 May I request you all, please fold your hands in prayer pose, close your eyes gently, breathing. Arahanta Siddha Esu Panchana Mokkaam Chasa Vesing Havai Mangalam Adhamam Mangalam Hello and welcome, 20th anniversary workshop. It doesn't feel so long but it's quite amazing and in a way it's a special occasion. And I'm very pleased to see so many of you coming here who are not giving a paper but who have been part of the venture for many years. This is of course not just a SOAS conference but it is a Jain Studies Network conference. One has to say that quite clearly. I mean the topic of these years proceedings also came quite naturally because there are a number of connected events, projects, etc. which actually called for a self-reflective topic. First of all we completed of course the Jaina Omastikon from Klatt last year. We launched this massive volume with no doubt a milestone of, we can celebrate it every year again, of Jaina studies. We completed a hundred and, what is it, forty years ago and finally came out. Then there is the Brill Encyclopedia on which everyone in the room probably works at the moment. And I think the editors which will tell us more about it tomorrow see as a kind of summing up of the state of art in Jaina studies at the moment. And then there is of course the change in generation of scholars in job in situ because I mean a generation of teachers in employment will retire no doubt within the next ten years. And whether their posts will be filled or simply cut we will have to see. In India Jaina studies as an academic subject doesn't exist anymore one could say except some pockets here and there such as the Monastik University, Jain Vishwabhati and so and so forth. And so there is something really to discuss I think and we have a few innovative ideas. We have two discussion forums tomorrow and one on the Brill Encyclopedia, one on the state and future of Jaina studies. And of course we have some wonderful celebrations because the Shravanabela Gona Bhatt will present the winner or bestow the winner of its 2017 prize, famous Prakrit Prize tomorrow. And we don't reveal the name of course yet but Hampana is ready and we all look forward to that one. The proceedings will be started today by the lecture, the annual Jain lecture by Everde Klerk. However as so often the things don't go to plan and her son fell sick and she can't be here in person. However with the help of Charles, Charles why don't you show yourself, our new Executive Centre Program Officer. It does a wonderful job and he set up everything possible here in technological wizardry so she will be present via Skype and we hope it will all go well. Questions are not allowed as usual, as you know by now, learning the hard way and we shall see how that goes. I have to thank the sponsors of course which are this year mainly the universities that sponsor the travel fair and the accommodation of the speakers. And three organisations who in the last minute helped covering our expenses and this is the Jain Vishwabhati London, the Jiv Daya Foundation and of course the Shravanabela Gona Matta. For the first time we received some funding from them which is I think also worth noting because without funding after all we cannot have the conference dinners, most important. Okay, I have to say something about the sponsorship, since it's our 20th anniversary lecture I want to say something. Whenever I travel to places, academic or Jain people ask me, so who is funding actually the Jain Centre? Which Jain family is funding the Jain Centre? And I say, absolutely no one. And I say, what? I just have no one is funding this. And of course we get for the conferences some sums, they're all on the sponsors list, if you go on the web page, every penny is basically accounted for. And since I'm also on the to be retired list within the next 10 years, I would like to flag up the necessity of endowing the charity so as well. And to strengthen the case, I have invited one of our regulars from Detroit, Dr. Manish Matta, to give a five minute presentation on the fantastic successes in fundraising for Jain oppositions in the United States. Manish, where are you? Pajan and everybody. And Pranam and Peter, thank you very much. You were going to co-present this with me now. I mean, it is my great pleasure to be here before you, and especially such a distinguished and accomplished audience. So I'm just nobody. All I do is work with Jaina. and Jaina this wonderful evening to helping prove the interactions and continue the interactions and outreach between the 70 Jain centers across North America and Canada, in the U.S. and Canada that we have, with our British brothers and sisters and many others who have come here from other countries across Europe and India, so it is my pleasure to be able to give you this very quick report. If we can advance this to the next slide, I want to give a lot of credit to Dr. Sulek Jain who is a complete driving force and motivator for the kind of academic liaison work going on in North America and I'm really doing very poor justice to the kind of passion and enthusiasm and energy that he brings even at age 80 to the world of Jain academic studies in North America and we just got off the phone this afternoon with him. He is pursuing three more unique chair professorships in North America to endow and sponsor Jain studies and research activities. So let's really quickly take this report to the next slide which has just a little bit of statistical details about what we have done in the last approximately eight to ten years with the majority of the progress being achieved in literally the next three to five years at best. But it had to start somewhere. It started with bringing the scholars together. It started with ISJS, the International School for Jain Studies which brings students that