REJECTING AND APPROPRIATING EPIC LORE

Eva De Clercq and Tine Vekemans

For most of its existence, Jainism was and continues to be the religion of a minority. The Jains
manifestly recognized the reality of South Asia’s diverse and multicultural environments
throughout history, and chose to project themselves as active and critical participants of the
broader interreligious discourses going on at various times and in various places. In the first
centuries of the common era, popular Hinduism - Śaivism and especially Vaiṣṇavism with its
daśāvatāra doctrine -, inbedded in a vast corpus of highly popular and authoritative legends,
myths and narratives, collected in the hindu Purā as, Mahābhārata and Rāmāya a, became
the dominant religious tradition.1 Rather than denying this material, Jainism opted for a
strategy of transforming and absorbing much of it into its own ideology.2 In addressing this
issue, this paper looks at two distinct, yet to a degree overlapping, categories of Jain texts,
focussing on how they deal with the Brahminical epics in particular, as reflections of certain
developments within the Jain tradition in dialogue with Brahminical traditions. To the first
category belongs a corpus of texts of which the main purpose is to reject of the traditions of
popular belief (laukika) or heresy (mithyātva) from the Mahābhārata, Rāmāya a and the
Purā as. The second category consists of the Jain purā as which transformed and
appropriated these beliefs into the Jain view of history. Comparing these texts and the
particular episodes which the Jain authors reject, will clarify to what degree there existed a
common and coherent Jain canon of such rejections, on the one hand, and of adaptations on
the other.

AGAINST POPULAR BELIEF AND HERESY

Among the first catergory of texts under discussion, I count the Dhūrtākhyānas, “Rogue
stories” and the Dharmaparīk ās, “Examinations of religion”. Dhūrtākhyānas narrate the
story of a gathering of rogues, who engage in a challenge whereby the leader of each group of
rogues gives a whimsical account from his life, which the others must prove to be true by

1
The Sanskrit epics were originally non religious compositions, belonging more to the k atriya sphere, but were
both subjected to brahmanical redactions, turning them into narratives of brahmin hegemony. On the
brahmanization of the Mahābhārata and Rāmāya a, see Brockington 1998: 20-21, 155-156, 470-471.
2
An overview of Jain approaches to other traditions on various fields is given in Qvarnström 1998
justifying it with events described in the Rāmāya a, Mahābhārata and the Purā as.3 He or
she who is incapable of justifying the story of the other, will have to arrange for a meal for the
entire rogue community present. The oldest of such rogue stories is found in the
Nisīhavisesacu i, composed by Jinadāsa Mahattara in the seventh century at the latest, a
prose commentary on the Nisīhabhāsa. The Nisīhabhāsa (6th c. at the latest), itself a
commentary on the Nisīhasutta, the fourth Chedasūtra of the Śvetāmbara canon, in three
verses (294-296) gives a very condensed account of the rogue stories in the form of a list of
keywords4. These verses serve as an illustration of the rule prohibiting on emitting popular
lies (loiya musāvāya, Sanskrit: laukika m" āvāda).5 The Nisīhavisesacu i refers to an older,
existing Dhuttakkhā a, which according to Krümpelmann (2000: 24-25) is a lost versified
version. Krümpelmann argues that this lost version also formed the basis for the most
renowned Dhūrtākhyāna, composed by Haribhadrasūri (8th c.).6 Haribhadrasūri’s composition
presents an greatly enlarged rogue account very similar to the one in the Nisīhavisesacu i.7
Significantly, the aim of Haribhadra’s composition is different from the Nisīhavisesacu i.
Whereas the Nisīhasutta and accompanying bhāsa and cu i deal with monastic rules and
prohibitions, Haribhadra’s story is directed towards the Jain lay community, who as a
religious minority were by his time beset by the overwhelmingly popular Hindu purā ic
stories, and even towards the followers of these popular beliefs, in order to convert them to
the Jain side (Osier and Balbir 2004: 50, Krümpelmann 2000: 60-62, Upadhye 1983: 256).
The number of brahmanical legends mentioned by Haribhadra (48), is far greater than the
Nisīhavisesacu i (12).8 Muni Jinavijaya, the editor of Haribhadrasūri’s Dhūrtākhyāna,
supplements Haribhadra’s text with two additional Dhūrtākhyānas: the first is a Sanskrit

3
The Dhūrtākhyāna tradition was thoroughly analyzed by Kornelius Krümpelmann (2000) and Jean-Pierre Osier
(2005: 41-200). See also J.P. Osier and N. Balbir (2004: 7-62) and A.N. Upadhye’s introductory essay “The
Dhūrtākhyāna: a critical study” to Jina Vijaya’s edition (1944: 1-56)
4
Upadhye (1983: 252) uses the term “clue word”. The use of such keywords is quite common in the Jain literary
genre of niryukti (See Balbir 1993: 51-52).
5
The account of the Nisīhavisesacu i portrays a gathering of four groups of five hundred rogues, the leaders of
whom (one woman and three men) tell the whimsical stories. The account given in the cu i is incomplete,
referring to the other Dhuttakkhā a for the remainder of the story (See Krümpelmann 2000: 21-51, Osier 2005:
42-89).
6
Krümpelmann (2000: 26-32) further claims that the Nisīhabhāsa verses are themselves based on an even older
lost prose account (pre 6th c.) of rogues tricking each other by telling fanciful stories, without the refutations of
brahminical myths. The justifications through brahminical myths were first introduced in the lost versified
Dhūrtākhyāna, which had also taken the prose account as its basis.
7
Haribhadra’s Dhūrtākhyāna has five rogue leaders (four men, one woman) narrating stories, and thus one
additional fanciful story told (See Osier 2005: 91-147, Balbir and Osier 2004: 63-70, Krümpelmann 2000: 59-63,
Upadhye in Jina Vijaya 1944: 2-12).
Krümpelmann (2000) provides a German translation of the Nisīhabhāsa verses, the corresponding part of the
Nisīhavisesacu i and Haribhadra’s Dhūrtākhyāna. Haribhadra’s text was also translated into French by Osier
and Balbir (2004).
8
This is according to Krümpelmann’s count (2000: 60). The number 48 excludes the list of names, without
stories, given at the very end of Haribhadra’s composition (5.114-118).
retelling by SaLghatilaka (14th c.), the second an anonymous bālāvabodha, a simplified
translation or parafrase in Old-Gujarati, called Dhūrtākhyānaka (pre-17th c.). Both are very
close to Haribhadra’s text (Krümpelmann 2000: 215-227, Upadhye in Jinavijaya 1944: 36-
31). The Jinaratnakośa (Velankar 1944: 198-199) in addition mentions a Dhūrtacaritrakathā
without further information, and a Dhūrtakathā believed to be a Hindi rendering. 9
Dharmaparīk ās were originally composed solely by Digambara authors. The oldest available
version is the Apabhraṃśa Dhammaparikkhā by Hariṣeṇa (988), who claims he composed his
work after an older Dharmaparīk ā in gāthās (i.e. in Prākrit) by one Jayarāma. To date the
work of Jayarāma has not been found. The most famous and influential is Amitagati’s
Dharmaparīk ā in Sanskrit, completed in 1014 and also probably based in Jayarāma’s
original. At least from the fifteenth century, Śvetāmbaras too began composing
Dharmaparīk ās, such as the one by Padmasāgara (1589), which has been identified as a
plagiarism of Amitagati’s composition.10 Amitagati’s version was considered authoritative by
later authors. Compared to the more generic setting of a gathering of hungry rogues in the
Dhūrtākhyāna, the Dharmaparīk ā’s narrative setting connects it with other Jain narrative
literature. The protagonists are two Vidyādharas, vidyā or genie possessing humans with the
ability to fly, well-known from accounts of the Jain Universal History. One of the
Vidyādharas is a Jain, the other has been “touched by the poison of wretched heresy”
(duranta-mithyātva-viṣāvalīḍho, 1.50). At the instruction of a Jain monk, the Jain Vidyādhara,
Manovega, takes his friend, Pavanavega, to Pāṭaliputra, a city where brahmins dominate, to
facilitate his release from mithyātva, that is, bring about his conversion to Jainism. In
Pāṭaliputra Manovega engages in discussions with Brahmins, making up incredible stories
about his life. When the Brahmins do not believe him, he justifies them by refering to parallell
episodes from the epics and purā as. These discussions are followed by didactic passages on

