J Am Acad Relig 2011 Geen 58 89

Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune: Krs av ra in . a and Mah .
n the Hindu and Jaina Traditions

Jonathan Geen*
Downloaded from http://jaar.oxfordjournals.org/ at Birla Institute of Technology & Science, Pilani on February 11, 2014
Hindu and Jaina mythological texts share many literary characters, some of which were clearly borrowed from one another. This paper examines two such cases of borrowing: the incorporation of the Hindu character Krs . a into the Jaina tradition and the incorporation of the .n Jaina savior Mah av ra by Hindus. While the Hindu mythological tradition underwent subtle changes as a result of adopting Mah av ra, the incorporation of Krs . a had a profound effect on Jaina mythology. In .n fact, as Jaina mythology developed, Krs . a came to be seen as a sort of .n Mah av ra-in-the-making, while Mah av ra was described as a Krs . a-of.n them. the-past, implying a chronologically shifted equivalence between The original impetus for borrowing one anothers popular characters seems to have been a desire to discredit them. Over time, however, the fortunes of these characters in their new literary environment steadily rose, and they managed to take on lives of their own.
WHEN VIEWING RELIGIOUS TEXTS from a literary point of view, it is fair to say that some characters get around more than others. Moses, for example, is a character of importance in Jewish, Christian, and Islamic scripture, though the interpretation of his role tends to differ from one tradition to the next. In some cases, religious traditions
*Jonathan Geen, Associate Professor of Religious Studies, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Kings University College, London, Ontario, Canada. E-mail: jgeen@uwo.ca. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, March 2011, Vol. 79, No. 1, pp. 5889 doi:10.1093/jaarel/lfq059 Advance Access publication on November 11, 2010 The Author 2010. Published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the American Academy of Religion. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com
Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune
59
utilize such shared characters to highlight doctrinal differences, such as the case of Jesuss relationship to God: one traditions doctrine of a monotheistic Trinity (Christianity) is viewed by another (Islam) as evidence of polytheistic leanings. A similar phenomenon is witnessed in scriptures originating in the common milieu of South Asia, where many popular characters are shared among the Hindus, Buddhists, Jainas, Sikhs, and even Muslims. At times, these shared characters become focal points of doctrinal disagreements, often resulting in remarkably rich character development. In this paper, I examine the manner in which the Hindu character Krs . a was transformed into a .n impact this had upon the distinctly Jaina character, and the ensuing development of Jainism itself. By way of a counter example, I also examine the fate that befell the Jaina savior Mah av ra1 when he was brought into the Hindu tradition. As will become evident, what began in both cases as polemical and slanderous inversions of the original characters ends with relatively positive depictions. The Hindus and Jainas may have set out to transform one anothers popular characters, but were in turn transformed themselves. As literary figures, it is difficult to think of two characters less alike than Krs av ra, . a, as portrayed in the Hindu tradition, and Mah .n as depicted by Jainas. While Mah av ra is the very soul of strict ascetic discipline, Krs . a is playful, mischievous, libidinous, and .n frequently a cheat. Despite their differences, however, both are soteriological figures in their respective traditions: following the example of Mah av ra constitutes the path to liberation for Jainas, while many Hindus hope to gain salvation through their unswerving and loving devotion to Krs . a. .n As a rule, descriptions of Jainas in Hindu scripture tend to be exceedingly unflattering.2 One prominent illustration of this is found in the Hindu pur an ara) as a false . ic story of Vis . us incarnation (avat .n ascetic, who taught Jaina and Buddhist doctrine to powerful demons in order to delude and weaken them. After deceiving the demons (who were, according to plan, promptly defeated by the gods), this avat ara was to remain in hiding until the advent of the morally degenerate Kali Age, at which time he was to begin his false teachings again among men. In the earliest extant story of this avat ara (Vis an .n . u Pur . a 3.17 3.18), it is evident that Hindus were unconcerned with clearly delineating Buddhist, Jaina, and Materialist doctrine, and tended to lump them
1 2
Mah av ra is, however, rarely identified by name in Hindu texts. See, e.g., Dundas (1992: 1).
60
Journal of the American Academy of Religion
together as heretical teachings. Nevertheless, inasmuch as Mah av ra may be considered the founder of Jainism,3 this false avat ara may be seen as an example of a shared character among Hindus and Jainas: one traditions savior becomes anothers charlatan. But the later history of this avat ara displays a discernible softening of this slanderous inversion. A similar attempt at inversion may have been the motivation for the Jainass incorporation of the popular Hindu character/deity Krs . a into .n who, their own tradition. Such a notion was proposed by P. S. Jaini, commenting upon the incorporation of R ama (of the R am ayan . a) and Krs . a into the Jaina tradition, stated: .n
in retelling their versions [of the Hindu epics] the Jaina authors shrewdly made a major change that was to accomplish at a single stroke both the elevation of R ama to the status of a Jaina saint4 and the consignment of Krs . a to hell. (1993: 213) .n
It is true that the Jainas stripped Krs . a of the divine status he holds in .n the Hindu tradition, and upon his death, the Jaina Krs . a did indeed .n go to hell.5 But like the false avat ara in the Hindu tradition, the ultimate fate of Krs . a in the Jaina tradition was to markedly improve. In .n the end, as I hope to demonstrate, the Jaina authors paid Krs .a a .n remarkably high compliment.
MAHVRA AND THE FALSE AVATRA OF VIS .U .N

