However, another source mentions his birth in Hijri 639 (CE 1241), which is VS 1297. Hemchandracharya died in VS 1229. If Hazrat Makhdoom Shah was born in CE 1241, he could not have possibly met Hemchandracharya, making the stories fabricated. The author concludes that these stories are evidence of religious fanaticism.

The core issue remains the 'Hemkhad', now under Muslim control. The author feels the appeal from respected figures like Makrand Dave to reclaim it and develop it as a spiritual site highlights the importance of Hemchandracharya and his land. When the author expressed concern about potential communal backlash, Dave insisted on taking action.

The author reiterates that the purpose of writing this is not to hurt anyone's sentiments but to express the deep religious connection of Jains to this situation, hoping for action.

Hem-Inscriptions (Hem-Pratimalekho):

There is limited historical information about installations (pratishthas) performed by Hemchandracharya. While some references to a VS 1228 installation exist, history also indicates the destruction of temples and idols soon after due to shifts in auspicious timings. Therefore, very few idols and inscriptions from his time that can be definitively linked to him are found.
A significant issue is the existence of other Jain Acharyas named Hemchandra during his era:
1. Maladhari Shri Hemchandrasuri, who also passed away in Patan.
2. Shri Hemchandrasuri, a disciple of Shri VijaySinhsuriji of Vadgachh and a guru-brother of Shri Somprabhusuri.
- This makes it difficult to ascertain which Hemchandra is referred to in inscriptions.
Secondly, the author cites a statement from the "History of Jain Tradition" (Vol. 2, p. 353) by Triputi Maharaj, stating that some ascetics have fabricated inscriptions in the name of Hemchandracharya, similar to the fabricated inscriptions attributed to Jinadattasuri. Triputi Maharaj claims to have seen such inscriptions and informed the Sangh that they were false.

Two Inscriptions Presented:

An inscription found in the unpublished literature of Muni Shri Jayantvijayji: "Samvat 1220 Jyeshtha Shudi 5... Shri Shalaka created the image of Shri Parshva for the welfare of... by Prabhu Shri Hemchandrasuri." The author notes the absence of "pratishthata" (installer) and location names is significant. This inscription was copied from a Parshvanath idol in the Mahavirswami temple in Tharad.
"Samvat 1223 Varshe Magh Vadi 8 Virasuten Depalakena... for the welfare of his brother... Maduk Chaturvimshati-pattah created. Installed by Shri Hemchandrasuri." Again, no place name is mentioned.

The author expresses hesitation in associating these inscriptions with the Hemchandracharya of Patan because there is no evidence of him leaving Patan for Tharad around VS 1220. In fact, this was a crucial period for his significant work in Patan. Furthermore, it is unlikely that an Acharya like him would perform installations without mentioning the village or deity's name, and instead use a title like 'Prabhu' without specifying his gachha (sect). Triputi Maharaj's statement about fabricated inscriptions carries more weight. The author suggests it's more probable that temples and idols inspired or installed by him were destroyed, making it hard to find his own installations. The aim of mentioning this is to caution against hastily linking any item with Hemchandracharya simply because it bears his name. The author also critiques a note from another publication that claimed Hemchandrasuri was the only one in 1223, stating this is based on incomplete knowledge.

3. Hemashri: Hemchandracharya's Sister:

Hemchandracharya's mother took diksha (renounced worldly life) at the time of his ordination and passed away in VS 1211 after about 45 years. There is no record of Hemchandracharya having any siblings.
However, the "Khartargachh Pattavali" mentions a sister, Hemashri, who was also initiated. This entry is believed to be biased, as the Khartargachh sect has a history of criticizing other gachhas.

The Khartargachh Pattavali Entry: The entry states that Hemchandracharya was hesitant to "chhotay" (perhaps referring to opening something or revealing a secret). His sister Hemashri told him to proceed, explaining that there was a decree from Jinadatta asking anyone who "chhotay" would face consequences. Hemashri then opened it, was immediately blinded, the book was returned to the treasury, and the library caught fire that night, burning all the books. The book then flew away to the Buddhists.

The author interprets this context as someone from Jinshwar Suri (or another Khartargachh figure) giving Hemchandracharya a book and warning him. When he hesitated, his sister opened it and was blinded. The library burned, and the book went to the Buddhists. The author finds this story bizarre, as a Jain Acharya would indirectly cause the destruction of a Jain library and send a book to Buddhists instead of retrieving it.