9
Velankar’s source for the entry Dhūrtacaritrakathā, the manuscript catalogue Jain Granthāvali (Śrī Jain
Śvetāmbar Konfarans 1908: 254) mentions the number of folios as 19, and that the manuscript is kept in the
Cañcalvāno Bhaṇḍār in Ahmedabad.
Note that Velankar’s source for the entry Dhūrtakathā is a list of manuscripts from the Digambar Bhandar at
Idar, which would make this text a unique Digambara Dhūrtākhyāna. With this exception, the Dhūrtākhyāna
traditions appears to be an exclusively Śvetāmbara affair.
10
A brief overview and discussion of various Dharmaparīk ā texts is given in Upadhye 1942. Aside from the
Dharmaparīk ās of Hariṣeṇa, Jayarāma, Amitagati and Padmasāgara, Upadhye mentions a Kannada version by
Vṛttavilāsa (ca. 1160) which closely follows Amitagati, a Sanskrit version by Saubhāgyasāgara (1515), one by
Mānavijayagaṇi (18th c.,), by Yaśovijaya (17th c.), by Jinamaṇḍana, Pārśvakīrti and by Rāmacandra. Of the last
five, admittedly, the exact content is unknown. In addition Velankar (1944: 189-190) mentions works named
Dharmaparīk ā by Devasena, Nayavijaya, and several anonymous manuscripts in his Jinaratnakośa.
Amitagati’s Dharmaparīk ā was examined thoroughly by Mironov (1903) and Osier (2005: 203-317), who also
includes a study of the Apabhraṃśa text of Hariṣeṇa, and compares it extensively to the Dhūrtākhyāna tradition,
with which it shares many of the incredible stories. Upadhye also briefly compares it with the Dhūrtākhyāna (in
Jinavijaya 1944: 41-49). References in this paper are to Amitagati’s text. Hariṣeṇa and the later authors appear to
follow Amitagati’s account with regard to the narrative and refutations of epic and purā ic material.
the Jain doctrine, after which Pavanavega accepts the vows of a Jain householder. In the
Dhūrtākhyānas, there are no Brahmins taking an active role, and the refutations are more
implicit and suggestive without too much explicit Jain preachings, whereas in the
Dharmaparīk ā Manovega, after he has won a discussion on an issue with the Brahmins,
instructs Pavanavega in the alternative, “true” Jain version of the narrated events, in reality
giving in brief the accounts from the Jain purā as on these issues, supplemented with
expositions on the Jain doctrine (Upadhye 1942: 607). The Dharmaparīk ās not only reject,
but themselves also appropriate the epics and Purā as, whereas the Dhūrthakhyānas do not.
In fact, when reading a Dhūrtākhyāna, one is not made aware that there effectively exists a
Jain alternative to these stories. This absorption of epic and purā ic material in the
Dharmaparīk ā may explain why this tradition in the end became the more succesful,
especially in the centuries after Haribhadra, when the power and influence of the epics and
Purā as and the gods of which they narrate, only increased in South Asia.

JAIN PURĀ AS

Another reaction to the rise of purā ic Hinduism was the development of a Jain counter
tradition of texts called purā as (Jaini 1993). Sometimes alternatively termed caritas, these
are compositions concerning the so-called Jain Universal History, narrating the lives of the
Śalākā-puruṣas or Mahā-puruṣas, “great men”. Aside from biographies of more distinctly Jain
heroes, the TīrthaLkaras and Cakravartins, the Jain purā ic text corpus includes Jain versions
of the Rāmāya a and Mahābhārata/Hariva(śa, thus absorbing the current of popular belief
of the epics and Purā as.11 Characters such as Rāma, Lakṣmaṇa, Rāvaṇa, Kṛṣṇa, Balarāma
and Jarāsaṃdha are here transformed into Jain Mahā-puruṣas. To this day, the oldest available
Jain purā a is a Jain Rāmāya a, the Paümacariya (in Prakrit) by the Śvetāmbara Vimalasūri
(5th c. at the latest). Vimalasūri’s account was expanded by the Digambara Raviṣeṇa in his
Padmapurā a (678). Svayambhūdeva’s Paümacariu (9th-10th c.) is an Apabhraṃśa version
which closely follows the two previous texts.12 A different Jain account of the Rāma story is
found in Guṇabhadra’s Uttarapurā a (9th c.), which together with Jinasena’s Ādipurā a
forms a mahāpurā a, a purā a narrating the lives of all the 63 Mahā-puruṣas, that is, the Jain
Universal History in its entirety. Guṇabhadra’s narrative is followed by Puṣpadanta in his
11
By Mahābhārata/Hariva(śa I refer to texts dealing with the story of the Kauravas and the Pāṇḍavas (the
Mahābhārata proper) and the life story of Kṛṣṇa (as narrated especially in the Hariva(śaparvan, the final book
of the Mahābhārata). For discussions on the relationship between the Mahābhārata and the Hariva(śa, see
Brockington 1998: 313-314.
12
For an overview of Jain Rāma stories, see Kulkarni 1990.
Apabhraṃśa Mahāpurā u (10th c.). The Rāma accounts of Vimalasūri, Raviṣeṇa,
Svayambhūdeva and Puṣpadanta have in common a dialogue in their narrative setting, the
samavasara a of Mahāvīra, where king Śreṇika and the Gaṇadhara Indrabhūti Gautama
discuss and reject “false” accounts of the Rāma story. Śreṇika utters his doubt over stories he
has heard about a particular character or event and invites Gautama to narrate the facts
according to the Jain view. In these refutations these Jain Rāmāya as overlap with the
Dhūrtākhyānas and Dharmaparīk ās.13 A few Jain Mahābhāratas/Hariva(śas contain a
similar passage in their narrative setting, most importantly the Ri,,ha emicariu in
Apabhraṃśa by Svayambhūdeva, author of the Paümacariu, the Pā -avapurā a of the
Digambara Śubhacandra (1552) and the Pā -avapurā a of the Digambara author Vādicandra
(1598). More renowned Jain Mahābhāratas/Hariva(śa texts, such as the Hariva(śapurā a
of Jinasena Punnāṭa (783), do not contain such a passage, nor do mahāpurā as such as
Hemacandra’s Tri a ,iśalākāpuru acarita (12th c.), Guṇabhadra’s Uttarapurā a, or ŚīlāLka’s
Caüppa amahāpurisacariya (9th c.) in their accounts of the Mahābhārata or of the
Rāmāya a.14