As representatives of the heterodox renunciatory ascetics or raman . as, both Jainas and Buddhists were openly critical of Hindus unquestioning belief in the authority of the Veda, its attending brahminical caste and arama systems,6 and most particularly its animal
3 Whether or not we should consider Mah av ra to be the historical founder of Jainism, it is likely that Hindus would have done so. 4 Historically, the earliest extant Jaina version of the R am ayan . a story (i.e., Vimalasris thirdcentury Pamacariya) predates the earliest extant Jaina version of the Krs abh arata . a-cycle/Mah .n (i.e., Punn at an . a Jinasenas eighth-century Harivam . apur . a) by about five hundred years. The glorification of R ama is clear throughout the Pamacariya, and Vimalasri even modified the familiar Hindu story so that Laks ama, killed their adversary R avan . a, rather than R . a, thereby . man allowing R ama to attain liberation at the end of his life while Laks man . a was consigned to hell. . 5 As Dundas (2000: 95) points out, this fact was known even to Abul Fazl, personal advisor to the Mughal Emperor Akbar. 6 The Hindu arama (stages of life) system certainly developed in the post-Vedic period, but nevertheless became a part of orthodox brahminical culture. For an in-depth discussion of the arama system, see Olivelle (1993).
61
sacrifices.7 In retaliation for such raman . ic criticism, Hindus countered with the story of Vis ara as a false ascetic.8 The earliest version . us avat .n 9 of this story is found in the Vis an .n . u Pur . a, though as Wendy Doniger has suggested, this story may be viewed merely as a pointed adaptation of many earlier stories in which the gods actively tricked or deluded their rival demons in order to gain or maintain superiority. The innovation here is that the deluder of the demons takes the form of a Jaina ascetic, and then a Buddhist monk. This false ascetic is popularly referred to in Vis ara as the Buddha, but it is clear in early . us avat .n pur an as . ic variants of the story that the false ascetic is as much Jaina Buddhist, and is intended to represent an amalgamation of heretics.10 In the context11 of the story, the raison dtre of the false avat ara is to trick the powerful demons into abandoning orthodox Hindu (Vedic) religion, thereby weakening them enough for the gods to win back cosmic superiority. The gods and demons, we are told, had been engaged in a protracted battle in which the gods were defeated. The gods then went to Vis . u and beseeched him to find a way they could .n again be victorious:
Thus addressed, Lord Vis ay amoha [the . u emitted from his body M .n Magic Deluder], gave it to them, and said this to those best of gods: This M ay amoha will delude all those demons; then, being excluded from the path of the Vedas, they will be vulnerable to slaughter. 12 (Vis an .n . u Pur . a 3.17.413.17.42)
7 Medieval Jainas promoted the idea that the Hindu Brahmin class, their sacred Veda, and their Vedic animal sacrifices all resulted from a corruption of the true (Jaina) religious path set out kara of the present epoch (Jaini 1993: 234ff). by Rs . abha, the first trthan 8 For a wide-ranging and comprehensive discussion of this false avat ara, see OFlaherty (1976: 174211). 9 The Vis an .n . u Pur . a may be roughly assigned to the fifth-century CE. For a brief discussion of this dating, see Matchett (2001: 1618). 10 The Vis an .n . u Pur . a, being composed/compiled during the Hindu revival of the Gupta Period, is naturally concerned with the denunciation of all heretics, though the Buddhists were, at this time, typically perceived by Hindus as a greater threat than the Jainas. 11 Ostensibly, the Vis an aara to his pupil .n . u Pur . a consists of the teachings of the sage Par Maitreya (for a complete English translation, see Wilson 1961). In Book 3, Par aara describes the fourfold division of the Vedas by Vy asa, and proceeds to discuss some of the Vedic rites incumbent upon the upper three classes of society, ending with a discussion of sacrificial offerings to the ancestors (r addha) with various foods, including the flesh of various animals. In 3.16, some of the things that can nullify a r addha rite are enumerated, including the ceremony being observed by a heretic. In 3.17, Maitreya asks Par aara to explain the nature and practices of a heretic, and Par aara, relating a story he heard Vasis s .t . ha tell Bh . ma, narrates the story of the false avat ara. . . . 12 ity ukto bhagav ams tebhyo m ay amoham arratah adya dadau vis aha cedam . | samutp .n . uh . pr . surottam an || m ay amoho yam akhil an daity ams t an mohayis yati | tato vadhy a bhavis yanti . . vedam argabahis ah . krt . ||.
62
M ay amoha, taking first the form of a naked and bald (digambaro mun an .d . o; Vis .n . u Pur . a 3.18.2) Jaina ascetic, was successful in converting many demons through a rather confused argument likely meant to represent the Jaina doctrine of anek antav ada, in which anything may be legitimately viewed from more than one vantage point.13 Thereafter, the deluder took on the form of a Buddhist monk, and argued for nonviolence and for reason over revelation. The monks argument begins as follows: O Demons, if you have a desire for Heaven or Nirv an . a, then realize that you must put an end to such wicked practices as slaughtering animals (Vis an .n . u Pur .a 3.18.17).14 It is interesting that the argument for non-violence is placed in the mouth of a Buddhist rather than a Jaina,15 but certainly both traditions were radically opposed to animal sacrifices. M ay amoha then set about weakening the demons faith in the efficacy of Vedic sacrifice; his main argument, repeated in several forms, was that simple ritual actions could not possibly have the sorts of real-world effects claimed by the Vedas. Vedic tradition holds, for example, that an animal slaughtered in sacrifice gets direct entry into heaven. Extrapolating from this principle, the monk asks: If the attainment of heaven is assured for an animal slaughtered in a sacrifice, how is it that the sacrificer does not therefore kill his own father [thereby ensuring his father entry into heaven]? 16 (Vis an .n . u Pur . a 3.18.28). The repeated implication is that Vedic sacrificial theology cannot withstand even the most superficial examination. Having made several such critiques, undermining the demons faith in the infallible nature of the revealed Vedas, the monk concludes: True words, O Great Demons, do not just fall from the sky; only words based upon sound reasoning are to be accepted by me and 17 others such as yourselves (Vis an .n . u Pur . a 3.18.31). Through the use of such arguments, both Jaina and Buddhist, M ay amoha finally convinced the demons to abandon the Vedas, thereby ensuring the desired result: Then, O Twice-born, the battle of the gods and demons
13 For a discussion of anek antav ada, and its related doctrines of nayav ada and sy adv ada, see Padmarajiah (2004: 269378). . . . 14 svarg artham yadi vo v ach a nirv an artham ath asur ah at adi dus . . | tadalam paugh .t . adharmam nibodhata ||. 15 The practice of non-violence is certainly taken to a greater extreme in Jainism than Buddhism, and medieval Jaina philosophers attempted to demonstrate that the so-called practice of nonviolence by Buddhists was flawed. See Granoff (1992). . 16 nihatasya paor yaje svargapr aptir yads a yajam anena kim nu tasm an na hanyate ||. . yate | svapit . . 17 na hy aptav ad a nabhaso nipatanti mah asur ah | yuktimadvacanam gr ahyam may anyai ca . bhavadvidhaih . ||.
63
resumed, and those demons, who now rejected the true path, were killed 18 by the gods (Vis an .n . u Pur . a 3.18.34; emphasis mine). It is clear from this account that the teachings of the heretical raman . as were invented as a clever device to lure the demons away from the Vedic tradition;19 it is, at the same time, a denunciation of the 20 raman . as and a glorification of the true path of Vedic sacrifice. In this context, arguments against animal sacrifices are deluded, and the teacher of such heresy a crafty swindler. Having accomplished his immediate goal, this false avat ara was instructed by Vis . u to go into .n hiding until the Kali Age, when he was to begin his heretical Jaina and Buddhist teachings again among men: we must infer, therefore, that historical raman av ra and the Buddha were in fact . ic teachers such as Mah the magical manifestations of the false avat ara M ay amoha.21
. . 18 tato dev asuram yudham punar ev abhavad dvija | hat a ca te sur a devaih . sanm argaparipanthinah ||. . 19 It is perhaps worth noting here the warning given by Manu in M anava Dharma astra 2.102.11: Scripture should be recognized as Veda, and tradition as Law Treatise. These two should never be called into question in any matter, for it is from them that the Law has shined forth. If a twice-born disparages these two by relying on the science of logic, he ought to be ostracized by good people as an infidel and a denigrator of the Veda (Olivelle 2004: 23). 20 In aiva variants, the story of Vis ara is absorbed into the ancient story of ivas . us false avat .n destruction of the three cities (tripura) ruled by powerful demons. The demons populating these cities were invincible due primarily to being devotees of iva, though it is said that the false ascetic . did bring an end to Vedic sacrifices there as well. See, e.g., iva Pur an a: . a (Rudrasamhit ga Pur Yuddhakhan d a 1970); Lin an a (1973: 1.711.73). . . . 21 Viewed historically, we can see that the story of the false avat ara is designed to explain the origin of heretics that were already clearly in existence (e.g., Buddhists, Jainas), but one may well ask why, theoretically, Vis . u would want to produce such heretical lineages in the first place. .n While the Hindus do not directly answer this question (at least not to my knowledge), they do include a prediction of the ultimate fate of the heretics, which again is related to an avat ara of Vis ara as the ninth, of Vis . u. Krs . a is typically listed as the eighth, and the false avat . us ten .n .n .n major incarnations. The tenth and final avat ara is known as Kalkin, who, it is said, will bring the degenerate Kali Age to a close by slaying all of the barbarians and heretics. Wendy Doniger has proposed (OFlaherty 1976: 200) that the Kalkin avat ara may have predated and even inspired the story of the false avat ara. If so, this may explain why the false avat ara was not originally restricted to the Buddha but was intended to encompass all heretical doctrines. Whatever the case, the stories of these final two avat aras produce an interesting result: not only will Vis . u, as Kalkin, slay .n all the heretics of the Kali Age, but it was in fact Vis ay amoha, who was . u himself, as M .n responsible for their heretical doctrines. If nothing else, this strips the raman . as of any independent agency in their beliefs and practices. The medieval Jaina atrujayam ah atmya of a stage in the present avasarpin Dhanevara, in discussing the duh . (equivalent to the Kali .s . am Age), mentions a prophecy of a King named Kalkin (or Kalkir aja) who will, during this degenerate time, persecute the Jaina religion (Burgess 1901: 307308). On the basis of both Hindu pur an . ic and Jaina sources, Jayaswal attempted to prove that the Kalkin avat ara was actually describing the historical king of the early sixth century, Vis . uvardhana Yaodharma, defeater of Mihirakula .n (Jayaswal 1917), while Pathak subsequently argued more forcefully that Kalkir aja was actually Mihirakula himself (Pathak 1918: 1819). As Kalkin may have been modeled, theologically at least, on the Buddhists future Buddha Maitreya (OFlaherty 1976: 200), it seems probable that the last two of Vis aras were heavily influenced by the raman . us ten famous avat . ic traditions. .n
64
Over time, this multivalent false avat ara came to be identified with the Buddha alone rather than as a generic representative of raman . as in general, thereby explicitly cutting the Jainas out of the picture.22 Contrary to the original intent of the story, depictions of this later Buddha avat ara often focus upon the spiritually heroic and compassionate life of the Buddha, rather than as a teacher of heresy. In Ks avat aracarita, for example, which . emendras eleventh-century Da provides stories of the ten great avat aras of Vis . u, the story of the .n Buddha avat ara 23 is more in line with that told in Buddhist texts such as Avaghos . as Buddhacarita than it is connected with the deluder story of the Hindu pur an . as. Similarly, in Jayadevas twelfth-century Gtagovinda, a poem extolling the delights of Lord Krs . as dalliances .n with his lover R adh a, Vis ara is described thus: . u-Krs . as Buddha avat .n .n
Moved by deep compassion, you condemn the Vedic way That ordains animal slaughter in rites of sacrifice. You take form as the enlightened Buddha. (Miller 1977: 71)
One might speculate that the willingness of Hindus, and especially vais .n avas , to fully embrace the Buddha coincided with the steep decline of . Buddhist influence in India in general, such that their glorification of the Buddha avat ara threatened neither to weaken their own tradition nor strengthen their rival. But what happened to the Jaina component of the false avat ara? One answer is found in the Bh agavata Pur an . a, generally dated circa ninth-tenth century. Though the story of the false avat ara is only alluded to here, rather than given in detail, the Bh agavata shows obvious signs that the false avat ara had become associated with the Buddha alone, and that the Buddha was both good and pure, even if a teacher of heresy to demons. In Bh agavata 1.3, where twenty-three major and minor avat aras of Vis n u . . are enumerated, the false avat ara is identified as the Buddha, son of Ajana.24
22 The false avat ara does not receive extensive attention in most of the Hindu pur an . as, and in the often brief references provided, details vary. For example, Agni Pur an . a 16 makes a brief reference to this buddh avat ara, where he is said to be the son of uddhodana (uddhodanasuta), the traditional name of the Buddhas father; in this case, however, he is said to have posed first as a Buddhist and then a Jaina. The opening chapter of the Garud an . a Pur . a identifies him, rather confusedly, as the Buddha, son of Jina (buddho n amn a jinasutah agavata Pur an . ), while the Bh .a (1.3.32) refers to him as the son of Ajana (buddho n amn a janasutah . ), the difference perhaps due to a scribal error. 23 Da avat aracharitam (1989: 472497). The Buddha is here, as usual, depicted as the ninth of ten great avat aras. 24 buddho n amn a janasutah . (1.3.24c).
65
In Bh agavata 2.7, a brief reference is made to an unnamed avat ara who is said to assume a disguise that captures the hearts and deludes the minds of the demons and then teaches them heretical agavata 10.40 includes a hymn to Krs doctrines in depth.25 Bh . a, .n sung by Akrra, that refers to Krs aras; 10.40.22 . as many avat .n states: Praise to the Pure Buddha, deluder of the demons.26 At Bh agavata 11.4.22, we find the unnamed buddh avat ara described as cleverly deluding with various doctrines those who performed sacrifices but were unworthy to do so.27 The Jaina tradition does, however, pop up in a curious and fascinating way in the Bh agavata, though now entirely divorced from . the Buddha avat ara. One of the minor incarnations (am avat ara) of 28 Vis agavata is a man named Rs . u discussed in the Bh .n . abha, more commonly known as the first Jaina savior of the current world epoch,29 co-opted here by Hindus as the founder of a yogic-ascetic tradition.30 In the Bh agavata, the tradition founded by Rs . abha is not a false tradition designed to delude anyone, but a fully legitimate path for ascetics. There is, however, a description of how this legitimate path would become perverted in later times. Bh agavata 5.6.9 contains a prediction that, in the Kali Age, a king named Arhat,31 having heard tales of Rs . abhas ascetic path and wishing to adopt it, will abandon the path of his true religion
. . . . 25 n ghnat devadvis am . . . | loka am mativimohamatipralobham ves aya bahu bh as . . am vidh . yata aupadharmyam ||(2.7.37). 26 namo buddh aya uddh aya daityad anavamohine | (10.40.22ab). 27 v adair vimohayati yajakrto tadarh an (11.4.22 c). 28 The Bh agavata is not the earliest Hindu pur an an . a to mention Rs . abha (see, e.g., Vis .n . u Pur .a 2.1), but it seems to be the only one in which Rs abha is granted avat ara status. . 29 For a discussion of Rs . abha in the Jaina tradition, see below. 30 The purpose of this avat ara is explicitly stated in Bh agavata 5.3.20, where he is described as having a pure or white body (uklay a tanuv a) and having a desire to establish the religious paths . (dharm an darayituk ama) of naked (v ataraan an am), celibate (rdhvamanthin am), mendicant . sages (raman an am rs am). He is also described (5.5.28) as embodying the Paramahamsa path . n . .. ( p aramahamsyadharmam upaiks an was, in typical Hindu . am . ah . ). The goal of his raman . a dharma . fashion, attainment of the unending joy of brahman (brahmasaukhyam anantam; 5.5.1), where it u. Bh a gavata 5 contains Rs is clear that brahman is one and the same as Vis n . abhas discourse on .. . the path to liberation from sams ara. Interestingly, while he praises both the Vedas and the Brahmin class, he explicitly prescribes neither Vedic sacrifices nor the practice of non-violence. We should note, however, that while serving as king, Rs . abha did perform sacrifices according to the Vedas (5.4.17), and it is said (5.5.28) that when renouncing the world he fixed the [Vedic] ahavanya fire within himself ( atmany aropit ahavanyo), implying a sort of upanis . adic internalization of Vedic sacrifice. For a more detailed discussion of this minor avat ara in the Bh agavata Pur an . a, see Jaini (1977). 31 The term arhat (worthy one), though commonly used by both Jainas and Buddhists, is often reserved for the Jainas in the Hindu pur an . as.
66
(svadharmapatha) and propagate the unbecoming and wicked path . . 32 of heretics (kupatham p as . an .d . am asamajasam). The Bh agavatas stories of Rs . abha and King Arhat appear to provide a concession to Jainas that falls somewhere between the original, slanderous story of the false avat ara on the one hand, and the later glorification of the Buddha avat ara on the other: a Jaina savior (i.e., Rs ara of Vis . u) is given . abha, now in the form of a minor avat .n credit for propagating a legitimate ascetic path similar in description to the practices of Jaina ascetics, but the later manifestation of this path (i.e., in the Kali Age) is said to have become perverted and corrupt.33 While Mah av ra as an individual is never embraced in the manner that ara represents a the Buddha came to be,34 the story of the Rs . abha avat of implying, as the false discernible improvement in his stature: instead avat ara story does, that Mah av ra was a mere magical charlatan created by Vis . u to delude demons and men, he now may be viewed as the .n heir to a legitimate ascetic path that had, sadly, become corrupt. Finally, it should not escape our notice that, in the original story of the false avat ara, it was ironically the relinquishing of slaughter (i.e., of Vedic animal sacrifices) that rendered the demons susceptible to slaughter. That is, the original story of the false avat ara did not present Hindus with any persuasive ethical argument in favor of animal sacrifices, but rather implied only that the violence of sacrifice enhanced the effectiveness of violence in battle. Thus, when the Buddha avat ara was later extolled for his deep compassion, nothing but the Hindus assessment of the situation had changed: the anti-sacrificial doctrine of the Jaina-Buddhist false avat ara merely shifted from heretical to ethical.35 What had been originally depicted as deluded came to be viewed as compassionate.
32 This story may have been specifically directed at the ninth-century R as .t . rakut . a king Amoghavars . a I, who converted from the vais .n . ava to the Jaina tradition (Jaini 1977: 331). As Jaini points out, the main perversion of Rs . abhas legitimate path, represented by the heretical Jaina and anti-sacrifice stance. Whereas Jaina texts such as tradition, is the vehement anti-Brahmin Jinesenas ninth-century dipur an . a and Hemacandras twelfth-century TPC depict animal sacrifice as being a perversion of the original Vedas (which they claim promoted strict non-violent practices), the authors of the Bh agavata Pur an . a claim the opposite: the Jaina disdain for Brahmins and sacrifice represents the perversion. 33 There are two good reasons why the authors of the story of this minor avat ara in the Bh agavata Pur an av ra as their subject. The first, suggested by Jaini . a chose Rs . abha rather than Mah have been responding to the large and popular biography of Rsabha (1977: 331), is that they may . (i.e., the dipur an . a) written by the ninth-century Digambara Jaina poet Jinasena. The second is that Mah av ra must surely have been associated already with perverted practices of the Kali Age. 34 As Jainism enjoyed increasing prosperity and royal patronage in the medieval period, Hindus may not have been as inclined to embrace Mah av ra in the way they did the Buddha. 35 The Jainas are able to share in this triumph only vicariously.
67
The extent to which the story of the false avat ara played a role in this change of heart is impossible to gage. The historical develop. ment of a broad ethic of non-violence (ahims a) across India in 36 general was a complex phenomenon, and Hindu texts from the ancient upanis an . ads to the medieval pur . as show signs of a growing uneasiness with Vedic animal sacrifices.37 Nevertheless, it is perhaps not over-reaching to suggest that the raman . ic opposition to Vedic animal sacrifice portrayed in the Vis an .n . u Pur . a played some small role in promoting non-violence in the Hindu tradition (as the above quotation from Jayadeva suggests), and it certainly facilitated the wholehearted embrace of the Buddha seen in the later vais .n . ava tradition. In any case, the historical trajectory taken by the false avat ara keenly displays how a character, once incorporated into a religious tradition, may subsequently develop in new and unexpected ways, and with hindsight, the brahminical authors of the original false avat ara story may have had second thoughts about allowing their opponents to make such a full-throated denunciation of Vedic animal sacrifice in a Hindu text. Before proceeding to a discussion of Krs . a in the Jaina tradition, .n the seeming similarity between the tricky false ascetic M ay amoha, in his role as Buddhist monk, and the Compassionate-Trickster Buddha discussed by Sara McClintock in her essay in this issue, merits some comment. On the one hand, as McClintock points out, the Buddha of the early Buddhist tradition was a somewhat liminal figure, who freely made use of delusions and illusions in order to raise peoples consciousness. It is this latter aspect that made his tricks compassionate. M ay amoha, on the other hand, another highly liminal figure, used tricks of philosophy merely to delude the demons, leading to their defeat, and to delude the heretics of the Kali Age, whose defeat is assured by Vis ara Kalkin. From the point of view of the . us future avat .n gods, M ay amohas mission may have been one of compassion, but his compassion was in no way directed to those he deluded. It is unclear whether or not the brahminic authors of the Vis an .n . u Pur . a intentionally co-opted and corrupted the Buddhas compassionate trickster-like qualities in order to further slander him, but the possibility is intriguing.
36 37
See, e.g., Alsdorf (1962), Schmidt (1968), and Proudfoot (1987). See, in particular, Schmidt (1968).
68
At some point in their history, perhaps shortly after they had migrated west to the city of Mathur a,38 Jainas began to incorporate Krs . a into their literary cast of characters. In order to make Krs . a their .n .n Jainas had to contend not only with Krsna himself but with a own, .. number of significant theological issues associated with him. The manner in which the Jainas dealt with some of the ancillary theological issues will be addressed below. First, however, I will discuss the ways in which Jainas transformed Krs . a, and how this Jaina Krs . a in turn .n .n to contextualize the important transformed Jainism. In order position afforded Krs n a in Jaina mythology, a brief description of the Jaina .. Universal History is required.
THE JAINA KRS . A: A MAHVRA-IN-THE-MAKING .N
The Jaina Universal History