Triputi Maharaj's Critique of the Pattavali: Triputi Maharaj states that Khartargachh prose pattavalis fabricated such stories to elevate Jinadatta and Jinishwar Suri, and to diminish Hemchandracharya and King Kumarpal. He points out that Jinishwar Suri lived from VS 1278 to 1331, while Hemchandracharya and Kumarpal lived from VS 1199 to 1229. The name Sadhvi Hemashri is also deemed fabricated, and the author concludes that the pattavali creators manufactured many events out of gachha rivalry. The author notes the similarity between the "Hemkhad" narrative and this one, both stemming from sectarian bias.

4. Girnar Yatra and Dasharmandap:

A popular story from ancient prabandhas states that Hemchandracharya and King Kumarpal went to Girnar. They could not ascend the mountain together because if two great souls ascended simultaneously, the mountain would shake, causing an earthquake. This is presented as an example of exaggeration to enhance the greatness of a famous person.
The actual event, as recorded by Hemchandracharya's contemporary Shri Somprabhacharya in "Kumarpalpratibodh," is as follows: King Kumarpal, with his army and followers, set out on a pilgrimage under the guidance of Guru Hemchandra. They reached Girnar, where the king saw the "Dasharmandap" (pavilion of the Dashar clan) and the palace of King Ugrasen. Astonished, he asked the Guru about them. The Acharya explained that in Dwarka, the ten Dashar kings resided, including Vasudev (tenth), whose son was Krishnavasudev. Arishtanemi, son of Samudravijay, was to be married, and his bride, Rajimati, was the daughter of King Ugrasen of Girinagar. This was the pavilion of the Dashars and the palace of Ugrasen.
When the king asked if these structures were from that era, the Guru replied they were from a slightly earlier period, built by Nagार्जुन, a disciple of Ary Nagahasti Suri.
Upon hearing this, the king became eager to climb Girnar. Hemchandracharya advised him: "Rajaji! The path is difficult, so you should not climb. Let others climb. You will gain merit by meditating from here."
Following the Guru's advice, the king did not climb, but the Guru did. This account from "Kumarpalpratibodh" is considered the most authentic source for the Acharya's life.

Archaeological Significance of this Account:

Ugrasen's residence was in Girinagar (Girnar). If Krishna and Nemikumar arrived there from Dwarka, it implies that the settlement was in Girinagar, and Dwarka might not have been as far away as it is today. Recent satellite imagery reports suggest that Vanthali and its surrounding region might have been the Dwarka region, which could align with this account.
It is possible that what is now known as Buddhist cave complexes was once known as Dasharmandap, or they might have been destroyed.

Conclusion on the Girnar Story: The story that Girnar would shake if Kumarpal and his Guru climbed together is definitively a fabricated exaggeration.

Hemchandracharya and K. M. Munshi:

The article discusses the concept of strict celibacy, a rare virtue found in very few individuals, requiring past-life merit, noble lineage, proper guidance, inherent goodness, and self-awareness to channel energy upwards. While Banabhatta questioned if anyone had passed youth without flaws, the author believes Hemchandracharya was an exception.
The discussion then shifts to the renowned novelist Kanhaiyalal Munshi, who wrote about the Solanki era. In his novels, he created fictional characters Kak and Manjari, portraying Kak as formidable and Manjari as exceptionally beautiful and alluring, capable of breaking the pride of powerful men.
Munshi, generally, did not miss opportunities to portray Jains negatively. However, he reached the pinnacle of his imagination by depicting Hemchandracharya as attracted to Manjari's beauty, becoming bewildered, and making inappropriate requests. This is attributed to his Jain hatred and self-indulgence. The author believes readers can see Munshi's own domestic life reflected in Kak and Manjari.
This portrayal faced significant opposition. Munshi, being a former royal administrator, remained firm in his views, also citing freedom of artistic expression.
Ironically, this opposition was labelled as "a blow to the communal psyche." It was argued that to prove Hemchandracharya's greatness, one needed to depict him faltering in his celibacy with Manjari, which the author deems a preposterous argument.
Dr. Madhusudan Dhanki reportedly stated that Munshi exhibited intense Jain hatred in his criticism of Hemchandracharya's genius, calling him a terrible Jain-hater.

