Prachin Bharat Varshnu Sinhavlokan

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Prachin Bharat Varshnu Sinhavlokan" by Acharya Vijayendrasuri, based on the provided pages:

Title: Prachin Bharat Varshnu Sinhavlokan (A Lion's Gaze upon Ancient India) Author: Acharya Shri Vijayendrasuri Publisher: Shree Yashovijay Granthmala Publication Year: VS 1993 / AD 1937

Overall Purpose: This book is a critical review and detailed refutation of certain historical claims made in Dr. Tribhuvandas L. Shah's book, "Prachin Bharat Varshno Pratham Bhag" (The First Part of Ancient India). Acharya Vijayendrasuri, a respected scholar and spiritual leader, undertakes a thorough investigation of historical facts, seeking to present an accurate and evidence-based account of ancient Indian history, particularly as it pertains to Jainism and its tradition. The author emphasizes the importance of rigorous scholarship, neutrality, and adherence to factual evidence in historical writing, criticizing what he perceives as distortions and unsubstantiated claims in the earlier work.

Key Themes and Arguments:

1. Critique of "Prachin Bharat Varsh": The book's primary purpose is to address what Acharya Vijayendrasuri identifies as significant historical inaccuracies and unsubstantiated interpretations in Dr. Tribhuvandas Shah's book. He aims to correct these errors, providing counter-arguments and supporting them with extensive evidence from Jain scriptures, historical texts, inscriptions, geographical data, and the works of various scholars (both Indian and Western).

2. Importance of Evidence-Based History: Acharya Vijayendrasuri consistently stresses that history should be built upon solid evidence, facts, and logical reasoning, rather than mere imagination, speculation, or preconceived notions. He criticizes the tendency to force facts to fit a narrative or to ignore contradictory evidence.

3. Revisiting Specific Historical Points: The book delves into numerous specific historical debates and claims, including:

