Padmapuran Aur Manas Ke Ram

Here's a comprehensive summary in English of the provided Jain text, focusing on the comparison between the "Padmapuran" and "Ramcharit Manas":

Book Title: Padmapuran aur Manas ke Ram (The Ram of Padmapuran and Manas) Author: Lakshmi Narayan Dubey Publisher: Z_Kailashchandra_Shastri_Abhinandan_Granth_012048.pdf Catalog Link: https://jainqq.org/explore/211313/1

This scholarly article by Lakshmi Narayan Dubey explores the parallels and divergences between the Jain rendition of the Ram story in Acharya Ravishana's "Padmapuran" (circa 678 CE) and Tulsidas's revered "Ramcharit Manas" (circa 1574-1577 CE).

Key Similarities:

• Central Figure: Both texts center around the life and deeds of Rama.
• Praise of Rama: Both Acharya Ravishana and Goswami Tulsidas glorify the life of Rama and express their reverence to earlier storytellers of the Ramayana.
• Inception of Narrative: Both authors begin their narratives by establishing a question or doubt, providing a framework for their retelling.
• Debt to Valmiki: Both authors acknowledge their indebtedness to the original poet Valmiki.
• Artistic Presentation: Both writers present Rama's personality in a captivating, poignant, and impactful manner, depicting him as a repository of strength and an unparalleled treasure of virtue.
• Literary Merit: Both works demonstrate excellent literary standards in Sanskrit (Padmapuran) and Awadhi (Ramcharit Manas) languages.
• Human Welfare: Both texts aim to establish religious principles for the benefit of humanity.
• Cultural Depiction: "Padmapuran" presents a realistic picture of the integrated culture of India's happiness, peace, and prosperity, while "Ramcharit Manas" portrays an idealist culture.

Key Differences:

• Philosophical Stance: The most significant difference lies in their philosophical underpinnings. Ravishana's work is characterized as "Vedanindak" (one who criticizes the Vedas), whereas Tulsidas is deeply devoted to the Vedas.
• Nature of Rama:
  • Ravishana's Rama: Is portrayed as a "Mahapurush" (great soul) who attains liberation through his own actions. He is depicted as the owner of nine thousand queens and subject to worldly attachments ("Mohabhibhoot").
  • Tulsidas's Rama: Is presented as "Maryadapurushottam" (the ideal man) and also as "Parabrahma" (the Supreme Being) who incarnated to protect Dharma. He is a devoted husband, an ascetic, and one who conquers attachments.
• Theological Interpretation: Ravishana's primary aim is to convey the consciousness of Jainism by describing Rama as the eighth Balabhadra. Tulsidas, on the other hand, elevates devotion to Rama by narrating the life of Shri Rama as the Supreme Being who controls Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva.
• Narrative Focus: The fundamental differences in their perspectives lead to significant divergences in their narratives. Tulsidas imparts a loftier and more dignified status to the Ram story than is possible for Ravishana.
• Moral Depiction: Tulsidas adheres to moral codes and propriety. Ravishana, at times, presents situations that can evoke sensuality.
• Character Details:
  • In "Padmapuran," Rama's name is also Padma. Ravishana's Rama is a ruler with many queens and is swayed by emotions, contrasting with Tulsidas's Rama who is devoted to a single wife, ascetic, and overcomes passions.
  • In "Padmapuran," women of the hermitage become intoxicated upon seeing Rama and Lakshmana, whereas village women in "Manas" exhibit shyness.
  • Ravana's Demise: In "Padmapuran," Ravana is killed by Lakshmana, not Rama. This is due to the Jain belief that a "Pratinarayan" (anti-Narayan) is killed by a "Narayan," not a "Baldev." In this context, Rama is a Baldev, Lakshmana is a Narayan, and Ravana is a Pratinarayan. This leads to Rama's character appearing somewhat subdued in comparison to Lakshmana in the Jain text.
  • Actions like cutting Shurpanakha's nose or secretly killing Vali, which are performed by Tulsidas's Rama, are explicitly avoided by Ravishana's Rama, thus preventing later criticism.
  • The episode of Sita's trial by fire, which appears later in "Manas," is not further developed in "Padmapuran."
  • Ravishana's Rama ultimately becomes a "Kevali" (one with omniscience), while Tulsidas's Rama's end is not included in the narrative's scope.
  • Several characters prominent in Tulsidas's "Ramkatha," such as Manthara, Shabari, Anasuya, Sampati, Vasishtha, Vishvamitra, Shiva, Nishada, Kakabhushundi, and Sulochana, are rendered insignificant by Ravishana.
• Verse Count and Innovation: "Padmapuran" uses more than double the number of verses found in "Manas." Ravishana also created some original verses.
• Cultural Representation: "Padmapuran" offers a realistic depiction of India's socio-cultural fabric, while "Manas" presents an idealized vision.

Influence:

The author suggests that Tulsidas might have consulted "Padmapuran," citing the line "Nanapurāṇanigamasammataṁ yadrāmāyaṇe nigaditaṁ kvacidanyato'pi" (Whatever is narrated in the Ramayana that is agreed upon by various Puranas and scriptures, or even from other sources). While it's uncertain if Ravishana directly influenced Tulsidas, it's possible that Tulsidas, through his acquaintance with the Jain poet Banarasidas, may have heard or read certain pronouncements from "Padmapuran." However, the article concludes that there is no discernible influence of Jainism on Tulsidas.