THE REFUTATIONS15

1. Against the Rāmāya a

Table 1 provides a list of the refutations in the Jain versions of the Rāmāya a and those of the
Dhūrtākhyāna and Amitagati’s Dharmaparīk ā.

13
Note that Guṇabhadra’s Rāma story does not contain such a passage, nor do any of the other Jain Rāma stories
discussed in Kulkarni’s overview (1990).
14
Some Pā -avapurā as are discussed in Jaini 1984.
For an overview of different Jain Mahābhārata/Hariva(śa accounts, see De Clercq 2008.
15
Entries in italic represent legends and myths that could not be retraced in current editions of the epics and
Purā as.
Some of the refutations mentioned in the Dhūrtākhyāna and Dharmaparīk ā without specific reference,
particularly those not pertaining to the kernel of the epic narrative, may be found in either or both epics, as well
as one or several Purā as or even older Vedic texts.
For discussions on the sources of the refutations, cf. Upadhye’s introductory essay in Jina Vijaya’s edition
(1944: 25-36), Krümpelmann 2000: 72-213, Osier & Balbir 2004: 113-163 and Mironov 1903: 26-38.
Vimalasūri’s Ravi/e a’s Svayambhūdeva’ Pu/padanta’s Dhūrtākhyāna16 Amitagati’s
Paümacariyam Padmapurā a s Paümacariu Mahāpurā u Dharmaparīk"ā
(2.104-117, 3.8- (2.228-237, (1.9.9-10.9) (69.3.2-12)
12) 2.242-249)
Characterization Characterization Characterization Characterization Characterization of
of the Rākṣasas of the Rākṣasas of the Rākṣasas of the Rākṣasas the Rākṣasas (16.11;
16.95)
Characterization Characterization Characterization Characterization Characterization of
of the Vānaras of the Vānaras of the Vānaras of the Vānaras the Vānaras (16.11-
14; 15.97)
Rāvaṇa Rāvaṇa Rāvaṇa Rāvaṇa overthrows
overthrows Indra overthrows Indra overthrows Indra Indra (16.100-103)
Kumbhakarṇa Kumbhakarṇa Kumbhakarṇa’s Kumbhakarṇa’s Kumbhakarṇa drinks Characterization of
sleeps for six sleeps for six characterization characterization 1000 pitchers of Kumbhakarṇa
months months wine and eats men (16.95)
(4.25-26)
Rāma kills a Rāma kills a Golden deer episode
golden deer golden deer (15.95)
Rāma kills Vālin Rāma kills Vālin Rāma kills Vālin Rāma kills Vālin
(15.97)
Monkeys build a Monkeys build a Monkeys build a Monkeys build a Monkeys build a
dam dam dam dam (4.89-90) dam (15.98; 16.1)
Tortoise carries
the world
three worlds in ~ universe in a world in Rāma’s
Rāma’s belly boy’s/Kṛṣṇa’s belly; belly (10.25)
Kṛṣṇa’s all-
pervasiveness (2.31-
4117; 5.112-113)
Rāma fights with Rāma kills Triśiras,
Khara and Dūṣaṇa Khara, etc. (15.95)
Rāvaṇa has ten Rāvaṇa has ten Rāvaṇa sacrifices his
heads heads; is a Śaiva heads to Śiva (16.47-
53)
Vibhīṣaṇa takes
Mandodarī as his
wife
Indrajit is older Mandodarī is born
than his father from a frog, becomes
pregnant with her
father’s semen and,
after 7000 years,
gives birth to
Indrajit, after
marrying Rāva a
(14.68-78)
Rāma kills Rāma kills Rāvaṇa,
Rāvaṇa who had a boon from
Śiva (16.13-15)
Vibhīṣaṇa is
immortal
monkey Hanumān monkey Hanumān is
crosses the ocean sent as a messenger
(1.85-88)* to Sītā in LaLkā
(15.97-98)
Jaṭāyu is big as a
mountain, his wings

16
References are to Haribhadra’s Dhūrtākhyāna. Entries marked with an asterisk (*) are also found in the
Nisīhavisesacu i.
The following episodes mentioned by the Dhūrtākhyāna are, as far as I could ascertain, not attested in the epics,
and appear unrelated to them: 1. the incredible size of Śiva’s li7ga (1.39-40, 5.59, f.i. in Vāyupurā a; also
mentioned in Dharmaparīk ā 17.80), 2. a drum made from a bean plant (4.18, no other sources), 3. Gaṇeśa’s
birth (5.114), and 4. Pārvatī’s birth (5.117). The first two myths are also mentioned in the Nisīhavisesacu i.
17
Note that Haribhadra names the Āra yakaparvan of the Mahābhārata as the source of this account.
 restored when met
by Hanumān in his
search for Sītā
(2.62-74)
Hanumān pieced
together, after being
broken to pieces
when he attempts to
eat the sun (3.38-44)
Hanumān brings Hanumān pieces
Mount Droṇa with A7gada together
wound-healing (16.80)
herbs, to piece slain
monkeys back
together and heal
Lakṣmaṇa (3.46-52,
3.92-95)
Hanumān roots out
trees in the park
(4.91-93)
Hanumān is the son
of the god Vāyu
(5.11)
Indra and Ahalyā Indra and Ahalyā
(5.33-36) (11.61-63; 12.23)
The long tail of
Hanumān, sets fire
to LaLkā (5.60-63)*
Rāma, a god, is
captured by Indrajit
(13.47)
Rāma, a god, suffers
from being separated
from Sītā. Though
he is everywhere, he
does not know
where she is (10.25;
13.48)
Brahman is the
father of Jāmbava
(Jāmbavān) (11.59)
Birth of Bhagīratha
from two women
(14.56)
Story of
Dadhimukha (16.59-
78)
Śiva carries the Śiva marries GaLgā
GaLgā in his hair (11.23)
(1.52, 1.89-92,
4.28)*
Jahnu drinks the
GaLgā (4.28-29)
Viṣṇu created the
Dānavas and then
killed them (10.43)