From the earliest extant Jaina texts,39 it is clear that Jainism was originally an extremely strict, ascetically oriented renunciatory tradition that had little patience with worldly life in any form. The life of a householder was depicted in a very poor light, and many textual passages were devoted to convincing monks who may have been tempted to throw off the mantle of ascetic life and return to society that such a course of action would be entirely futile. Not only does the violent nature of household life lead to future torments in hell, we are told, but household life itself is fraught with troubles and travails. This fact notwithstanding, Jaina monks and nuns relied upon the generosity of lay supporters for alms, and before long the Jaina attitude to their laity softened to a considerable degree.40 Moreover, the fate of burgeoning voluntary religious sects such as Buddhism and Jainism appears to have been, at least in part, in the hands of kings, whose royal patronage (or lack thereof ) could potentially make (or break) a traditions survival. It should not surprise us, then, that the Jainas came to karas), but also honor not only their ascetic heroes and teachers (trthan lay supporters in the form of powerful worldly rulers, idealized as universal sovereigns (cakravartins).41 In the face of the Hindu Vedic tradition, which by the time Jainism rose to prominence in the sixth- to fifth-century BCE had an enormous
38 Archeological evidence places a Jaina community in Mathur a prior to the Common Era (see, e.g., Ghosh 1974: 4968). 39 ga- and Strakrt ga-stras. That is, the first books of the c ar an an 40 For a discussion of this trend, see Johnson (1995). 41 For a discussion of the role of cakravartins in the Buddhist tradition, see Strong (1989: 4456).
69
weight of ancient authority, alternative religious doctrines that were presented as new had little chance of surviving beyond the lifetime of their charismatic founders.42 Thus, it again should not surprise us that historical raman av ra were soon . ic figures such as the Buddha and Mah viewed by their followers merely as particular examples of a general type, and that in fact there had been, periodically, countless Buddhas or karas stretching back into a past without beginning. According trthan to this scheme, the raman . ic doctrines they taught were anything but new.43 Jainas claimed that, in the land of Bharataks . etra (roughly synonymous with India), each world epoch ( past, present and future) is karas, and Mah witness to a series of twenty-four trthan av ra, an undoubtedly historical figure, was said to be the twenty-fourth and final kara of the present world epoch. trthan In an obvious parallel development, the Jainas likewise posited a recurring series of half as many (i.e., twelve) cakravartins in Bharataks . etra in each world epoch. The close connection between cak karas is highlighted by the fact that in the present ravartins and trthan karas in the same lifeepoch, three cakravartins also became trthan time.44 These two series of recurring personages became the basis for what has been dubbed the Jaina Universal History, which is a history focusing primarily upon the lives of the sixty-three great (mah a-) or illustrious (al ak a-) persons ( purus ah . . ) that appeared in the land of karas Bharataks . etra in the present world epoch. The twenty-four trthan (beginning with Rs av ra)45 and twelve cakra. abha and ending with Mah vartins together comprise thirty-six of these al ak apurus . as, leaving twenty-seven so far unaccounted for. The remaining twenty-seven al ak apurus . as comprise nine triads, each containing one baladeva, one v asudeva, and one prativ asudeva. The baladeva and v asudeva are always heroic brothers, and the prativ asudeva (i.e., anti-v asudeva) is a wicked rival who is invariably killed
42 The attribution of a new text or tradition to an ancient authority is commonplace in the Hindu tradition. For example, whereas the earlier dharmastra texts were presented as scholarly treatises, wherein various scholarly opinions were provided, the author of the later M anava Dharma astra (i.e., Laws of Manu) attributes his text to the creator god Brahm a himself. See, e.g., Olivelle (2004: xxivxxv). 43 I do not wish to suggest that this was the only reason for the development of stories of past karas, but it was undoubtedly one important reason. Buddhas or trthan 44 In their same lifetime, the fifth, sixth, and seventh cakravartins ( anti, Kunthu, and Ara) karas. became the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth trthan 45 Whereas scholars may be tempted to view Mah av ra as the founder of the Jaina tradition, he is viewed by Jainas as being the last in a long line of cosmically significant persons, not entirely unlike the Islamic view of the prophet Muhammad, who is seen less as the founder of Islam than as the seal of a long line of prophets.
70
in battle by the v asudeva. Furthermore, each v asudeva, due in part to this violent slaying, will be reborn in hell. The otherwise-unique characters we know as Krs asudeva and his brother Baladeva from the . a V .n Hindu tradition are considered by Jainas to have been merely the ninth and final v asudeva and baladeva of the current world epoch.46 That is, the Jainas not only incorporated Krs . a and Baladeva (and their rival .n also expanded them into recurJar asandha) into their mythology, but ring character types to be numbered among the other al ak apurus . as (i. karas and cakravartins).47 Thus, the incorporation of e., the trthan Krs . a into the mythological history of the Jaina tradition must be .n viewed as a rather momentous event. These new categories of baladevas, v asudevas, and prativ asudevas also allowed the Jainas to neatly incorporate the R am ayan . as heroes R ama and Laks avan . a, and their rival R . a, into their Universal . man History: R ama was identified as the eighth baladeva, Laks . a the . man eighth v asudeva, and R avan asudeva. In this fashion, . a the eighth prativ the Jainas absorbed the Hindu epics R am ayan abh arata into . a and Mah their own mythological tradition, and still had room left over to posit, as it were, seven earlier epic stories of the present world epoch. The expansion of Krs . a, his brother, and his rival into archetypal categories .n removing the uniqueness of the Hindu characters, had the effect of but I am not sure this was the explicit intention. Rather, it appears that this process of character expansion was simply the way the Jainas came to view the universe: any special, illustrious person, whether kara or v trthan asudeva, was necessarily only one in an infinite series. Why, exactly, the Jainas incorporated Krs . a into their own cast of .n snas behavior in Hindu characters is a matter of speculation. Kr .. mythology is scarcely a model of ideal Jainaconduct, nor do the Jainas 48 transform Krs . a into an ideal Jaina. On this issue, there have been .n held opinions: (1) the Jainas incorporated into their own two generally texts characters popular in the Hindu tradition (and especially those of the R am ayan abh arata) in order to satisfy their laitys desire . a and Mah
46 In general, the archetypal and iconographical descriptions of all the Jaina baladevas conform to a description of Krs asudevas . as brother Baladeva as found in the Hindu tradition, and all the v .n Krsna. This pattern generally holds true even for versions of the Jaina to that of the Hindu .. R am ayan asudeva are filled by R ama and Laks . a, . a, in which the roles of baladeva and v . man respectively. 47 For a discussion of the historical development of the baladevas, v asudevas, and prativ asudevas, see Geen (2009). 48 In Hemacandras TPC, all of the v asudevas, Krs . a included, adopt right belief, which is .n only the first step on the path to Jaina liberation, and this only after they have killed their respective prativ asudeva.
71
for entertaining storiesfailure to do so might have left the Jaina laity dangerously open to conversion by Hindus;49 or (2) the Hindus, Jainas, and Buddhists all drew upon a stock of ancient narrative literature that was largely non-sectarian, and each tradition modified the stories, creating a collection of sectarian versions.50 There is likely some measure of truth in both of these suppositions, varying in degree on a case-by-case basis. Jaini, as quoted above, suggests a more nuanced approach,51 in which R ama (of the R am ayan . a received unequal treatment . a) and Krs .n ama, and so depicted in the hands of Jaina poets:52 the Jainas admired R him as a baladeva who attains a Jaina-style liberation at the end of his 53 life, whereas they disapproved of Krs . a, and thereby saw to it that he .n (and by extension all other v asudevas ) would go directly to hell.54 Whether or not this was the Jainas original intention, and it very likely was, the final shape taken by the Jaina Universal History ultimately results in a fate for Krs . a that is, arguably, much superior to that of .n R ama.
49 See, e.g., Winternitz (1983: 434), Glasenapp (1999: 134), and Sumitra Bai and Zydenbos (1991: 260261). 50 See, e.g., Upadhye (1983: 16) and Cort (1993: 190). 51 Jaini (1993: 207208) accepts the ( plausible but unproven) supposition that the Hindu epics were originally pan-Indian heroic stories that were acceptable to all Indians, regardless of religion or creed. According to him, the composition of sectarian Jaina versions of the Hindu epics and pur an . as resulted from a hostile reaction to the Brahminic attempt to appropriate such worldly heroes as R ama and Krs . a, sanctify their secular lives, and set them up as divine incarnations of .n their god Vis . u. It is not at all certain that the Jaina versions specifically represent an indignant .n reply to an arrogant Brahminic appropriation of popular secular stories in the way that Jaini suggests; it is equally possible that the Jainas first encountered the stories of the R am ayan . a and Mah abh arata at a time when they were already thoroughly Brahminized, and the vais .n . ava Hindu theological overlay was already firmly entrenched. For that matter, it is possible (though unlikely) that the so-called vais .n . ava Hindu overlay was a feature of the epics from the beginning. 52 In the words of Jaini (1993: 212), the Jaina authors were employing their discriminatory wisdom. 53 As Jaini (1993: 220221) notes, on the basis of textual evidence, the Jainas seemed to be more fascinated by Krs . as father Vasudeva than were the Hindus, and this emphasis on Vasudeva may .n to deflect attention away from Krsna. reflect an attempt .. 54 nor Krsna go to hell upon their deaths in As avat aras of Vis ama . u, of course, neither R .n .. Hindu mythology. Nevertheless, the death of Krs . a in the Hindu tradition does have something of .n an ignoble twist to it: Krs . a first witnessed all the warriors of his own dynasty slaughter one .n after which he was mortally wounded through being shot in the foot another in a drunken brawl, by a hunter named Jar a. Upon his death, Krs . a immediately returned to heaven. It seems clear in .n his death was due to his failure to prevent, and his the Mah abh arata that the ignoble nature of unethical conniving during, the Bh arata war, and it is more specifically attributed to a curse laid upon him by G andh ar (Mah abh arata 11.25.41). For various accounts of the death of Krs . a in the .n Hindu tradition, see Mah abh arata 16.5, Vis an agavata Pur an .n . u Pur . a 5.37, Bh . a 11.3011.31, and Padma Pur an . a 6.252.
72
The most highly standardized and comprehensive Jaina Universal History is found in Hemacandras twelfth-century vet ambara Tris as t i al a k a purus acarita (T PC), or Biographies of the Sixty-Three . .. . Illustrious Beings. In this text, Hemacandra provides complete accounts 55 of all sixty-three al ak apurus . as of the current world epoch. Many 56 earlier Jaina texts contained biographies of al ak apurus . as, including baladevas, v asudevas, and prativ asudevas, but no text gives more comprehensive attention to the latter three than the TPC.57 As Dundas (1992: 20) has astutely commented, the [Jaina] Universal History in its widest extent gives the impression of being a massive introduction to the biography of Mahavira. So let us begin with the biography of Mah av ra. One of the interesting aspects of Jaina biographies is that, especially for prominent personages, the biographies always begin long before birth; that is, the biographies in the wider sense usually include stories of past lives. In the case of Mah av ra, more than twenty of his past lives are recounted in the TPC, including his past life as a man named Mar ci, who, according to the Jaina reckoning of time, lived untold millions of years ago. The story of Mar ci (TPC 1.6.11.6.52) is fascinating.58 He was the grandson of the first trthan . kara of the present epoch, Rs . abha, and the a monk and son of the first cakravartin Bharata.59 Though he became tried to follow the Jaina path, he did not have the belly for it. While he
Krs av ra in the Tris ak apurus . a and Mah .n . as .t . ial . acarita
55 Hemacandras TPC may even be historically responsible for the sharp division between these particular sixty-three great men ending with Mah av ra on the one hand, and later prominent leaders ( gan dharas) and monks of post-Mah av ra Jainism on the other. See Bruhn (1961: 10). . 56 ghad For example, Vimalasris Pamacariya, Jinad asas vayaka-Crn asas . i, San Vasudevahin d i, Ravis en as Padmapur an a, Haribhadras vayaka-T k a, Punn at a Jinasenas . . . . . . . . kas Cappan Harivamapur an l an apurisacariyam, Pus apur an . a (193031), .n . amah . padantas Mah . a, the Mah apur an a of Jinasena/Gun adhyayana-T a. . abhadra, Devendras Uttar . k . 57 As Bruhn (1961) rightly suggests, Hemacandra took it as his main task to compile and edit material from previous sources (some of which are no longer extant), and though the literary composition was his own, it is likely that little of the basic content in the TPC was original to Hemacandra. Nevertheless, his text was novel in its sheer comprehensiveness, especially in its systematic treatment of the baladevas, v asudevas, and prativ asudevas. 58 This story, which presents a past life of Mah av ra as a heretic, is in sharp contrast to an otherwise analogous story in the Buddhist tradition (Conze 1959: 2024), where our Buddha, in a kara, and was thereby set on the path to past life, met a previous Buddha named D pan Buddhahood. Though one text in the Therav ada Buddhist canon, the Pubbakammapiloti, does refer to twelve sins of the Buddha in past lives, at times resulting in re-birth in hell (Walters 1990), Buddhists do not (to my knowledge) depict the Buddha, in any of his past lives, as a founder of a heretical sect. 59 The story of Rs agavata Pur an . abha and Bharata in the Bh . a, discussed above, omits the story of Mar ci.
73
did not wish to continue the harsh ascetic lifestyle, he also did not wish to disgrace his illustrious family. In the end, he decided upon the heresy of a not-so-ascetic lifestyle, which is described in terms suspiciously similar to Buddhist practices.60 Eventually, he met a man named Kapila,61 who had likewise rejected Rs . abhas ascetic teaching and who wished to follow Mar cis path. He initiated Kapila and made him his own follower. From that time forth, there has been heresy among menav ra, in his past life as the heretic dicants (TPC 1.6.52).62 Thus, Mah Mar ci, may well be considered the founder of Buddhist and/or Hindu ascetic lineages, a role that bares a striking resemblance to Vis . us false .n avat ara being the founder of the heretical raman . ic traditions. Not long after Mar cis story is told, Rs . abha enumerated the names trthan karas of the present and vital statistics of the twenty-three future epoch (ending with Mah av ra), and then the eleven future cakravartins (TPC 1.6.2761.6.337). Finally, Rs . abha related the names of the twenty-seven future v asudevas, baladevas , and prativ asudevas that would appear (TPC 1.6.3381.6.369). Bharata then asked Rs . abha was whether or not there was anyone present in their assembly who kara, and Rs destined to become a trthan ci was . abha told him that Mar kara Mah destined to become the twenty-fourth trthan av ra. On the av ra, we are told, Mar cis soul would be born path from Mar ci to Mah in Bharataks asudeva of the present epoch, . etra as Triprs .t . ha, the first v and thence as a cakravartin named Priyamitra in a realm outside 63 asudeva, Mah av ras soul Bharataks . etra (TPC 1.6.3731.6.379). As a v
60 Briefly, he chooses to shave his head, rather than pluck his hair out; to refrain from destruction of gross life only rather than both gross and fine life; and to wear reddish-brown garments rather than white. These practices made him, according to the text, neither an ascetic . nor a householder (na samyato na ca gr . h; TPC 1.6.24), which is the typical Jaina attitude toward Buddhist monks. 61 khya tradition of This is surely intended to refer to the founder and promulgator of the S an Hindu philosophy, who is likewise named Kapila. While the connection between Kapila and khya is not made explicit here, it is when the stories of Mah S an av ras past lives are retold in TPC 10.1.25ff (Johnson 1962: 37). . . . 62 adks ayam cak ara ca | parivr ajakap akhan abhavat ||. . ayat sa kapilam svasah .d . am tatah . prabhrti c 63 resulted in According to Jaini (1979: 32), Mar cis sinful pride resulting from this prediction karas. In the Kalpa Stra (1979), there is no mention of his being the last of the twenty-four trthan Rs ci, nor are any of Mah av ras past . abhas son Bharata (by name), let alone his grandson Mar lives given. The chapters on Rs . abha and Bharata in Vimalasris Pamacariya (and Svayambhs . Apabhrama Pamacaryu) do not include the story of Mar ci, likely due to the story ending long . before the birth of Mah av ra. Punn at an . a Jinasenas eighth-century Harivamapur . a (9.1259.127) makes reference to Mar ci, but does not explicitly relate him to Mah av ra (as this text too ends before the birth of Mah av ra). Here, Mar ci is identified as the grandson of Rs . abha, is said to have of the sin of pride been overwhelmed by the rigors of the strict Jaina ascetic life and, out ad aya), promulgated an ascetic lineage ( parivr (m anakas . vratapos . an . a), donned red garments .. (k as ayam ves . . am), carried a staff (ekadan .d . ), washed (uci), and shaved his head (mun .d . ). Jaina
74
(like that of Krs . a) was destined to be reborn in hell. In fact, of the .n nine v asudevas of the current epoch, Triprs .t . ha was the only one to of hell (TPC 4.1.886).64 descend to the lowest (i.e., the seventh) level Krs . a, upon his death, fell only to the third level of hell (TPC .n 8.11.164). The salient point, of course, is that the unfolding of Mah av ras path takes him from heretic (Mar ci) to v asudeva (Triprs t ha) to cakravartin . . kara.65 Not all trthan karas are explicitly said to (Priyamitra) to trthan have been v asudevas in past lives, nor will all v asudevas necessarily karas. Nevertheless, Mah become trthan av ra is the most important kara in the Jaina tradition, and he was at one time, just like trthan Laks asudeva. . a and Krs . a, a v . man .n Furthermore, despite their sojourn in hell, the v asudevas Laks .a . man and Krs . a too have greater things in store. Laks . as soul will travel .n . man an arc similar to the soul of Mah av ra: he will eventually be reborn as a cakravartin outside Bharataks av ra, will become in . etra and, unlike Mah kara (TPC 7.10.2437.10.244).66 Krs the same lifetime a trthan . a, .n to though not explicitly named as a future cakravartin, is predicted kara of Bharataks become the twelfth trthan . etra in the coming world epoch (TPC 8.11.52).67 The future of Krs . as brother Baladeva is .n
texts treating the wider biography of Mah av ra (e.g., vayaka-niryukti and its commentaries), as well as texts covering the entire Universal History (e.g., the Cappan apurisacariyam of .n . amah ka, the Tris l an apur an . abhadra), do include this episode, . as .t . ilaks . an . amah . a of Jinasena/Gun sometimes twice (once in connection to the lives of Rs . abha and Bharata, and again in connection with the Mah avracarita itself ). In TPC 1.6.3801.6.383, Bharata goes to pay homage to Mar ci kara-hood, though he makes it clear that no upon hearing the prediction of his future trthan homage is due on account of his future status as either a v asudeva or cakravartin. For a discussion on the Mar ci episode in various Jaina texts, see Bruhn (1961: 1921). . 64 triprs at saptamm narak avanim. Two of the twelve cakravartins likewise, as a result of .t . ho g their unrighteous rule, descended to the seventh hell: Subhma (TPC 6.4.109) and Brahmadatta (TPC 9.1.600). 65 The notion that heretics and evil-doers can and will find their way to liberation is not extraordinary in the Jaina tradition. Typically, the prativ asudevas, though reborn in hell after being killed by the v asudeva, will rise again to attain liberation. Even the first heretic in Mah av ras congregation, Jam ali, the equivalent of the Buddhas Devadatta, is predicted to attain liberation within five future births. See Dundas (2006). 66 kara-hood in a region outside Bharataks It might be argued that being granted trthan . etra is slightly less illustrious than inside Bharataks etra. . 67 kara-hood, Jaini (1993: 229) On the issue of Krs . as impending (though improbable) trthan .n states: There is also unanimous agreement that Krs . as birth as a human being will take place .n kara. If immediately as he emerges from hell and that it will be his last birth, the birth as a T rthan this were the case, then one must wonder when Krs . a could have accumulated those sixteen .n kara. It seems that Krs meritorious acts that are considered prerequisites for birth as a T rthan . as .n kara was the result of an exceptional destination to become so exalted a person as a T rthan concession made by the Jaina ac aryas in an effort to rehabilitate Krs . a and make this assimilation .n irrevocable. Jaini, however, does not offer any particular motive for such a concession or rehabilitation. As noted above, the Jainas do display a tendency to rehabilitate heretics and
75
extraordinary as well. Unlike baladevas in general, and especially the eight baladevas that preceded him in the current epoch (including R ama), Baladeva did not attain emancipation upon death, but rather av ra, he is destined was reborn as a god in heaven.68 According to Mah kara of Bharataks to become the thirteenth trthan etra in the coming . world epoch.69 In other words, among the epic heroes R ama, Laks . a, Baladeva, . man and Krs ama is now the only one not destined to become a . a, R .n . Even S kara trthan t a, R amas faithful wife, is predicted to attain emanci kara. Perhaps more surpation as a chief disciple ( gan . adhara) of a trthan kara of whom she will be a disciple is none other prising yet, the trthan than the soul of R avan asudeva who had abducted her in . a, the evil prativ 70 ama, which originally may have the Jaina R am ayan . a. The liberation of R been intended to appear glorious in comparison with Krs to . as descent .n 71 hell, seems now to have become somewhat prosaic by comparison. When the Universal History is read chronologically, the soul of Mah av ra is, of course, a v asudeva long before Krs . a is born. As scholars, .n
evil-doers, perhaps indicating that no amount of past wickedness need be an insurmountable obstacle to liberation. The Jaina texts are not unanimous on the names of the twenty-four future karas (e.g., compare the list in the third appendix to the Samav ga Stra (1982) (verses trthan ay an . 7477) with Harivamapur an . a 60.55860.562 and TPC 10.13.18610.13.200) nor which of them Krs . a and Baladeva will become; the important point is that they are unanimous that Krs . a will .n .n kara in the coming utsarpin indeed become a trthan (e.g., bhavis yattrthakrd dharih . . .; . karas in the coming utsarpin Harivamapur an . a 62.63). For a discussion of Jaina trthan . , see Balbir (1991). 68 Reference to the fact that Baladeva was the only baladeva of the current world epoch not to gain liberation, but rather to be reborn in Brahmaloka, is found as far back as the third appendix ga, verse 67. to the Samav ay an 69 There seems to be some confusion as to Baladevas ultimate fate in the TPC. While Mah av ra kara, named Nis predicts that he will become the thirteenth trthan aya, in the coming utsarpin . kas . . kara of the present avasarpin (Johnson 1962: 347), Nemin atha (the twenty-second trthan . and first cousin to Krs . a and Baladeva) suggests something different. He predicts that Baladeva will attain .n kara Amama, i.e., Krs liberation in the congregation of the trthan . a in a future birth. Speaking to .n sa moksam upay Krs atha states of Baladeva: trthan athasya te trthe asyati (TPC . a, Nemin .n . 8.11.54). 70 van This was predicted by R ama himself, upon his attaining omniscience (tatah . ra . ajvah . sa trthan atho bhavis ac cyutas tasya bh av gan an || TPC 7.10.241). . yati | vaijayant . adharo bhav 71 If we consider, (1) that the births of v asudevas are heralded by seven auspicious dreams (half kara or cakravartin) while that of the baladevas is accompanied by only as many as herald a trthan four, (2) that both Rs av ra listed the names of the future v asudevas before the future . abha and Mah baladevas, and (3) that the general pattern of baladevas attaining liberation upon death was karasuspended for Baladeva alone, seemingly for the purpose of granting him eventual trthan hood, then the baladeva status of R ama in the Jaina Universal History is comparatively pedestrian. Jaini (1993: 230) suggests that R ama, unlike [Baladeva], was deemed virtuous enough to attain moks . a in that very life, and thus Baladevas rebirth in heaven should be taken as an indication of his lack of virtue. According to Jaina doctrinal principles, this may be true, but I still contend that Baladeva is eventually granted a more exalted position than R ama in the grand scheme of Jaina mythology.
76
however, we are justified in viewing all of the al ak apurus . as (excepting Mah av ra and perhaps P arva) as literary creations that could be manipulated to fit into a pre-arranged pattern. In this context, there seems to be no question that Krs . a is accorded a very high standing in .n a Mah that he becomes, in a sense, av ra-in-the-making, while Mah av ra becomes a Krs . a-of-the-past. Given the Jaina belief in an .n to infinity in both past and future, the only eternal universe stretching significant difference between Krs av ra is that they entered . a and Mah .n slightly different points in time. kara-hood at the stream to trthan
There is, in the TPC, another bold similarity between Krs . a and .n life of Mah av ra. As mentioned above, the heretic Mar ci, a past Mah av ra, is said to be the founder of the tradition of lax ascetics in India, likely referring to Buddhists and Hindu ascetics. In a similar fashion, the Jaina Krs . a is said to have been the founder of the Hindu .n 72 Krs . a-bhakti cult, thereby providing Hindus with yet another deluded .n religious practice. Hemacandra tells us that, upon his death, Krs . a s .n brother Baladeva became a god in heaven (rather than attaining emancipation); as a god, he visited Krs . a in hell with the hope of cheering .n him up. But Krs . a had his own ideas. He told Baladeva to return to .n Bharataks . etra, and to
ga bow, conch and club, wearing bright display me holding cakra, arn yellow clothes and riding on a celestial car with the T arks . ya-banner, and display yourself, far and wide, holding pestle and plough, wearing dark blue clothes and riding in a celestial car with the Palm-banner. It should be declared throughout the world that the imperishable R ama and Krs at will, thereby erasing our previous humiliation. . a roam here .n (TPC 8.12.80-82)73
The Jaina Krs . a as Founder of Hindu Krs . a-Bhakti .n .n
Baladeva agreed to this plan of elevating their reputations, and did just as Krs . a suggested. He also spoke to the people of Bharataks .n . etra, proclaiming:
72 As Jaini (1993: 230231) notes, a similar (and earlier) version of this story is found in . Harivamapur an . a 65. . . . 73 gaan khagad tad gaccha bharate cakra arn adharam | ptavastram t arks am . yaketum. darayer m . . gal vim anagam || nl ambaram t alaketum l an ayogradh arakam | darayeh svam ca sarvatra . . vim anastham pade pade || yath a hy anavarau r amakrs av ih arin .n . au svecch . au | iti loke praghos . ah . sy at prvanyatk arab adhakah . a tallies well with the typical .n . ||. This illusion suggested by Krs Hindu conception of Krs . a and Baladeva. .n
77
My good people! Having made auspicious images of us, you must worship them respectfully, with the conviction that we are the Supreme Deities. We alone bring about creation, preservation and destructionwe came here from heaven and return to heaven at our whim. The city of Dv avak a was constructed by us, and was destroyed when we wished to leave. There is no other creator or destroyer, and we alone can grant heaven. (TPC 8.12.848.12.86)74
The people, successfully duped by Baladeva, carried out his commands, and being a god, Baladeva had the ability to reward them with great good fortune75 for their devotion. And thus, according to Jainas, did the Hindu tradition of Krs . a-worship begin in the land of India! .n This account of the deceitful origin of Krs . a idols is certainly slander.n ous from the Hindu point of view, but it may have been adapted from a 76 similar story told on the origin of idols in the Hindu pur an . as. Whatever the case, it is clear that the Jainas were not content merely to adapt Krs . a to their own purposes; they felt compelled to explain why .n Hindus mistakenly worship him as an eternal demiurgic god.77
Mah av ra as an Epic Hero