6. Hemacharya's Sky-Travel (Akashgaman):

The question arises whether exaggerations in prabandhas enhanced or diminished Acharya's glory. The story of him flying in the context of Hazrat Makhdoom Shah suggests that Jain prabandhas might also describe him with such powers. Research confirms this.
The story from "Prabandhachintamani" (pp. 87-88) describes Hemchandracharya and Kumarpal visiting Bhrugukachh to inaugurate a Jin temple built by Amrabhat. After the inauguration, Amrabhat danced on the temple roof in the evening and was overcome by spirits (Joganis) passing by. He became unconscious, and the Acharya, upon hearing of this, flew through the sky to the spot and resolved the issue.
If "swasthane" (to his own place) means Patan, then flying there seems plausible. However, the journey from Bhrugukachh to Patan takes days. Amrabhat's dancing and ecstasy likely occurred on the day of the inauguration itself. If it happened the same day, and the Acharya was in the city, why would he need to fly? "Swasthane" could simply mean his upashraya.
Alternatively, if the incident occurred after the Acharya reached Patan, it would take 3-4 days for news to reach him, and would he remain idle for so long? This makes the story confusing and hard to accept.
Furthermore, even if the Acharya possessed yogic powers, the idea of him possessing the knowledge of sky-travel and using it for such purposes is questionable. If he had such power, he could have resolved the issue from his own place without flying.
This confusion can be resolved by assuming the Acharya was in Bhrugukachh. On the day of the inauguration, Amrabhat, in his ecstasy, was afflicted by the spirits. Upon hearing the news, the Acharya went there and resolved the issue with his own capabilities.
This hypothesis is supported by a review of "Prabhavakcharit." The "Hemchandrasuricharit" section (pp. 207-208, verses 275-762) contains a detailed description where verse 739 states, "Ayayau padacharena" (He came on foot), proving that the sky-travel and going to Patan were exaggerations. The above assumption appears largely accurate.

"Prabhavakcharit" Account:

Ambra or Amrabhat saw the old wooden chaitya of Suvratjin in Bhrugukachh was dilapidated and decided to renovate it. He kept the deity in its place, dismantled the old structure, and dug the foundation for the new one. During this, spirits (Joganis) possessed Amrabhat, causing him pain, loss of appetite, and weakening his body. His mother, Padmavati, prayed to the goddess Padmavati, who appeared in a dream saying there was a great seat of spirits there affecting him, and only Hemchandracharya could save him.
The next morning, the Guru was informed. Instantly, the Guru, along with his disciple Yashashchandra (skilled in mathematics), went to Amrabhat. Yashashchandra calculated the matter and secretly informed Amrabhat's mother to send a capable and trustworthy person that night. The city gatekeepers were instructed to open the gates. That night, the Acharya, Yashashchandra, and the man went out through the city gate to the temple of Devi Saindhavi. On the way, various creatures in the form of animals appeared up to the temple gate, but they were appeased with fragrant offerings and diverted. At the Devi's shrine, Yashashchandra Ganesh said, "Guru Hemchandracharya has come to your courtyard on foot. He is also accepted and worshipped by other seats like Jalandharpeeth. It is appropriate and beneficial for you to welcome and worship him."
Hearing this, the Devi appeared, joined her hands, and stood before the Acharya. Seeing her, the Acharya suggested that if Amrabhat, seized by the spirits associated with her clan, couldn't be helped, then she should sit in her place. Frightened, the Devi ordered the spirits to release Amrabhat. Amrabhat recovered. The next morning, at the Acharya's instruction, Amrabhat offered a thousand-rupee offering to Devi Saindhavi, after which he completed the renovation of the chaitya.

The author concludes that the "Prabandhachintamani" description is more realistic, while the "Prabandhachintamani" account is full of exaggeration. Essentially, stories claiming the Acharya possessed sky-travel powers are fabricated tales to enhance his glory, which even the Acharya himself would not approve of.

Conclusion: The author concludes by stating that the article has documented significant misunderstandings and inappropriate narratives that have circulated about Hemchandracharya from his time to the present, encouraging discussion about their factual basis. One thing is clear: only the brilliant are targets of envy. Even through their animosity, they indirectly acknowledge the Acharya's brilliance. Salutations to the Acharya's brilliance!