The four Jain Rāmāya a versions follow the trend of the Dhūrtākhyāna and Dharmaparīk ā
by attributing these episodes to “popular scripture” (loya-satthe in Vimalasūri 2.102, laukike
granthe in Raviṣeṇa 2.231), “preachers of bad teachings” (kusattha-vādi in Vimalasūri 3.8),
“followers of bad ideologies” (kumatānuga in Raviṣeṇa 3.17) and the more neutral “teachings
of others” (para-sāsa a in Svayambhūdeva 1.1.9). Uniquely Puṣpadanta explicitely refers to
“the words of Vālmīki and Vyāsa” (vammīya-vāsa-vaya a, 69.3.11) as the sources of these
episodes, as well as the “pit of bad traditions” (kummaggakūva, 69.3.11). Vimalasūri,
Raviṣeṇa and Svayambhūdeva give an almost identical account of the Rāma story, so too in
their refutations. All the rejected episodes which they have in common, can be easily retrieved
in current editions of Vālmīki’s Rāmāya a, and are more or less central to the most
significant difference between the Brahminical and Jain version of the story, namely the
characterization of the Rākṣasas and the Vānaras. According to the Jain view they are not
demons and monkeys, but humans, Vidyādharas, with special abilities.18 Of these three
authors, Svayambhū includes some extra episodes, again known elements from the Vālmīki-
Rāmāya a, though he does not limit himself to the non-religious kernel of the story, rejecting
the idea of Rāma (as Viṣṇu) holding the world in his belly, an element also found in the
Dhūrtākhyāna and Dharmaparīk ā, and the notion of the earth being carried by a tortoise.19
Puṣpadanta, on the other hand, includes new elements, some which are not or barely present
in Vālmīki’s text, such as the claim that Rāvaṇa as a Śaiva, which in the Vālmīki-Rāmāya a is
a late addition (7.31.38-40), and is more profusely described in other sources such as the
Skandapurā a, Kṣemendra’s Daśāvatāracarita, Padmapurā a and Kālidāsa’s Raghuva(śa
(Bulke 1971: 635, 642-643). Furthermore, he rejects a somewhat enigmatic claim that
according to these false sources “Indrajit is older than his father”. What exactly is meant by
this, becomes clear from the parallel in Amitagati’s Dharmaparīk ā about Mandodarī, of
whom it is said that she was born from a frog and accidentally became pregnant by her own
father. Her father, a sage, slowed down her pregnancy for seven thousand years and, only
after she married Rāvaṇa, she gave birth to a son Indrajit. This is probably the result of so-
called folk etymology of her name as manda-udarī, “possessing a slow womb”.
When comparing the Jain Rāmāya as with the Dhūrtākhyāna there appear to be only two
common refutations, namely in the characterization of Kumbhakarṇa, and the dam across the
ocean built by monkeys, again related to the most significant difference with the Brahminical
Rāmāya a accounts, namely in the characterization of the Rākṣasas and Vānaras. Particularly
striking is that many of the Rāmāya a refutations in the Dhūrtākhyāna relate to the character
of Hanumān.20 Most of these episodes are substantiated in the Rāmāya a, except for one,
where Hanumān visits the mountain-like bird Jaṭāyu during his search for Sītā, and Jaṭāyu
18
See Vālmīki’s Rāmāya a f.i. 6.32-86 for a description of the vānaras as monkeys, and 2.108.12, 3.2.13, 3.9.6,
6.48.17 for descriptions of the Rāk asas as demons. References are to the Baroda critical edition.
19
This idea seems to already have existed at the time of the Brāhma as and later developed into the
Kūrmāvatāra (Daniélou 1960: 256).
20
For a discussion, see Osier 2005: 124-126.
reveals Rāvaṇa to be Sītā’s abductor. This appears to be a assimilation of the character of
Jaṭāyu with the account of his brother Sampāti in the Vālmīki-Rāmāya a (4.55-62), who
points Hanumān in the direction of LaLkā to find Sītā. The Dharmaparīk ā does not share the
Dhūrtākhyāna’s focus on Hanumān, and has more elements in common with all or some of
the four Jain Rāma accounts, probably due to the fact that it also includes the Jain alternatives
to the Brahminical stories. Nevertheless, it repeats a few of the rejections exclusive to the
Dhūrtākhyāna, and narrates the peculiar episodes of the birth of Bhagīratha and Dadhimukha,
which are altogether absent from the Vālmīki-Rāmāya a. Despite not giving an alternative
Jain version to these stories, none of the Dhūrtākhyāna’s refutations collide with the Jain
accounts of Vimalasūri and Raviṣeṇa, which both predate Haribhadrasūri. Only
Svayambhūdeva, who lived after Haribhadra, describes how Hanumān uproots the trees in
LaLkā (51.2-8), an episode refuted by the Dhūrtākhyāna. In the Jain version, however,
Hanumān is a Vidyādhara, not a monkey.
What is striking with regard to the Rāmāya a rejections, is that some of the more famous
morally “difficult” episodes are not included in these lists of refutations, such as the
mutilation of Śūrpaṇakhā, Rāma killing the Śūdra Śambūka, his rejection of Sītā, Rāma
killing the brahmin Rāvaṇa, etc.21 Only the killing of Vālin is included by all, except the
Dhūrtākhyāna.22

2. Against the Mahābhārata

Table 2 provides a list of the refutations in the Jain versions of the Mahābhārata/Hariva(śa,
and those of Dhūrtākhyāna and Amitagati’s Dharmaparīk ā.

Svayambhūdeva’s Śubhacandra’s Vadicandra’s Dhūrtākhyāna Amitagati’s

Ri##ha emicariu Pā $avapurā a Pā $avapurā a Dharmaparīk"ā
(1.2.12-1.3.9) (2.30-73) (1.73-163)
Nārāyaṇa (Kṛṣṇa) Kṛṣṇa, a god, served
served Nara (Arjuna) Arjuna as charioteer
as his charioteer and messenger
(10.22-23; 16.103)
Dhṛtarāṣṭra and Pāṇḍu Dhṛtarāṣṭra, Pāṇḍu Dhṛtarāṣṭra, Pāṇḍu Dhṛtarāṣṭra, Pāṇḍu [implied in
were begotten out of and Vidura fathered and Vidura fathered and Vidura fathered rectification] (15.50-
wedlock (?) by Vyāsa from three by Veda-vyāsa from by Vyāsa from three 51)