As alluded to above, the creation of the baladevav asudevaprativ asudeva triads seems to have been, in part, a device by which the Jainas could incorporate the epics R am ayan abh arata/Krs . a. a and Mah .n cycle into their mythology. At the center of the Jaina versions of these epics is the cosmically ordained battle between v asudeva (e.g., Laks man a, Kr s n a) and prativ a sudeva (e.g., R a van a, Jar asandha). By . . . .. v establishing the asudevas as epic heroes, and by proclaiming Mah av ra to have been a v asudeva in the past, Jainas have, by association, made Mah av ra into an epic hero. As the v asudeva Triprs .t . ha, the soul of rival Avagr Mah av ra takes part in a battle with his prativ asudeva va (TPC 4.1.1084.1.762). In Hemacandras text, this episode is dwarfed in size by the stories of the R am ayan abh arata. Nevertheless, . a and Mah the story of Triprs t ha and A vagr va is the third-longest account of a .. v asudeva-prativ asudeva battle, and itself forms a sort of mini-epic.
. 74 h evam ce ca bho loka a nau pratim ah ah stadevat abuddhy a yyam . krtv . ubh . | prakr . . .. srstisthitisam pjayat adar at || vayam eva yatah h arak arin ah | vayam diva ih ay amo y ama ca . .. . . . a ca n anyo svecchay a divam || nirmit a dv arak a sm abhih a ca yiy asubhih a hart . samhrt . | kart sti svargad a vayam eva ||. . . 75 pratim arcakakartr n am mah antam udayam dadau sa surah . . (TPC 8.12.88). 76 See, e.g., Brahma Pur an a 47. . 77 To add to our list of stories explaining how various religious practices originated, Jaini (1993: . 222224) recounts a Jaina explanation, found in Harivamapur an . a 49, of how the misguided Hindu blood sacrifices to the goddess Vindhyav asin first began.
78
The Jainas, it seems, were intent upon crediting Mah av ra with every grand deed, both worldly and ascetic, of which a soul is capable. By the time Hemacandra was finished, the soul of Mah av ra had been to the highest heaven and lowest hell, had been a heretic, had stood firm in battle as a v asudeva, had stood firm in righteous sovereignty as a cakravartin, and finally had stood firm in ascetic discipline in order to achieve the highest position possible for a soul.
FURTHER ADAPTATIONS IN JAINA MYTHOLOGY

