[INDOLOGY] International Journal of Jaina Studies Vol. 16, Nos. 1-3

[Peter Flugel]

Disentangling Poetry from Profit in Jain Monks’ Literary Works

Author: Aleksandra Restifo

Year: 2020

ISSN: 1748-1074

International Journal of Jaina Studies (Online) Vol. 16, No. 1 (2020) 1-9
Abstract

Greed (lobha) is one of the four passions (kaṣāya) that are the primary
causes for the soul’s bondage by karmic matter. Medieval Jain literature is
brimful with stories and accounts where greed is condemned and ridiculed.
This article looks at some of these literary instances, in which court
poets attempt to uncouple the production of poetry from the monetary reward
of a patron. It focuses on the three Jain authors - Bālacandra (thirteenth
century), Hemacandra (1089-1172), and Rāmacandra (1093-1174) - who, I
argue, set themselves apart from some other non-Jain poets, who engaged in
what they implied was the foul practice of writing poetry for personal
enrichment. While these monks, as well as Jains more generally, valorized
wealth and riches for the purpose of spreading the Jain dharma, building
temples, and worshipping the Jina, they denounced the reduction of the
poetic skill to the fiscal benefits it can produce.

Download File (pdf; 74kb) <https://www.soas.ac.uk/ijjs/file146288.pdf>
[image: Adobe PDF File Icon] <https://www.soas.ac.uk/ijjs/file146855.pdf>The
Gold of Gods: Stories of Temple Financing from Jain Prabandhas

Author: Basile Leclère

Year: 2020

ISSN: 1748-1074

International Journal of Jaina Studies (Online) Vol. 16, No. 2 (2020) 1-25
Abstract

Since they are intended to recall to their audience the pious actions of
illustrious members of the Jain community from a more or less remote past,
the medieval Prabandhas devote an important space to the activity of temple
building as it is probably one of the most expensive donations that could
be made to the community. Thus, biographies of prominent Śvetāmbara laymen
such as the Caulukya king Kumārapāla or the ministers Vastupāla and
Tejaḥpāla include lists of religious edifices erected or renovated at their
behest. As regards the sums spent on these constructions, however, it
appears that they have not received the same attention from the authors.
While there is only sparse information about funding issues in the
chronicles dating back to the fourteenth century, later sources from the
fifteenth century record precise amounts of money as well as other details
unknown otherwise. Moreover, none of them clearly states where the money
exactly came from. It might be assumed that laymen financed religious
foundations with their personal wealth, but positive evidence is lacking to
prove it. On the contrary, it is said in several stories of temple
construction that the funds were miraculously obtained through the
intercession of a deity. What can account for this supernatural motif seems
to be the need of a divine sanction for the Jain sanctuaries dealt with,
either because they rose to prominence at a comparatively late date or
because they were located at a site claimed by other creeds. Another
motivation would be to extoll the merit of the human founders of the
temples inasmuch as the deities choose them on account of their good
fortune and pious conduct.

Download File (pdf; 214kb) <https://www.soas.ac.uk/ijjs/file146855.pdf>
[image: Adobe PDF File Icon]
<https://www.soas.ac.uk/ijjs/file146875.pdf>Salvaging
the Plagiarist: Digambara Jain Text Production in Early Modernity

Author: Gregory M. Clines

Year: 2020

ISSN: 1748-1074

International Journal of Jaina Studies (Online) Vol. 16, No. 3 (2020) 1-23
Abstract

In 1991 Padmanabh S. Jaini published an article highlighting the similarity
between two early modern Sanskrit Pāṇḍavapurāṇas, the first by the
Mūlasaṅgha author Śubhacandra and the second, composed about fifty years
later, by the Kāṣṭhāsaṅgha author Śrībhūṣaṇa. Jaini demonstrates that
Śrībhūṣaṇa must have copied his sectarian rival’s earlier work and
subsequently labels Śrībhūṣaṇa a plagiarist. While not contesting the fact
that Śrībhūṣaṇa copied Śubhacandra, the goal of this article is to
reconsider the specific label of plagiarist levelled against the
Kāṣṭhāsaṅgha author. By examining the history of both premodern South Asian
and contemporary western definitions of plagiarism and by introducing
another example of Digambara Jain textual copying during the early modern
period, the article argues that labelling Śrībhūṣaṇa a plagiarist
inappropriately reads back modern ideas of personal intellectual property
onto a premodern literary landscape in which textual copying was, in
actuality, a valid form of intersectarian argumentation.

Download File (pdf; 177kb) <https://www.soas.ac.uk/ijjs/file146875.pdf>


Dr Peter Flügel
Chair, Centre of Jaina Studies
Professor of the Study of Religions and Philosophies
Department of History, Religions and Philosophies
School of Oriental and African Studies
University of London
Thornhaugh Street
Russell Square
London WC1H OXG

Tel.: (+44-20) 7898 4776
E-mail: pf8 at soas.ac.uk
http://www.soas.ac.uk/jainastudies


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20200326/8ccb0338/attachment.htm>