21
For discussions of these moral issues, see Dubuisson 1986 and the two edited volumes of Paula Richman
(1991 and 2000) for alternative treatments of some of these episodes.
Note that most of these episodes receive a radically different treatment in the Jain texts, compared to Vālmīki’s
version. I examine the mutilation of Śūrpaṇakhā and death of Śambūka elsewhere (De Clercq: forthcoming)
22
I discuss the Vālin episode further below.
adāraja iyā, “created wives of his brothers three widows of his widows of his brother.
without a wife”23 brothers (by (5.14-18)
sight/sexual union)
Kuntī had five Kuntī and Madrī Kuntī and Mādrī Indra’s son with Kuntī begets four
husbands [four beget sons from the beget sons from the Kuntī; sons from the gods
gods+Pāṇḍu] gods gods Bhīmasena son of the (15.11)
wind (5.11, 5.37)
Draupadī married all Draupadī married all Draupadī married all [implied:
five Pāṇḍavas five Pāṇḍavas five Pāṇḍavas impossibility of
woman marrying five
husbands] (15.48)
Bhīṣma (GāLgeya) Bhīṣma born from Bhīṣma cuts of his
could choose his own river GaLgā genitals: that is why
death he is named “the
terrible”.
Born from river
GaLgā
Droṇa dies, even
though invincible
with the bow
Karṇa born of Kuntī’s Karṇa born from Karṇa born from Karṇa born from Karṇa, son of Sūrya
ear Kuntī’s ear, son of Kuntī’s ear, son of Kuntī’s ear by Sūrya (14.91)
Sūrya Sūrya (1.83-84; 5.23)
Kuru-guru (Droṇa) Droṇa born from a
was born from water water pitcher (1.60-
pitcher 61)
Vyāsa born from Veda-vyāsa born from Vyāsa, son of Vyāsa is born from
Matsyagandhā/Yojana Matsyagandhā, Matsyinī/ the sage Pārāsara and
gandhā, daughter of daughter of Śāntana Yojanagandhā could a fisherwoman. As
Śāntana and a fish, and a fish, and speak as soon as he soon as he is born, he
and Pārāśara. Pārāśara. Immediately was born and left his becomes an ascetic.
Immediately became became a hermit after mother. His mother is made a
a hermit after birth, birth, joining his Yojanagandhā virgin again (14.81-
joining his father. father. Matsyagandhā became a virgin 90)
Yojanagandhā later later married Śāntana again, had another son
married Śāntana and and bore his children. with Śāntanu (5.12-
bore his children. 18).
relatives drinking
each other’s blood
Gāndhārī, wife of Gāndhārī, wife of Gāndhārī’s husband Gāndhārī embraces a
Dh"tarā ,ra, gives Dh"tarā ,ra, gives becomes a Kurabaka Panasa tree and gives
birth to 100 Kauravas birth to 100 Kauravas tree (5.64)* birth to a Panasa
after intercourse with after intercourse with fruit, from which 100
100 he-goats/goat- 100 he-goats/goat- sons grow. (14.58-61)
gods gods
Pāṇḍu, a keen hunter,
is cursed by a deer
100 Kīcakas, sons of
Virā,a, born of
bamboo (1.41-51)
The four var as
originating from
Brahmā’s body (1.37-
38). His quarrel with
Viṣṇu about who is
the creator (2.45-50)*
Birth of Brahmā, lotus Brahmā arises from a
stuck to Viṣṇu’s navel lotus stuck to Viṣṇu’s
(1.53-57). His quarrel navel (13.20-36)
with Viṣṇu about who
is the creator (2.42-
50)*
Tilottamā ruins Tilottamā ruins
Brahmā’s austerities Brahmā’s

23
According to the translation of D.K. Jain (1985: 3) this refers to Vyāsa fathering the two with the widows of
his brother Vicitravīrya.
 + Brahmā’s five faces austerities+Brahmā’s
(1.65-72) five faces (11.29-56;
12.22; 13.90)
Birth of
Svedakuṇḍalin and
Raktakuṇḍalin (1.74-
82; 5.116)
The myth of the Brahmā’s semen in
cosmic egg (2.27- water creates an egg,
30)* from which the world
arose (13.79-85)
Keśava, who held the
whole world in his
belly, in Devakī’s
womb; Kṛṣṇa’s all-
pervasiveness (2.40-
44*; 5.112-113)
Vi u, Agni, Nāgas,
etc. settle inside the
bow of Drupada at
Draupadī’s
svaya(vara (2.51-61)
Reṇukā revived (3.21-
25)
Jarāsandha pieced Jarāsandha pieced
together (3.26) together (16.81-85)
Constitution of Constitution of
Tilottamā to kill two Tilottamā (11.34)
demons (3.27-37)
Miraculous birth of Miraculous birth of
Skanda (3.53-86) Skanda (16.87-88)
Rāhu’s head eats the
sun and the moon
(3.87-88)
Viṣṇu covers the story of Vāmana and
universe in three steps Bali (10.24)
(3.89-91)
Viṣṇa as varāha lifts
up the earth (3.96-
97)24
A river of elephant
ichor (4.19-21)25
Bhīma eats food for Bhīma and Baka
ten (4.22-24)
Garuḍa steals am"ta
(4.31-87)
Govardhana lifted by
Kṛṣṇa for seven days
(4.88)
Abhimanyu hears
K" a from inside the
womb (14.66-67)
Arjuna travels to the
underworld (13.7-10)
Agastya drinks the Agastya drinks the
ocean (4.27) ocean (13.18-19)
Birth of Nāgaketu
(14.92-101)
Nahuṣa’s story (5.65-
69)*
Birth of Yādava

24
This episode is lacking in SaLghatilaka’s Sanskrit Dhūrtākhyāna.
25
According to Haribhadrasūri, this concept stems from the Mahābhārata, though neither it nor the Sanskrit
quotation (4.20) given as an illustration can be traced to the Mahābhārata. The quotation is, however, mentioned
by Bhāmaha in his Kāvyāla7kāra (4.37), as an illustration of a do a, “poetic defect”.
 Haladhara (Balarāma)
through Māyā (5.117)
Viṣṇu/Kṛṣṇa, a god,
lusts after 16000
gopīs (11.26), while
Lakṣmī resides in his
chest (12.21)
Viṣṇu/Kṛṣṇa, a god,
lived like a simple
herdsman (10.21-22)
Agni’s amorous affair Agni’s amorous affair
with Yama’s wife and with Yama’s lover
cursing of the Chāyā (11.3-12.10;
elephants (5.25-31). 12.24-25)
Nārāyaṇa has four
arms (13.90)
Śiva has three eyes
(11.22; 13.90)
Śiva gave half his
body to his wife
(11.23; 12.20)
If Brahmā, Śiva and
Viṣṇu appear in one
form (mūrti), how did
Śiva tear off the head
of Brahmā? (13.77)