In the process of making Krs . a their own, the Jainas were .n forced to contend with a constellation of theological issues relating to the Hindu Krs n a, all of which required some reworking in order .. in a Jaina context. I will address only three. First, to fit comfortably for many Hindus, Krs . a was a soteriologic figure in a manner that .n Jaina doctrine could not accept. Second, the association between Krs . a and Vis . u, or more pointedly, the fact that Krs . a was con.n .n .n celestial god sidered by Hindus to be an earthly incarnation of the Vis . u, did not fit with Jaina ontology. And third, the pervasive .n Hindu mythological motif that forces of good/gods/order and evil/ demons/disorder are locked in an eternal struggle, a struggle in which the Hindu Krs . a actively partook, did not rest easily with .n the radically individualistic law of karma promulgated by the Jaina philosophers.78
Krs . a as a Soteriologic Figure .n
The Hindu notion that Vis . u-Krs . a is a supreme deity, the .n .n creator, sustainer, destroyer, and re-creator of the universe, deserving of uncompromising love and devotion, and who will, out of returned affection and devotion, bring ultimate salvation to his devotees, has no place in the Jaina universe (despite the fact that, according to Jainas, it was Krs . a himself who was the source of .n this erroneous belief ). No such being can or does exist in the Jaina karas can only guide the faithful to the path of cosmos: even trthan salvation. Gods do exist in the Jaina universe, but they are merely a form or station which any soul, with sufficient good karma, may temporarily attain.
78 The law of karma is operational in the Hindu tradition as well, though it is somewhat mitigated in the devotional traditions where God (e.g., Vis . u, Krs . a) can bring about the salvation .n .n of his devotees regardless of their karmic circumstances.
79
In adapting Krs . a to Jaina doctrine, the Jainas made use of a .n shared character to set the theological record straight: Krs . a was a .n unable man, not a god, and far from being able to save others, he was to avoid descending into hell himself upon his death.79 Seeking out the divine assistance of Krs . a is clearly misguided in a Jaina context, but .n kara, predict for the Jainas do, in depicting Krs . a as a future trthan .n coming world epoch. In this larger him a soteriologic status in the context, the Jainas do not ultimately strip Krs . a of his soteriologic .n status, but rather reorient it in a manner acceptable to Jaina doctrinal principles.
Hindu Incarnations and Jaina Recurring Characters