   • Maharaja Kharvel's Religious Affiliation: The author strongly refutes the claim that Maharaja Kharvel was an Ājīvika follower, presenting extensive evidence from inscriptions and historical texts that indicate he was a devout Jain and an opponent of the Ājīvikas.
   • The Age of Muni Mank: The author corrects the claim regarding Muni Mank's age at the time of his death, citing Jain scriptures like the Dashavaikālika Sūtra to establish a more accurate age.
   • The Grammarians Śākaṭāyana and Kātyāyana: The author clarifies the identities and timelines of these prominent grammarians, arguing that they are distinct individuals and refuting the suggestion that they are corruptions of each other. He highlights that Pāṇini, a renowned grammarian, referenced Śākaṭāyana, placing him before Pāṇini.
   • Pāṇini's Birthplace and Identity: The author corrects the geographical and identity claims regarding Pāṇini, stating his birthplace was in Northwest Gandhara (specifically Shālatura) and refuting the idea that he was of Āryan descent or had Jain affiliations based on flawed interpretations.
   • Champa and Anga: The author corrects the geographical location of Champa and Anga, firmly establishing them in Eastern India (Bengal) on the banks of the Ganges, contrary to the claims of placing them in Central India near Rūpnāth. He criticizes the mixing of ancient and modern Champa and the conflation of different historical periods.
   • Jambhīyagrāma and Ṛjuvālukā River: The author refutes the identification of Bhārhat with Jambhīyagrāma and the Son river with Ṛjuvālukā, emphasizing the geographical and historical accuracy of Jambhīyagrāma being near Pāvāpurī in Eastern India and on the Ṛjuvālukā river, where Lord Mahāvīr attained Kevala Jñāna.
   • Pāvāpurī's Location: The author strongly asserts that the true Pāvāpurī, the nirvana site of Lord Mahāvīr, is located near Behar in Eastern India, and not at Sanchi or Sachor in Western India as suggested in the earlier book. He meticulously refutes the etymological and geographical arguments made to connect these locations.
   • Ayodhyā vs. Āyuddhā: The author clarifies the distinction between Ayodhyā and the Āyuddhā tribe, asserting that they are separate entities and refuting the claim that Ayodhyā is an Apabhraṁśa of Āyuddhā or a name for Ujjain.
   • Vajrabhūmi: The author corrects the identification of Vajrabhūmi, stating it was a region within the Laṭha (Radha) country in Bengal, not a mountainous region in the Himalayas north of Śrāvasti. He criticizes the misinterpretation of the term "Vajra" (meaning strong or perverse) as necessarily indicating an "Ārya" region.
   • Udayin (Magadh King) vs. Udayana (Vatsa King): The author clarifies the distinction between these two historical figures, refuting the claims that Udayin died without an heir and that his actions were attributed to Udayana. He presents evidence from Jain and Puranic traditions that Udayin was succeeded by his sons, while Udayana had sons but died differently, and importantly, that the accounts of Udayin's death and succession are presented confusingly and inaccurately in the criticized book.
   • Śrīchakravarti's Guru: The author corrects the claim that Śrīyak's guru was Śayyambhava Sūri, stating that it was Sambhūti Vijaya Āchārya, as supported by Jain traditions and the order of succession of āchāryas. He also highlights inconsistencies in dating.
   • Vāhīkula vs. Vāhīkula: The author points out the error in using "Vāhīkula" instead of "Vāhīkula," citing authoritative texts to establish the correct term referring to a specific tribe or region.
   • Chorvād and Śauri-pura: The author firmly refutes the attempt to equate Chorvād (near Veraval) with Śauri-pura, providing evidence that Śauri-pura was located on the Yamuna river, associated with Krishna's lineage, and distinct from the western region of Saurashtra.
   • King Prasenjit and King Pradeshi: The author establishes that these are distinct individuals, with Prasenajit being a contemporary of Buddha and ruler of Kosala, while Pradeshi was a king associated with Śrāvasti and a devotee of Keshī Āchārya. He criticizes the conflation of names and identities.
   • Kanakkhala Tapasa: The author clarifies that Kanakhala refers to an Āśrama (hermitage) and not a Tapasa (ascetic), refuting the misinterpretation found in the criticized book. He also corrects the geographical location, stating it is on the way to Śrāvasti, not Ayodhya.
   • Mahavira and Buddha's Marriage Age: The author corrects the claim of their marriage at a young age (13-14 years), citing Jain and Buddhist scriptures that indicate they married in their youth (after 16 years) and highlighting the logical and textual inconsistencies in the earlier book's claims.
   • Śālivana vs. Mūla Granth: The author criticizes the reliance on translations and the neglect of original texts, which leads to significant errors.
   • Inconsistencies and Contradictions: Throughout the book, the author points out numerous instances where Dr. Shah's work contains internal contradictions, misinterpretations of evidence, and unsupported assertions.
   • Misuse of Authorities: Acharya Vijayendrasuri accuses Dr. Shah of selectively quoting authorities, misinterpreting their statements, and even distorting the meaning of original texts to support his own theories.
   • "Doctor-Shahi" History: The author labels the work as "Doctor-Shahi Itihas" (History written by a Doctor), implying a lack of proper historical methodology and a reliance on conjecture rather than scholarly research.

4. Upholding Jain Tradition and Scholarship: A significant underlying motive for Acharya Vijayendrasuri is to defend the integrity of Jain scholarship and historical tradition. He argues that inaccuracies in presenting Jain history could undermine the credibility of Jain historians and scriptures in the eyes of future generations and the wider academic world.

5. Call for Accurate Historical Writing: The book serves as a broader appeal for rigorous and honest historical research, emphasizing the responsibility of historians to present facts clearly and impartially, without personal bias or speculative interpretation.

Structure of the Book: The book is structured as a point-by-point critique of the claims made in "Prachin Bharat Varsh." Each chapter or section addresses a specific historical issue, presenting the claim from the criticized book and then meticulously dissecting it with counter-arguments, scriptural references, historical evidence, and scholarly citations. A substantial bibliography listing numerous books (in English, Sanskrit, Prakrit, Pali, Hindi, and Bengali) demonstrates the author's extensive research.

Conclusion: "Prachin Bharat Varshnu Sinhavlokan" is a scholarly and detailed rebuttal that aims to rectify historical errors concerning ancient India, particularly regarding Jain history and traditions. It stands as a testament to the importance of critical inquiry, adherence to evidence, and the defense of scholarly integrity in historical studies. The author's deep respect for Jain scriptures and his commitment to truth are evident throughout the work.