Compared to the Jain Rāmāya as, the authority of Jain Mahābhāratas/Hariva(śas containing
refutations of the orthodox version is comparatively of a lower order. The oldest and most
famous Jain accounts, such as that of Jinasena Punnāṭa’s Hariva(śapurā a, Guṇabhadra’s
Uttarapurā a, etc., do not contain such a passage. Only in the compositions of
Svayambhūdeva, who already had experience with such a passage in his Jain Rāmāya a, and
of the sixteenth century poets Śubhacandra and Vādicandra do we find such a passage. These
three texts have in common that their narrative focuses heavily on the Mahābhārata material,
i.e. the internecine war between the Pāṇḍavas and the Kauravas, whereby the space and
attention devoted to the other themes of these Jain Mahābhāratas/Hariva(śas, namely the
biographies of Nemi and Kṛṣṇa and the Vasudevahi -i, are reduced considerably.26 Unlike in
the case of the three older Jain Rāmāya as, the contents of these three texts do not correspond
to such a high degree. Śubhacandra and Vādicandra correspond in their refutations, but
Svayambhūdeva’s are somewhat different.
With regard to the sources of these false accounts, Svayambhūdeva speaks in general terms of
“what he has heard perversely among the people (vivareraü suvvaï savvajane 1.3.1)”.
Śubhacandra refers to the story of the Pāṇḍavas “in other śāstra (parakīye śāstre, 2.30)” and
Vādicandra refers directly to the Bhārata (1.74) and often mentions Śaiva texts as his source
(śaiva-śāstra, 1.91; śiva-śāsana, 1.131, 1.156 & 1.162; śiva-purā a, colophon to first canto)
as his source.
26
For a discussion on the different topics of the Jain Mahābhārata/Hariva(śa, see De Clercq 2008.
We can see commonalities between all five texts with regard to rejections directly related to
the kernel of the story and its principal characters, which can generally be traced to the
Mahābhārata as we know it today. To underline Bhīṣma’s fierceness and his vow of celibacy,
Vādicandra inserts a claim that, according to his source, Bhīṣma cut off his genitals, an
episode absent from the Mahābhārata. Moreover, in his and Śubhacandra’s version, Śāntanu
is both not only the husband of Matsyagandhā, but also her father, another element absent
from the Mahābhārata. A curious theme rejected by four authors is the story that Karṇa, the
son of Kuntī and Sūrya, was born from his mother’s ear. This account is not present in the
Mahābhārata and is probably the results of another instance of folk etymology (kar a
meaning “ear”). The birth of the Kīcakas from bamboo is another instance of folk etymology
(kīcaka, “hollow bamboo; Krümpelmann 2000: 81; Osier & Balbir 2004: 119). Four authors
also refer to the circumstances of the conception and birth of the Kauravas, though they differ
in the details: in the Dhūrtākhyāna and Dharmaparīk ā it is the result of Gāndhārī’s
embracing a tree, and Śubhacandra and Vādicandra describe a version where one hundred
sons were engendered by one hundred goats, who later become goat-gods. Again there is no
reference to any of these in the Mahābhārata as we know it, even though one could say that
the episode in the Mahābhārata, with the Kauravas being born from a ball of flesh cut into
one hundred pieces (1.107), is curious enough. Svayambhūdeva, Śubhacandra and Vādicandra
in their refutations stick to the kernel of the story. The Dhūrtākhyāna and Dharmaparīk ā,
however, list a great number of minor episodes, most of which are found in some form in the
Mahābhārata or Hariva(śa as we have it (including *passages). None of the rejections
appear to conflict with the many Jain versions of the Mahābhārata/Hariva(śa, except for
Haribhadrasūri’s refutation of Kṛṣṇa lifting Mount Govardhana for seven days, for, according
to the Jain Hariva(śa stories, Kṛṣṇa, like all Vāsudevas, lifts up the rock Koṭiśilā to
demonstrate his strength. The lifting of this rock is in Jain stories no mean feat, since it is said
to measure one yojana in height, width and depth.27

A COMMON JAIN CANON?

One of the main questions of this paper is whether or not there exists a common canon of Jain
refutations of the brahmanical epics. The answer to this is not a clear yes or no. A few
elements occur on all the texts, such as the characterization of Kumbhakarṇa for the
Rāmāya a or the Pāṇḍavas being sons of gods for the Mahābhārata. Whether this is due to

27
See f.i. Hariva(śapurā a of Jinasena Punnāṭa 53.31-40; Hemacandra’s Tri a ,iśalākāpuru acarita 8.8.30-32
the existence of an older set of Jain refutations, predating these compositions, or borrowing by
one individual author from another, cannot be determined with certainty, though frequent the
dependence of poets on predecessors in their narrative would rather suggest the second.28
Aside from this limited number of common elements, most authors include unique and
seemingly original refutations. Though there are some peculiar episodes refuted which are not
found in the epics as we know them today, most of them can easily be traced in common
editions of the Rāmāya a and Mahābhārata. The episodes that could not be traced, indicate
that other versions of the epics must have been current at the time and in the area where the
Jain authors lived.
Another question raised is whether these refutations hint at any doctrinal strife within the Jain
tradition, as is for instance the case in differing Jain versions of Draupadī’s marriage to the
five Pāṇḍavas: according to Śvetāmbara authors, following an account already found in the
Śvetāmbara Āgama, Draupadī indeed married all five Pāṇḍavas, whereas according to
Digambara authors, who were not bound by any canonical authority, she only married Arjuna.
The Digambaras specifically attack the Śvetāmbara accounts in their claim that Draupadī’s
polyandry is preposterous.29 A case of inconsistency can be made for the refutation of Vālin’s
death at the hand of Rāma, identified also in non-Jain circles one of Rāma’s major sins
(Dubuisson 1986: 19-47), though the disagreement here is not along the Digambara-
Śvetāmbara divide. The three earliest Rāmāya as and the Dharmaparīk ā – authored by
Śvetāmbaras, Digambaras and Yāpanīya - agree in rejecting the fact that Rāma kills Vālin.
Closer analysis of the verses in the three Jain Rāmāya as reveals that it is not, as one might
think, the fact that the hero Rāma commits murder that is particularly refuted, but the fact that
the otherwise noble Sugrīva asks Rāma to kill his brother, making him guilty of fratricide.30 In
these three Jain Rāma stories this issue is resolved by the transformation of the character of
Vālin. Here, prior to the intrigues in Ayodhyā, the elder brother Vālin gives up the throne in
28
Kulkarni (1991: 92) argues that Raviṣeṇa stayed so close to his predecessor Vimalasūri for the composition of
his Padmapurā a that he must have had a manuscript copy of the Paümacariya before him. His refutations are
identical to those of Vimalasūri. Svayambhūdeva (Paümacariu 1.2.9) explicitely refers to Raviṣeṇa as his
source, though he does include some novel refutations. Though their Mahābhārata/Hariva(śa narratives are
individual compositions, there can be no doubt that Vādicandra modeled his list of refutations on that of
Śubhacandra. Upadhye (1942: 607-608 and in Jina Vijaya 1944: 49) argues that the Dharmaparīk ā clearly
borrowed from the Dhūrtākhyāna.
29
This episode was studied extensively by Jonathan Geen (2005 and 2006). Note that, indeed, all the non-
Śvetāmbara authors (Svayambhūdeva, Śubhacandra, Vādicandra, and Amitagati) include Draupadī’s marriage to
the five Pāṇḍavas among their refuted episodes, whereas the Śvetāmbara Dhūrtākhyāna is silent about it.
30
“How could [Rāma] have struck down Vālin, because of Sugrīva and Sutārā, through [such] flawed
behaviour?” (Vimalasūri’s Paümacariya 3.10); “Rāma... killed Sugrīva’s older brother who was like a father [to
Sugrīva] because of a woman.” (Raviṣeṇa’s Padmapurā a 2.248); “How is it that Vālin is killed by his brother, a
king of monkeys, because of a woman?” (Svayambhūdeva’s Paümacariu 1.10.5).
Amitagati (15.97) gives a more neutral statement: “After slaying the mighty Vālin, the powerful [Rāma] met
with monkeys for the sake of king Sugrīva.”
favor of his younger brother Sugrīva and renounces the world to go and live on a mountain as
an ascetic.31 Later Sugrīva is ousted from the kingdom, which was thus rightfully his, by a
Māyāsugrīva, a doppelganger who lusts after his wife. It is this Māyāsugrīva, who is not in
any way related to Sugrīva, whom Rāma kills.32 However, there is another tradition of Jain
Rāma accounts, namely that of Guṇabhadra’s Uttarapurā a (68.440-466) and Puṣpadanta’s
Mahāpurā u (75.5-8), which narrate the story in a similar fashion to Vālmīki: Sugrīva is
ousted from his kingdom by his older and more powerful brother Vālin. Here, however,
Lakṣmaṇa, and not Rāma, kills Vālin. In Guṇabhadra’s and Puṣpadanta’s texts Sugrīva is still
guilty of the fratricide that Vimalasūri, Raviṣeṇa and Svayambhūdeva so explicitely rejected.
In its rendering of the Jain alternative to the Brahmanical version the Dharmaparīk ā follows
the account given by Vimalasūri (16.96-99). Amitagati is generally very brief in his accounts
of the Jain “alternatives”, limiting himself to the essential difference between the brahminical
and the Jain version. He discusses the origin of Jainism and heresy, and gives Jain
interpretations of Viṣṇu and Śiva. As far as the Jain versions of the Rāmāyaṇa and the
Mahābhārata are concerned, he only summarizes the stories of the main characters, which
have, according to him, become distorted the most in the brahminical versions: the Rākṣasas
and Vānaras as humans, the identity of Indra as a Vidyādhara and not a god, the birth of
Vyāsa and Karṇa, the war in Kurukṣetra as the ultimate battle between the Vāsudeva Kṛṣṇa
and Prativāsudeva Jarāsaṃdha, etc. Among these narrations is also the mention of the
alternative story of Vālin in as much as four verses, even though his character is far from
central to the Rāmāyaṇa. One could argue that Amitagati lays additional stress on his Vālin
account to set the record straight regarding the version of Guṇabhadra and Puṣpadanta, who
were after all both poets of some authority at that time. This is, however, very speculative.
Whether or not internal rivalry between different Digambara monastic branches is at play
here, is equally hard to establish.33 The distinction between the two Jain Rāmāyaṇa narratives
may be nothing more than originally a geographical variance, with Vimalasūri’s account
representing a Northern tradition, and Guṇabhadra and Puṣpadanta a Southern.34 Guṇabhadra
followed the account as he may have received from his teachers, unaware of the existence of
another Digambara account of Raviṣeṇa. However, after Guṇabhadra and Puṣpadanta and