One method by which the Hindu epic and pur an . ic authors struck a compromise between the mythological richness of the many and the philosophical satisfaction of the one is the theory of a single deity taking multiple forms. In the case of vais .n . ava theology, this is seen in the multiple incarnations of Vis . u, includ.n ara. In aiva mythology, a ing R ama,80 Krs . a, and the false avat .n similar (though somewhat distinct) maneuver is found in the identi81 fication of iva with his gan . as.
79 One might wonder why Krs asudeva rival Jar asandha, did not . a, after killing his prativ .n renounce the world and take initiation as a Jaina monk. He did, after all, hear a sermon delivered kara Nemin by his cousin, the twenty-second trthan atha, a sermon that prompted the renunciation of many of Krs . as contemporaries. It is well known that: When the vow is taken for but a single .n day, the path leads nowhere else but heaven (vrate hy ek aham atre pi na svarg ad anyato gatih .; TPC 7.4.214). Of all the v asudevas, Krs . a is the only one that seems to toy with the idea of .n the TPC deals directly with this issue (for what is likely renouncing, and thus this is the first time the earliest variant of this story, see Antagad ao 5.1; Barnett 1907: 8081). The omniscient . adas gins [i.e. v Lord Nemin atha tells Krs arn asudevas] absolutely never become ascetics due to the . a: .n nid impediment created by a ana [i.e. a sinful desire for a future life]. They inevitably go below [i.e., . a [the third hell] ( j atv a tad aayam sv am proce krs alukaprabh to hell]. You will go to V .n .a . . gin kad api hi | na arn anena krt argal ah at tvam . ah . pravrajanti nid . || gacchanty avayam te dhast g am v aluk aprabh am | TPC 8.11.498.11.50ab). The nid ana made by Krs . a in his previous life as .n gadatta was merely for universal popularity (vivav Gan allabhya; TPC 8.5.22) and according to the story, Krs . a continued to suffer from this egotistical desire in hell, provoking the people of .n Bharataks . etra to make images of him and worship them with devotion. The notion that it is the result of a nid ana made in a past life that causes a v asudeva to necessarily go to hell upon death (and the lack of a nid ana that allows the baladevas to rise up) is found in several places in the ga states: an vet ambara canon. For example, the third appendix to the Samav ay an an a r am a . id . akad . . savve vi ya kesav a niy an a | ud am r am a kesav a savve ahog am (verse 66). This is . akad . .d . hamg echoed verbatim in vayaka-niryukti 415. 80 Technically, Krs ama or simply R ama, was also . as brother Baladeva, frequently called Balar .n considered an incarnation of either Vis . u or Vis . us serpent es .n .n . a, though in this instance I refer to the hero of the R am ayan . a. 81 See Granoff (2006). Among Hindu goddesses, there is again a tendency to identify regional, originally independent goddesses with forms of Laks or P arvat or even a single unified . m goddess (dev).
80
In the Jaina tradition, neither Krs asudevas are . a nor any of the v .n incarnations of Vis . u or any other god. According to Jainas, all life .n comes in discreet units referred to as jvas or souls, and the conditions in which souls find themselves differ as a result of their past actions, following the law of karma; intrinsically, however, all souls are equivalent. In this context, which permits no ultimate ontological distinction among any living beings, the notion of an ontologically distinct divine being taking birth on earth as a human being is simply nonsensical. Assuming that Krs . a was already viewed by Hindus as an incarnation .n of Vis . u at the time when the Jainas first encountered his mythology, .n obvious modifications were required. The modification made by the Jainas seems entirely in keeping with their view of the universe: just as karas or cakravartins without one may posit a recurring series of trthan claiming an absolute identity among them, one may posit a series of v asudevas, baladevas, and prativ asudevas. By skirting the issue of divine incarnation, the Jainas avoided the sticky problem of providing a consistent and coherent theory of how, exactly, incarnation works, something with which the Hindus struggled for centuries and never finally resolved.82 But in place of this, the Jainas were forced to explain what, exactly, made a person a v asudeva or baladeva, if in fact each one had his own separate and discreet soul. To my knowledge, the Jainas never address this question directly. If becoming a v asudeva is merely a matter of accruing the appropriate karma, there would be no a priori reason to suppose that, in an eternal universe, there would not be an occasion in which every non-liberated soul would be a v asudeva at the same time. But such is never allowed. In Bharataks . etra, for example, there will be sixty-three al ak apurus as in each and every world epoch, with absol. utely no exceptions.83 There will never be, in Bharataks . etra, two karas, or two cakravartins, or two v trthan asudevas at the same time. The rule is clearly stated,84 though the reasons are never given. Statistically, this rule could never withstand an infinite time period, in which every conceivable situation could be expected, unless there was
82 For a discussion of the relationship between Vis . u and Krs . a in the Hindu tradition, see .n .n Matchett (2001). For a discussion of the process of grafting theological principles onto the earthly Krs . a, see Bryant (2003: xxxvixxxix). Similar difficulties arise with the notion of a formless god .n inhabiting a permanent or even impermanent image or idol (Granoff 2006). 83 karas in the present epoch, and that the soul of It is true that three cakravartins became trthan kara Mah the v asudeva Triprs av ra, but the point is that there can .t . ha eventually became the trthan never be, simultaneously, two of any class of al ak apurus . as in Bharataks . etra, and never more than sixty-three total in any given world epoch. 84 See Geen (2008).
81
an overarching control in the universe or some natural law that inhibits such an occurrence. We must infer, therefore, that the consistent and unvarying series of al ak apurus . as in Bharataks . etra constitutes a cosmic law that need merely be stated, without further explanation. Nevertheless, the eternal nature of Vis . u in the Hindu tradition is .n maintained by the Jainas in the sense that the office or station of v asudeva is a permanent feature of the universe, even if it remains unoccupied most of the time, and even if the soul of each v asudeva is entirely distinct. Furthermore, the application of a host of vais .n . ava epithets to each v asudeva encourages a sense of unity among them, as any given Jaina v asudeva may be referred to as a n ar ayan . a, a vis .n . u, a gin, and so on. The physical description of each v Krs arn asudeva .n . a, a is similar, and each one is provided with the same weapons and insignia by the gods.85 Thus, while on the one hand the Jainas insist that the soul of each v asudeva is distinct, on the other they depict each v asudeva as being very much the same as the others. In this way, the form of the Jaina v asudevas tends to mirror the vais aras,86 even if the .n . ava avat theology differs.
The Cosmic Battle Between Good and Evil

