Ramagiri In Jaina Literature

This document, "Ramagiri in Jaina Literature" by V. V. Mirashi, delves into the historical and literary context of the location known as Ramagiri, focusing on its representation within Jain texts. The author engages with a scholarly debate surrounding the identification of Kalidasa's Ramagiri from the Meghaduta.

Here's a summary of the key points:

• The Scholarly Debate: The article begins by acknowledging the controversy regarding the location of Kalidasa's Ramagiri. Early suggestions by Prof. H. H. Wilson identified it with Ramtek (north of Nagpur), but his reasoning was not fully substantiated and some other identifications were questionable. Prof. K. B. Pathak initially agreed with Ramtek but later proposed Ramgarh in the Central Provinces due to its proximity to Amrakuta (Amarakantak). Mirashi states his own earlier work favored Ramtek, and he has since refuted arguments for Ramgarh, deeming them fallacious.

• Jain Literary Evidence - Vimalasuri's Paümacariya: The core of the article shifts to the evidence from Jain literature, starting with Vimalasuri's Paümacariya (also known as Padmacarita).

  • Date of the Work: Mirashi discusses the uncertain dating of Paümacariya. While an internal statement suggests completion in 530 years after Mahavira's nirvana, this is not widely accepted by scholars. The presence of terms like "dinara" and "lagna" suggests a later date, with Dr. Jacobi placing Vimalasuri in the 3rd century AD. Nevertheless, it is considered the oldest extant Prakrit kāvya.
  • Jain Interpretation of the Ramayana: Vimalasuri's work retells the Ramayana story with significant Jain adaptations. He omits or reinterprets elements considered fantastic by Jain standards, such as monkeys being Vidyādharas and Ravana's ten heads being a visual illusion.
  • Description of Ramagiri in Paümacariya: Vimalasuri describes Rama, Lakshmana, and Sita reaching a place called Vamsasthapura. They chose to stay on an adjacent hill, Vasagiri. This hill is described as lush with various trees, birdsong, fragrant breezes, and clear streams. The prince of Vamsasthapura provided for them, and at Rama's request, erected numerous shrines to the Jinendras (Jain Tirthankaras).
  • Origin of the Name Ramagiri: Crucially, Vimalasuri states that the hill became known as Ramagiri because Rama had excellent and brilliant temples of the Jinendras erected there.

• Connecting Jain Evidence to Ramtek: Mirashi argues that Vimalasuri's description of Ramagiri as a hill north of Dandakaranya aligns geographically with Ramtek.

  • Tradition of Sambhuka: He points to the tradition at Ramtek of the Sudra ascetic Sambhuka being beheaded by Rama. An inscription from the Yadava period on the hill mentions this, with the ascetic's name slightly altered.
  • Bhavabhuti's Uttararamacarita: Bhavabhuti's work is cited to describe Dandakaranya as stretching southward from Sambhuka's hermitage, further supporting the Ramtek identification.
  • Fourth-Century Evidence: Mirashi highlights the Rddhapur plates of Vakataka queen Prabhāvatīguptā, dating from the 4th century AD, which mention a grant made near the pādukās (footprints) of Ramagirisvamin (Rama). This directly links the name Ramagiri to Ramtek in that period.
  • Kalidasa's Account: Kalidasa's description of the pādukās of Raghupati (Rama) on Ramagiri is also cited as consistent with Ramtek. Mirashi further suggests Kalidasa may have sojourned in the nearby Vakataka capital, Nandivardhana.

• Vimalasuri's Account and Historical Accuracy: While Vimalasuri's geographical placement of Ramagiri (north of Dandakaranya) appears to reflect a known tradition about Ramtek, Mirashi notes that the claim about Rama erecting Jain temples on the hill might be more imaginative. However, he counters that while no such temples remain on Ramtek hill itself, a large statue of Shantinatha was found in the vicinity and installed in a new temple, alongside images of Parshvanatha and Candraprabha. This indicates a Jain presence and sacredness associated with the area.

• Conclusion on Ramgarh: The article concludes by emphasizing that Vimalasuri's description definitively argues against identifying Kalidasa's Ramagiri with Ramgarh. The reasons given are the lack of any Jain temple remains or vestiges in the vicinity of Ramgarh and the absence of evidence that Ramgarh lay north of the ancient Dandakaranya.

In essence, Mirashi utilizes Jain literature, particularly Vimalasuri's Paümacariya, to strongly support the identification of Kalidasa's Ramagiri with Ramtek, arguing that Jain traditions and textual evidence corroborate this location, while also offering a unique Jain perspective on the Ramayana narrative.