31
Paümacariya 9; Padmapurā a 9; Paümacariu 12.
32
Paümacariya 47; Padmapurā a 47; Paümacariu 43.
33
The Digambara authors all appear to belong to different Digambara branches: Raviṣeṇa, though he does not
give any direct information himself, is thought to belong to the Senagaṇa (Kulkarni 1990: 91; Varni 1997-2000:
vol. 1, 326); Amitagati is said to belong to a Mathurāgaccha (Mironov 1903: 1; Varni 1997-2000: vol. 1, 326);
Guṇabhadra belonged to the PañcastūpasaLgha (Varni 1997-2000: vol. 1, 326).
34
Vimalasūri is thought to have lived near Mathura (Kulkarni 1990: 60), as did Amitagati (Mironov 1903: 1).
Guṇabhadra and Puṣpadanta lived under the Rāṣṭrakūṭa kings of Mānyakheṭa (Kulkarni 1990: 115 & 152).
despite their relative authority, Digambara poets ceased to follow this tradition, also in the
South. Even the Kannaḍa version of Abhinava Pampa (12th c.) follows the account of
Vimalasūri, not of Guṇabhadra (Cort 1993: 280n18). Despite initial differences, it appears
that after the first millenium, different Jain schools formed a more or less united front in their
version of the Rāma story, as a sound Jain alternative against the dominant Brahminical and
manyfold popular tales of the Rāma story.35 Inspite of competition and strife on various other
aspects of the Jain tradition, as far as the story of Rāma is concerned, internal differences
were abandoned.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary sources (texts and translations)

Bhatt, G.H. (ed.). The Vālmīki-Rāmāya a (7 vols.). Baroda: Oriental Institute, 1960-1975.

Bhayani, H.C. (ed.). Paumacariu of Kavirāja Svayambhūdeva (3 vols.) (Singhi Jain Series,
nr. 34-36). Bombay: Singhi Jain Shastra Shikshapith - Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1953-
1960.

Jacobi, H. & M.S. Punyavijayaji (eds.). Ācārya Vimalasūri’s Paumacariya( with Hindi
translation (2 vols.) (Prakrit Text Society Series Nos. 6 & 12). Varanasi - Ahmedabad:
Prakrit Text Society, 1962-1968.

Jain, Bh. (ed.) Ācārya Hari e a Pra īta Dhammaparikkhā. Nāgpur: Sanmati Risarc Insṭīṭyuṭ
af Inḍolajī, 1990.

Jain, D.K. Kavirāja Svayambhūdeva viracita Paümacariu (5 vols.) (Jñānapīṭha Mūrtidevī

Jaina-Granthamālā [Apabhraṃśa GranthāLka 1, 2, 3, 8 & 9]). Kāśī: Bharatīya
Jñānapīṭha, 1957-1970.

Jain, D.K. Ri,,ha emicariu – Kavirāja Svayambhūdeva k"ta Ari ,anemicarita: Yādava-kā -a
(Jñānapīṭha Mūrtidevī Jaina Granthamālā, Apabhraṃśa grantha 19). New Delhi:
Bharatiya Jnanpith, 1985.

35
Note that this roughly coincides with the rise of Rāma as a political ideal in South Asia (Pollock 1993).
Jain, D.K. Mahākavi Pu padanta’s Mahāpurā a (5 vols.) (Moortidevi Jain Granthamala:
Apabhramsha Grantha Nos. 15, 16, 17, 18 & 23). New Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanpith,
1999-2001(1979-1999).

Jain, P. (ed.). Padmapurā a of Ravi e ācārya - with Hindi translation (3 vols.) (Jñānapītha
Mūrtidevī Jaina Granthamālā - Samskrita Grantha Nos. 20, 24 en 26). Kāshī:
Bhāratīya Jñānapītha, 1958-1959.

Jain, P. (ed.). Hariva(śa Purā a of Jinasena (Jñānapīṭha Mūrtidevī Jaina Granthamālā

Sanskrit Grantha Nos. 27). New Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanpith, 19782.

Jaini, P. “Pāṇḍava-purāṇa of Vādicandra: Text and Translation.” Journal of Indian

Philosophy 25 (1997): 91-127 & 517-560.