In the Hindu tradition, descriptions of, or allusions to, battles between the forces of good and evil date as far back as the early Vedic texts in the form of ongoing struggles for cosmic supremacy between the gods (devas), representing truth and order, and demons (asuras) representing falsity and disorder. It seems fair to say that such battles between good and evil are built into the fabric of the cosmos as envisioned by Hindus. The vais ara-concept seems to have devel.n . ava avat oped within this vision of the universe, as most of the traditional avat aras of Vis . u were involved in overcoming demons in one form or .n another. In the Jaina tradition, the only battle of any ultimate relevance is ones battle with oneself: the only person standing in the way of ones salvation is oneself, in the form of karma accrued from past lives as well as karma being continually accrued through misguided violent acts. Though Jaina monks, practicing harsh asceticism, are routinely depicted as suffering the onslaughts of various beings (human, demonic, or divine), these dramas were intended to depict the returning
85 For a summary of the iconographical features of v asudevas in Jaina literature, see Shah (1987: 7374). 86 In fact, there is much greater conformity among Jaina v asudevas than there is among Vis . us .n avat aras.
82
of evil deeds performed in the past, brought to fruition by the law of karma. These onslaughts were to be borne with perfect equanimity; to regard any hostile being as ones enemy was to slip from the true path.87 By having regular and standardized battles between every v asudeva and prativ asudeva, the Jaina v asudevas may, at first sight, appear to be fulfilling the traditional role of Vis aras in the Hindu epics and . us avat .n pur an . as: restoring the forces of law and order (dharma) in the world by overcoming forces of unrighteousness and disorder (adharma). But this may be an erroneous conclusion. Historically, the Jainas seem to have wavered on the issue of whether or not to fully institutionalize this battle between good and evil. The decision as to whether or not the evil prativ asudeva ought to be included among al ak apurus . as seems to have been difficult for Jainas; originally, the number of al ak apurus . as was set at fifty-four rather than sixty-three, which reflects the noninclusion of the nine prativ asudevas.88 Though the Jainas did finally accept the prativ asudevas as al ak apurus . as, and in this sense cosmically institutionalized the recurring battle between good and evil, they lent no significance whatsoever to the struggle or its outcome. The battle between v asudeva and prativ asudeva is merely one of those things that happens from time to time. The battles serve no soteriologic function, and if they do serve an important role in the Jaina cosmos, it is difficult to discern what it might be.89 Every v asudeva kills his prativ asudeva rival, and upon his death, every v asudeva descends into hell. This does not provide much motivation for the violent triumph of good over evil.
CONCLUSION
South Asian religious literature is replete with examples of shared characters who, at times, are developed and explored with almost
87 In the Hindu Bhagavadgt a, Krs . a continually urges Arjuna to physically participate in the .n the victory of the gods over the demons, or dharma over Bh arata war, thereby contributing to adharma. It is also true, however, as Brian Black reminded me, that Krs . a repeatedly speaks to .n 6.25.37) standing in the Arjuna of a sort of yogic war against internal enemies (e.g., Mah abh arata ga), delusion (moha), desire (k way of spiritual liberation, such as attachment (san ama; icch a); attraction (r aga); fear (bhaya); anger (krodha); hatred/aversion (dves . a), memory lapses (smrti. . vibhrama), doubt (samaya), and willful intentions (samkalpa). In this latter case, Krs . a, as the .n usual. Lord of Yoga ( yogevara; Mah abh arata 6.33.4), is in closer harmony with Mah av ra than 88 For a discussion of this issue, see Geen (2009). 89 Bauer (2005), following the work of Pandit Sukhlalji Sanghvi, attempts to make sense of the Jaina Krs acaryavra (hero of wonders), in contradistinction . a as a karmavra (hero of deeds) and .n karas, who are dharmavras (heroes of righteousness). As I have discussed elsewhere to trthan (Geen 2008), I do not find this line of interpretation entirely satisfying.
83
bewildering variety. In some instances, the initial impetus for one religious tradition adopting popular characters from another seems to have been a desire to discredit or invert them: what better way to level a critique upon a rival tradition than to disparage its spiritual heroes, and to claim that the foundations of the rival traditions rest in heresy, fraud, or a scandalous corruption of the true path? There is little doubt that this is exactly what the Hindus intended in the pur an ara. The original purpose of the . ic story of Vis . us false avat .n story does not seem to have been merely a personal attack on Mah av ra or the Buddha directly, but also a clear demonstration that the path of the Veda and Vedic sacrifice is the true and eternal path, whereas the heterodox traditions, so clever in their logic and rationality, lead only to ruin. The story obviously developed in response to criticisms of Vedic sacrifice leveled by, among others, the Jainas and Buddhists, and the arguments made by the false avat ara against the Vedic sacrifices are in keeping with raman ara . ic doctrines. Over time, however, the false avat became identified with the Buddha alone. As such, vais .n . avas could now lay claim to the spiritually heroic life of the Buddha, and take credit for his propagation of non-violence throughout India. It is unlikely that such a trajectory would have been predicted by the authors of the original pur an . ic story, but once characters have been incorporated into a religious tradition, they may well take on a life of their own. The trajectory taken by the character Krs . a in the Jaina tradition is .n equally interesting. By the time of Hemacandra s TPC, the biography of Krs . a is not only fully developed, but has likewise made a significant .n contribution to the development of Jaina mythology and the wider biography of Mah av ra. Again, it is unlikely that those Jainas who first adopted Krs . a into their literary cast of characters could have predicted .n where it would lead. Yet for all his mythological significance, Krs .a .n does not seem to be particularly popular with Jainas.90 To what end, then, did the Jainas incorporate Krs . a into their mythology? They .n managed to redefine, or perhaps domesticate, Krs . a so as to strip him .n
90 The main focus of the Hindu Krs . a cult was the adorable and mischievous child/adolescent .n Krs . a of Vraj, a time in his life typically glossed over by Jainas. As the Jaina Krs . a was mainly a .n .n to attract pious worldly hero, with no soteriologic value in his present form, he was not calculated karas of the past and monks and nuns of the present. I do Jainas who tend to revere the trthan not, however, wish to suggest that Krs . a plays no role whatsoever in Jaina theory and practice. .n a do, in a few instances, play a minor role in certain Jaina Stories that include the character Krs . .n 179180). In the later medieval period, Krsna becomes practices (see, e.g., Cort 2001: 135, .. embroiled in discussions of Jaina dietary practices, especially the issue of eating meat and the impact it does or does not have on the Jaina faithful (Babb 1996: 178ff; Dundas 2000). Krs . a was .n also a sustained character of interest to certain Jaina vernacular poets (Dundas 2000: 95).
84
of the special soteriologic status he held in Hindu circles, and even managed to send him to hell. In this, they did not create a Krs . a that .n was calculated to rival the Hindu Krs . a in sheer popularity; rather, they .n that, though he did indeed exist provided their own laity with evidence and walk the land of Bharataks . a was simply not who the . etra, Krs .n the most effective way in Hindus said he was. This was perhaps which Jainas could counter the perceived threat of the popular Krs . a.n bhakti cult. Here, one might draw a parallel with the depiction of Jesus in the Qur an, wherein it is made clear that Jesus was indeed a pious prophet of God, but was quite simply not who the Christians said he was. More generally, the Jewish and Christian traditions are viewed in Islam as corruptions of the true faith: their prophets spoke the truth, but the message had somehow managed to be perverted. It would seem that this process of redefining characters and charging rivals with corrupting the true path is a common one indeed amongst religious traditions. In adopting and adapting Krs . a, however, the Jainas did not merely rede.n fine their rivals literary character: by expanding Krs . a and Baladeva .n into cosmically recurring characters, the Jaina poets went on to develop a mythological richness for the Jaina tradition it might otherwise never have had.
REFERENCES
1988 dipurn . a of crya Jinasena. Edited by Pan d it Pannalal Jain. 2 Vols. New Delhi, India: .. Bharatiya Jnanpith. Agnipur an at anagaryy am: Sarasvat yantre . am. Kalik Mudritam. vayaka-niryukti, with the t . ka of Haribhadra, Part 1. Mumba , India: r Bherul al Kanaiy al al Kot h a r Dh a rmika T rast a. . . . Da avat aracharitam of Ks . emendra, 472497. Kashi Sanskrit Series, 264. Varanasi, India: Chaukhabha Sanskrit Sansthan. Garud an at anagare: Sarasvat yantre . apur . am. Kalik Mudritam. . Harivamapurn at . a of (Punn . a) Jinasena. Edited by Pan ll. 2 Vols. Bombay, India: .d . it Darbr Man . ikacanda Digambara Jaina Granthaml.
1882 1981
1989
1890 193031
85
1979
Kalpa Stra. Translated into English by K. C. Lalwani. Delhi, India: Motilal Banarsidass. ga Pur Lin an . a. Translated into English by a Board of Scholars in the Ancient Indian Tradition and Mythology Series, volumes 56. Delhi, India: Motilal Banarsidass. Mah abh arata. Critically edited by V. S. Sukthankar et al. Poona, India: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Padmapurn Edited by Khemaraj . am. Shri Krishnadas. Bombay, India: Venkatevara Press. Pamacariya of c arya Vimalasri. Varanasi, India: Prakrit Text Society. Pamacaryu of Svayambh. Translated from . Apabhrama as Jaina R am ayan . -Paumacaryu by Shantilal Nagar. Delhi, India: B.R. Publishing Corporation. ga Stra. Jin Samav ay an agama Grantham al a, ka Granth an 8. Beawar, India: r gamaprak aana Samiti. . iva Pur a: Yuddhakhan an .d . a. . a. Rudrasamhit Translated into English by a Board of Scholars in the Ancient Indian Tradition and Mythology Series, volume 2. Delhi, India: Motilal Banarsidass. rmadbh agavatam. Madras, India: Sri Ram Publishers. Tris ak apurus ak avyam. Vol. 1 . as .t . ial . acaritamah (Parvan 1) Edited by Munir aja r caran . avijayaj Mah ar aja; Vol. 2 (Parvans 24) Edited by Munir aja r pun Mah ar aja; Vol. 3 . yavijayaj (Parvans 57) Edited by r raman kavijayaj . Gan lacandrasri; Vol. 4 (Parvans . i and Vijaya 89) Edited by r raman kavijayaj Gan . . i and Vijaya lacandrasri. Ahmedabad, India: Kalik alasarvaja r hemacandr ac arya Navama . Janma abd Smrti iks aranidhi. . a-Samsk . an
1973
193341
n.d.
1962 2002
1982
1970
1974 2001
86
1997
Vis .n . upurn . am (Critical Edition), Vol. 1. Edited by M.M. Pathak. Vadodara, India: Oriental Institute. Beitrge zur Geschichte von Vegetarismus und Rinderverehrung in Indien. Wiesbaden, Germany: Steiner. Absent Lord: Ascetics and Kings in a Jain Ritual Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press. karas of the Future. In Aspects of T rthan Jainology, Vol. III. ed. M. A. Dhaky and S. Jain. Varanasi, India: Parshwanath Vidyapeeth. Antagad ao. London, UK: The Royal Asiatic . adas Society. Hero of Wonders, Hero in Deeds: V asudeva Krishna in Jaina Cosmohistory. In Alternative Krishnas, ed. G. L. Beck, 151176. Albany: State University of New York Press. Introduction. In Cappan apurisacariyam .n . amah ka, ed. Pt. A. M. Bhojak, by c arya r l an 131. Ahmedabad, India: Prakrit Text Society. Krishna: The Beautiful Legend New York, NY: Penguin Books. The atrujaya M ah atmyam. Antiquary 30:239251, 288308. of God. Indian
Alsdorf, L. 1962 Babb, Lawrence A. 1996 Balbir, Nalini 1991 Barnett, L. D., trans. 1907 Bauer, J. H. 2005
Bruhn, Klaus 1961 Bryant, E. F. 2003 Burgess, James 1901 Conze, Edward 1959 Cort, John 1993 2001 Darb ar l al, Pan .d . it ed. 193031 Dundas, Paul 1992
Buddhist Scriptures. New York, NY: Penguin Books. An Overview of the Jaina Pur an an . as. In Pur .a Perennis, ed. W. Doniger, 185206. Albany: State University of New York Press. Jains in the World. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. . Harivamapur an at . a of (Punn . a) Jinasena. 2 vols. Bombay, India: Man . ikacanda Digambara Jaina Grantham al a. The Jains. New York, NY: Routledge.
87
2000
The Meat at the Wedding Feasts: Krs . a, .n Vegetarianism and a Jain Dispute. In Jaina Doctrine and Practice: Academic Perspectives, ed. J. T. OConnell, 95112. South Asian Studies Papers, no. 13. Toronto, Canada: Centre for South Asian Studies. The Later Fortunes of Jam ali. In Studies in Jaina History and Culture, ed. Peter Flgel, 3360. New York, NY: Routledge. The Rescue of Draupad . South Asian Studies 24:4966. Krs . a and His Rivals in the Hindu and Jaina .n Traditions. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 72/1:6399. Jaina Art and Architecture. Vol. I. New Delhi, India: Bharatiya Jnanpith. Jainism: An Indian Religion of Salvation. Translated from the Original German [1925] by Shridhar B. Shrotri. Delhi, India: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. The Violence of Non-Violence: A Study of Some Jain Responses to Non-Jain Religious Practices. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 15/1:143. iva and His Gan . as: Techniques of Narrative Distancing in Pur an . ic Stories. In Voice of the Orient: A Tribute to Prof. Upendranath Dhal, ed. Dr. Raghunath Panda, 76103. Delhi, India: Eastern Book Linkers. Jina Rs ara of Vis . u. Bulletin . abha as an Avat .n of the School of Oriental and African Studies 40/2:321337. The Jaina Path of Purification. Berkeley: University of California Press. Jaina Pur an an . as: A Pur . ic Counter Tradition. In Pur an a Perennis , ed. W. Doniger, 207249. . Albany: State University of New York Press.
2006
Geen, J. 2008 2009
Ghosh, A. 1974 von Glasenapp, H. 1999
Granoff, Phyllis 1992
2006
Jaini, P. S. 1977 1979 1995
88
Jayaswal, K. P. 1917 Johnson, H. (trans) 1962 Johnson, W. J. 1995 Matchett, F. 2001 Miller, B. S. 1977 OFlaherty, W. D. 1976 Olivelle, P. 1993 2004 Padmarajiah, Y. J. 2004 Pathak, K. B. 1918 Proudfoot, I. 1987 Schmidt, H.-P. 1968
The Historical Position of Kalki and His Identification with Yaodharman. Indian Antiquary 46:145153. Tris . as .t .ialkpurus . acaritra. Volume 6. (Gaekwad Oriental Series 140). Baroda, India: Oriental Institute. Harmless Souls. Banarsidass. Delhi, India: Motilal
Krs ara? Richmond, Surrey, UK: .n . a: Lord or Avat Curzon. Love Song of the Dark Lord: Jayadevas Gtagovinda. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. The Origins of Evil in Hindu Mythology. Berkeley: University of California Press. The rama System: The History and Hermeneutics of a Religious Institution. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. The Law Code of Manu. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. A Comparative Study of the Jaina Theories of Reality and Knowledge. (First Edition, 1963). Delhi, India: Motilal Banarsidass. New Light on Gupta Era and Mihirakula [Part 2]. Indian Antiquary 47:1622. . Ahims a and a Mah abh arata Story. Asian Studies Monographs, n.s. no. 9. Canberra: Australian National University. . The Origin of Ahims a. In Mlanges DIndianisme la Mmoir de Louis Renou (Publications de LInstitut de Civilisation Indienne, fasc. 28), 625655. Paris, France: ditions E. de Boccard. Jaina-Rpa-Man .d . ana, Volume 1. New Delhi, India: Abhinav Publications.
Shah, U. P. 1987
89
Strong, John S. 1989
The Legend of King Aoka: A Study and Translation of the Aok avad ana. Delhi, India: Motilal Banarsidass. (First published: Princeton University Press, 1983.) The Jaina Mah abh arata. In Essays on the Mah abh arata, ed. Arvind Sharma, 251273. New York, NY: E.J. Brill. ga, Upadhye: Papers. Mysore, India: Pras ar an University of Mysore. The Buddhas Bad Karma: A Problem in the History of Therav ada Buddhism. Numen 37/ 1:7095. Vishnu Purana. Third Edition. Calcutta, India: Punthi Pustak, 1961 (First Edition, London, 1840; Second Edition, London, 1888). A History of Indian Literature. Volume 2. Translated from the Original German [1922] by V. Srinivasa Sarma. Delhi, India: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers.
Sumitra Bai, B. N. and R. J. Zydenbos 1991 Upadhye, A. N. 1983 Walters, J. S. 1990 Wilson, H.H. (trans) 1961 Winternitz, Maurice. 1983