immersive cultural, social and scholarly opportunity to interact with Jains. So with all that we have been able to work with successful business and academic and entrepreneurship members of the Jaina community across North America and fund for example three chair professorships in Jainism at University of California at Irvine campus. There's a position open there. Any budding PhD dissertation or postdoc individuals are encouraged to apply with all the accomplishments that you have. At University of California Riverside and UC Davis each of these is being funded at least a million dollars today to be able to be supporting these students into perpetuity for their Jain academic based research and travel and other grants that would help sustain these scholarships and then the chair professorships. So then we also have four full professorships in Jain studies currently at Florida International University where JVB also has a strong presence. We have some niches there but we also have Stephen Wohls I believe was going to be here. University of North Texas, Emory University, Loyola Marymount University, two postdoctoral fellowships in Jainism at Rice University and University of Texas Austin. One center for Jain and Sikh studies that we share and co-fund at Loyola Marymount University. And then there are 14 centers for Jain studies where classes in Jain research academic way of life topics are offered, conflict and peace resolution for example in states such as Pennsylvania, California, Texas, Massachusetts, Illinois, Connecticut and also in Ottawa University in Canada. And then there are so many overseas centers that contribute students to this ISJS initiative as well as partner with Jaina and come to our Jain conventions. So I just want to leave with a very quick invitation. There are two opportunities to interact with Jaina this year. One is July 4th weekend in Chicago, Illinois at the Young Jains of America convention and next year 2019, the same July 4th Independence Day weekend for us in Los Angeles where the Jaina convention will be held. I think it's the 20th Jaina convention. So there are some parallels here with the 20th Jain studies workshop. So with that I want to thank you all very much for your time and patience and Peter, congratulations on pulling off 20 years. So what it comes down to now, parting words is my challenge to our Jain brothers and sisters here, humbly please do something to sustain the phenomenal activity going on here that will keep us coming together and celebrating really Jain studies and graduating even more scholars and academicians on this very, very important way of preserving our culture and way of life. And please my UK brothers and sisters, this is the best opportunity to help support what is going on in SOAS through similar types of professorships. Thank you all, Jayjanendra, and wish you a successful conference. Thank you for this passionate support for the course and therefore I would like to call upon Professor Wright to give out the student prize, BA essay student prize for 2017 and I pass on to Professor Wright. And I in turn call on Alex Madement to receive a token of the award. So I now have pleasure in awarding you the certificate for your essay on the position of women in Jain life, the 2017 prize. Thank you very much. And now we get to serious business and the tricky issue of putting Professor Everde Klerk into this room will be tried in a minute, but first let us have a proper introduction of her work and personality by Dr. Renata Zernettina here of SOAS. Ladies and gentlemen, it is my great pleasure to introduce the keynote speaker of the 20th anniversary Jaina Studies workshop, Professor Everde Klerk from the University of Gendt, one of the rare experts in the prokret and upper branch languages and their literatures, which are so important for Jaina studies. She is actually no stranger to SOAS, where she had held a seminar in 2008 on Jaina narratives in multi-lingual early modern North India, upper branch texts from the 15th to 18th centuries in which I was one of the participants. And she took part with papers in three previous Jaina studies workshops, the sixth on Jaina doctrines and dialogues already in 2004 discussing doctrinal elements in Swayambo Devas Paumacharyu, the 13th in 2011 on Jaina narratives and the 16th in 2014 on Jaina Hageography and Biography. I actually met her first at one of our triennial conferences of the Sanskrit Epics and Puranas in Dubrovnik 2002, where she introduced us to the Jaina Ramayana Puranas, of which I had at that time not yet taken much notice. She took part again in these Dubrovnik conferences in 2005 and 2008 with papers on the Jaina revancha, which focused on different aspects related to it. In 2008, she also conducted a workshop on exchanges between Hindu and Jaina revanchas new dimensions from epic and narrative sources. This concentrated on Hindu influences on Jaina narratives and it induced me to look contrary wise for Jaina influences on texts of the Hindu tradition, resulting in my own contribution to the next Dubrovnik conference 2011, which she unfortunately did not attend and to the 16th Jaina workshop in 2014 when we are last met. She started her academic career actually with a graduation thesis approximately comparable to an MA dissertation here on a section of the Ramayana before she concentrated on the Jaina Purancha version of the Ramayana, the Pahumacharyu of Swayambudeva, which was to be the topic of her PhD thesis. Ever since then, she has devoted her research to the Jain versions of the Hindu epic Puranic traditions and to new aspects of various topics rising up from the Hindu epics, especially the Ramayana in the light of the Jain traditions to which her lectures and seminars at various universities in Europe, Würzburg, München, Bonn, Hamburg, Paris, Budapest, etc., and