Jaini, P. “Pāṇḍava-purāṇa of Vādicandra: Text and Translation.” Journal of Indian

Philosophy 277 (1999): 215-268.

Jina Vijaya, M. (ed.). Dhūrtākhyāna of Haribhadra Sūri – Haribhadra’s original Prākrit text,
Sa7ghatilaka’s Sanskrit version and an old-Gujarati prose rendering etc.) (Singhi
Jain Series no. 19). Bombay: Bhāratīya Vidyā Bhavan, 1944.
Krümpelmann, K. Das Dhuttakkhāṇa: Eine jinistische Satire (Europäische
Hochschulschriften Reihe XXVII: Asiatische und Afrikanische Studien vol. 74).
Frankfurt Am Main: Peter Lang, 2000.
Osier, J.P. and N. Balbir. Haribhadra: Ballade des Coquins. Titre original: Dhuttakkhāṇa
(Dhūrtākhyāna) – Traduction inédite du prakrit, présentation, notes, chronologie et
bibliographie. Paris: Flammarion, 2004
Sastry, P.V.N. Kāvyāla7kāra of Bhāmaha. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 19702
Śāstrī, P. B. Ācārya Amitagati viracita Dharmaparīk ā. Vārāṇasī : Vardhamāṇa Mudraṇālaya,
1998.

Shastri, J.P. (ed.). Shubhacandra’s Pandawa-Puranam (Jivaraj Jain Granthamala No. 3).
Sholapur: Jain Samskriti Samraksaka Samgha, 1954.

Śrīcaraṇavijayajī Mahārāj, M. (ed.). Kalikālasarvajña Śrīhemaca(drācāryaviracita(

Triśa ,iśalākāpuru acaritamahākāvyam (4 vols.). Ahmadābād: Kalikālasarvajña
Śrīhemacandrācārya Navama Janmaśatābdī Smṛti Śikṣaṇa Saṃskāranidhi, 1990-2006.

Sukthankar, V.S. (ed.). The Mahābhārata. For the First Time Critically Edited (19 vols.).
Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1933-1966.
Tomar, R.S. (ed.). Svayambhūdeva’s Ri,,ha emicariya (Hariva(sapurā a) (4 vols.)
(Prākṛtagranthapariṣad 27, 30, 31, 37). Ahmedabad: Prakrit Text Society

Vaidya, P.L. (ed.). The Mahāpurā a or Tisa,,himahāpurisagu āla(kāra (a Jain Epic in

Apabhra(śa of the 10th Century) of Pu padanta (3 vols.) (Māṇikacandra-Digambara-
Jaina-Granthamālā 37, 41-42). Bombay: Manikchand Digambara Jaina Granthamālā,
1937-1941.

Secondary sources

Balbir, N. Āvaśyaka-Studien - Introduction générale et Traductions (Alt- und Neu-Indische

Studien 45,1). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1993.

Brockington, J. The Sanskrit Epics (Handbuch der Orientalistik – Indien, vol. 12). Leiden:
Brill, 1998.

Bulke, K. Rām-kathā (Utpatti aur Vikās). Prayāg: Hindī Pariṣad Prakāśan, Prayāg
Viśvavidyālay, 1971[1950].

Cort, J. “An Overview of the Jaina Purāṇas.” Purā a Perennis. Reciprocity and
Transformation in Hindu and Jaina texts. Ed. W. Doniger, 185-206. Albany: State
University of New York, 1993

Danielou, A. Le Polythéisme Hindou. Paris: Buchet, 1960

De Clercq, E. “The Jaina Hariva(śa and Mahābhārata tradition - A preliminary survey.”

Parallels and Comparisons in the Sanskrit Epics and Purā as (DICSEP IV). Ed. P.
Koskikallio, 399-421. Zagreb: Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, 2008.

De Clercq, E. “Śūrpaṇakhā in the Jain Rāmāya as.” Women in crisis: the regional
Rāmāya as. Ed. M. Brockington. forthcoming.

Dubuisson, D. La légende royale dans l’Inde ancienne: Rāma et le Rāmāya a. Paris:

Économica, 1986.

Geen, J. “The Evolution of Draupadī’s Marriage in the Jaina Tradition.” Asiatische Studien
LIX.2 (2006) 443-497.
Geen, J. “Jaina Origins of the Mahābhārata Story of Draupadī’s Past Life.” Asiatische Studien
LX.3 (2006) 575-606.

Jaini, P. “ “Mahābhārata” Motifs in the jaina “Pāṇḍava-Purāṇa”.” Bulletin of the School of

Oriental and African Studies 47.1 (1984) 108-115.

Jaini, P. “A Purāṇic Counter Tradition.” Purā a Perennis: Reciprocity and Transformation in

Hindu and Jain Texts. Ed. W. Doniger, 207-249. New York: State University of New
York Press, 1993.

Kulkarni, V.M. The Story of Rāma in Jain Literature. Ahmedabad: Saraswati Pustak Bhandar,
1990.

Masson, J.M. “Fratricide among the Monkeys: Psychoanalytic Observations on an Episode in

the Vālmīkirāmāyaṇam.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 95.4 (1975) 672-
678.

Mironov, N. Die Dharmaparīk ā des Amitagati – Ein Beitraf zur Literatur- und
Religionsgeschichte des Indischen Mittelalters. Leipzig : Kreysing, 1903.

Osier, J.P. Les jaïna – Critiques de la mythologie hindoue. Paris: Cerf, 2005.

Pollock, S. “Ramayana and Political Imagination in India.” Journal of Asian Studies 52.2
(1993) 261-297.

Qvarnström, O. “Stability and adaptability: a Jain strategy for survival and growth.” Indo-
Iranian Journal 41 (1998) 33-55.

Richman, P. (ed.). Many Rāmāya as: The Diversity of a Narrative Tradition in South Asia.
Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991.

Richman, P. (ed.). Questioning Ramayanas: A South Asian Tradition. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2000.

Śrī Jain Śvetāmbar Konfarans-Mumbaī. Śrī Jain Granthāvalī. Mumbaī: Śrī Jain Śvetāmbar
Konfarans, 1908.

Upadhye, A.N. “Hariṣeṇa’s Dharmaparīkṣā in Apabhraṃśa.” Annals of the Bhandarkar

Oriental Research Institute 23 (1942) 592-608.

Upadhye, A.N. “Dhūrtākhyāna in the Niśītha-Cūrṇī.” Upadhye: Papers (Other Publications

no. 77). Ed. A.N. Upadhye, 252-259. Mysore: Prasārānga, University of Mysore,
1983.
Varni, J. Jainendra Siddhānta Kośa (5 vols.) (Moortidevī Jain Granthamālā: Sanskrit Grantha Nos. 38,
40, 42, 44 & 48). New Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanpith, 1997-2000(1921-1983).

Velankar, H.D. Jinaratnakośa: An Alphabetical Register of Jain Works and Authors (Vol. 1:
Works) (Government Oriental Series Class C No. 4). Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental
Research Institute, 1944.