Jaina Versionen Der Sodasa Sage - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary in English of the provided Jain text, "Jaina Versionen Der Sodasa Sage" by Frank Richard Hamm:

This article by Frank Richard Hamm delves into various Jain versions of the Sodasa Sage, a narrative also found in Brahmanical and Buddhist traditions, which centers on King Sodasa (or Saudasa) who, for a period, consumed human flesh. Hamm notes that the Brahmanical and Buddhist versions have been extensively studied, citing works by Watenabe and H. Kern from the early 20th century. Crucially, Kern was unaware of any Jain recensions at the time, while Leumann had access to a brief Jain version from Haribhadra's Āvaśyakaṭīkā.

Hamm identifies and categorizes five significant Jain versions of the Sodasa Sage:

Group I:

Haribhadra, Āvaśyakaṭīkā: This text, accessed from Leumann's estate, presents a concise account of Sodasa's cannibalism.
Sanghadāsa, Vasudevahiṇḍi: This work, edited by Caturavijaya and Punyavijaya, provides a more detailed narrative.

Group II: 3. Vimalasūri, Paumacariya: Edited by Jacobi, this text offers another substantial version. 4. Ravişeņa, Padmacarita: Edited by Dabārilal, this version contributes to the body of Jain narratives. 5. Hemacandra, Triṣaṣṭiśalākāpuruṣacarita: Edited by Rāyabudhasimha, this work is also analyzed.

The author then proceeds to present translations of these versions, providing the original text only for Haribhadra's version due to its conciseness and accessibility of others. The core of the article lies in examining the relationships between these five Jain texts and their connections to the Brahmanical and Buddhist versions.

Key Differences and Similarities within the Jain Versions:

Hamm highlights several distinctive features and points of divergence among the Jain texts:

Haribhadra's Unique Details: Haribhadra is the only one to mention that the townsfolk, after getting Sodasa drunk, removed him from the city.
Sanghadāsa's Specifics: Sanghadāsa stands out by identifying Sodasa as the king's son, and it is his father who banishes him. Notably, Sanghadāsa does not include a conversion story for Sodasa.
Shared Traits of Group I (Haribhadra and Sanghadāsa): These two texts exhibit clear commonalities that set them apart from Group II:
1. They refer to a "slaughter" (amāghāya), whereas Group II texts describe the day Sodasa first ate human flesh as a festival day with a specific prohibition against eating meat.
2. A cat (birala) steals the meat in these versions, while Group II texts only state the cook couldn't obtain meat due to the festival.
3. Sanghadāsa mentions a Rakkhasa bringing Sodasa to the Tilavatthuya region, while Haribhadra states people believed their king was a Rakkhasa.
4. Both Haribhadra and Sanghadāsa use similar or synonymous vocabulary for certain concepts.
Shared Traits of Group II (Vimalasūri, Ravişeņa, and Hemacandra): These three texts present a contrasting narrative:
- Vimalasūri includes a detailed sermon by a monk, whereas Ravişeņa and Hemacandra merely mention Sodasa meeting a monk.
- Vimalasūri is unique in stating that Sodasa initially refuses to give up eating meat.
- Ravişeņa details the cook's method of obtaining the children's flesh and explicitly names the festival.
- Both Vimalasūri and Ravişeņa note that Sodasa's past karma predisposes him to forbidden meat consumption and that he gains the name Sihasodāsa (Lion-Sodasa) from eating lion meat in exile. They are also the only ones to mention him eating the cook during his exile.
- Hemacandra elaborates by having ministers instruct the young king about the prohibition on meat during the festival.

Dating and Influences:

Hamm also addresses the relative age of these texts:

Group I: Alsdorf, following Jacobi, places the Vasudevahiṇḍi (Sanghadāsa) as significantly older than the 6th century CE, while Haribhadra belongs to the 8th century CE. Hamm suggests Haribhadra might have also drawn from an even older source for this particular tale.
Group II: Hamm intends to demonstrate Ravişeņa's dependence on Vimalasūri in a larger work on the Rama saga. He asserts that Vimalasūri is the older author, with Ravişeņa largely following and embellishing his narrative. Given that Vimalasūri and Hemacandra are Svetambaras, it is suggested that Hemacandra may have followed Vimalasūri.

Comparison with Brahmanical and Buddhist Traditions:

The article concludes by examining the relationship of the Jain versions to their Brahmanical and Buddhist counterparts:

Brahmanical vs. Buddhist/Jain: The Brahmanical sage of Saudasa Kalmasapada is primarily etiological, focusing on a curse that compels him to eat human flesh. The Raksasa is portrayed as the instigator, driving Saudasa to his fate. In contrast, both Buddhist and Jain versions are moralistic, a characteristic common to most narratives in these religions, emphasizing personal responsibility and the consequences of actions.
Buddhist and Jain Parallels: Hamm highlights significant connections between the Buddhist and Jain traditions, using the Mahāsutasomajātaka as a representative Buddhist example.
- The prohibition of killing and meat-eating on specific days (Uposatha days in the Jātaka, "Eight-day festival" in Group II Jain texts) is a shared motif.
- While a cat steals the meat in the Group I Jain texts, dogs are mentioned in the Jātaka.
- The cannibalistic king's consumption of his cook is mentioned in Vimalasūri and Ravişeņa, similar to the Jātaka.
Haribhadra's Connection to Buddhist Literature: Hamm points to a strong connection between Haribhadra's conclusion and the Buddhist Angulimalasutta. The dialogue where Sodasa (or in the Sutta, Angulimala) encounters monks and the exchange of words are nearly identical, suggesting a direct influence or shared source. Hamm understands Haribhadra's familiarity with the Angulimala legend as plausible given Haribhadra's engagement with broader Buddhist philosophical texts.

Conclusion:

Hamm concludes that the Sodasa sage is another example of the extensive cross-pollination between Buddhist and Jain narrative literature. Both religions drew from a common pool of oral and written folktales, adapting them to their respective religious and ethical frameworks. He emphasizes that pinpointing the exact source or demonstrating direct borrowing can be challenging, as the tradition is largely anonymous, and each tradition creatively used available material.

In essence, the article meticulously analyzes the nuances of the Sodasa legend within Jainism, categorizing different versions, highlighting their specific narrative features, and tracing their potential relationships to each other and to parallel narratives in other Indian religious traditions.