J Am Acad Relig 2011 Geen 58 89

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

J Am Acad Relig 2011 Geen 58 89

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune: Krs av ra in . a and Mah .

n the Hindu and Jaina Traditions

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

MAHVRA AND THE FALSE AVATRA OF VIS .U .N

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

THE JAINA KRS . A: A MAHVRA-IN-THE-MAKING .N

The Jaina Universal History

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Krs av ra in the Tris ak apurus . a and Mah .n . as .t . ial . acarita

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

The Jaina Krs . a as Founder of Hindu Krs . a-Bhakti .n .n

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Mah av ra as an Epic Hero

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

FURTHER ADAPTATIONS IN JAINA MYTHOLOGY

Krs . a as a Soteriologic Figure .n

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Hindu Incarnations and Jaina Recurring Characters

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

The Cosmic Battle Between Good and Evil

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Geen, J. 2008 2009

Ghosh, A. 1974 von Glasenapp, H. 1999

Granoff, Phyllis 1992

Jaini, P. S. 1977 1979 1995

Journal of the American Academy of Religion

Geen: Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune

Strong, John S. 1989

You might also like

Fair Trade and Reversal of Fortune: Krs av ra in . a and Mah .

Krs av ra in the Tris ak apurus . a and Mah .n . as .t . ial . acarita

Mah av ra as an Epic Hero