elsewhere Toronto are devoted as well as contributions to international conferences published in the corresponding proceedings and articles and journals and edited books. Her latest publication, 2018, is concerned with the topic of her PhD thesis, Swayambudeva's Pahumacharyu. It is actually an English translation which eventually gets published, is getting published. In her lecture tonight, she will discuss the significance of the Ramayana for the Jaina tradition, but conversely also the importance of Jaina contributions to the Indian Ramayana traditions in general. So I would like to ask her now to come and give her lecture on Jainism and Ramayana, but where is she? So good evening everybody and my apologies that I cannot be there with you in person tonight and I want to thank Charles and Tina especially for the Skype support and of course my sincere gratitude to Peter for giving me this opportunity tonight to share with you from my main research subject for the last almost 19 years that is the Jain Ramayanas. Now in view of the theme of this year's annual workshop I will address the history of the study of the Jain Ramayanas, discuss some of their main features and conclude with some observations from a Ramayana studies approach, but before we do all of that I will begin by introducing the corpus of texts central to this research and give some general background information. So I begin with this schematic representation which I hope you know you are seeing right now and so this is from the introduction to the edition of the palm material. The edition is a revised edition by Muni Punyavijayaji from 1962 of the original of Hermann Jacobi and the introduction to the edition was written in 1959 by V. M. Kulkarni, a scholar who for his doctoral thesis made a comparative study of the narrative material of a number of Jain Rama stories for the University of Bombay in 1952. The results of this were published in a number of articles especially in the Journal of the Oriental Institute in Baroda and then finally combined in a book comparing 11 works published by Saraswati Pustak Bandar in Ahmedabad in 1990. By examining the Rama stories, Kulkarni distinguished between two principal forms of the Jain Rama narrative, one that of Vimalasuri's palm material, the main Jain Ramayana with 11 compositions mentioned that are said to follow this narrative and two that of Gunabhadra in the Uttarapurana who was followed by at least two later authors. Now apart from these two there are the accounts of the Rama story in the Vasudeva Hindi and in Harishena's Brihat Katakosha which Kulkarni here takes together as exceptions and as stories which do not belong to either of the two traditions. K. R. Chandra who authored a critical study of the palm material sees some importance in some commonalities that exist between the Vasudeva Hindi and the Uttarapurana and therefore considers them two currents of one tradition. So we will take a closer look at some of these texts in a minute. Now despite there being at least two different narrative traditions there are things that all Jain Ramayanas have in common. The first is Rama, Lakshmana and Ravana are considered the eighth Baladeva, Vasudeva and Prativasudeva of this half cycle of a Sarpeni in the Tirta of the 20th Tirta Karabuni Suvrata. These categories of Baladevas, Vasudevas and Prativasudevas are sets of nine heroes and anti-heroes who live simultaneously their lives intertwined. Together they are 27 of the 63 Shalaka Purushas, the others being the 24 Tirthankaras and the 12 Chakravartins. They are combined biographies form the so-called Jain universal history and are composed in literary works termed Puranas or Charitras. As the names of the categories make clear the biographies of Balorama and Krishna, Vasudeva must have been the inspiration of the Baladeva, Vasudeva and Prativasudeva category. The Baladeva is always the older half brother to the Vasudeva and the Vasudeva ends up killing their mortal enemy the Prativasudeva. So here Lakshmana kills Ravana with the legendary Chakra Sudarsana and not Ravana with arrows. The second important commonality has to do with the characterization of the Rakshasas and the Vanaras. In the Jain narratives they are not demons and monkeys but humans belonging to two distinct branches of the Vidyadara dynasty. How this Vidyadara dynasty came into being is narrated in the biography of the first Tirthankara Rishabha which is very often included in the Jain Ramayanas. Rishabha himself the founder of the Ikshvaku dynasty of Ayodhya and thus direct forefather to Rama at the time of his renunciation had divided his realm among his relatives. However two relatives Nami and Vinami were absent at this occasion. Later when Rishabha was already immersed in meditation the two some approached him and claimed their land. Their presence near Rishabha and the danger they posed to his meditation alerted Dharanindra the lord of the Nagas a class of serpent deities. He appeared there and often the two men Vidyas and a territory consisting of the two ranges of the Vaitadia mountains. Hence their dynasty becomes known as that of the Vidyadaras the Vidya bearers. Generations later the Raksasas and Vanaras became two closely allied branches within this dynasty. These Vidyas are portrayed as a kind of supernatural female entities somewhat similar to Jainis granting the person who possesses them certain powers such as the power to change one's appearance to change one's size etc. These Vidyas are inherited through one's family but they can also be gained through performing austerities. There are also occasions where Vidyas are simply donated by one person to another. Incidentally Rama and Lakshmana are also described as possessing some Vidyas although they are not part of the Vidyadara dynasty. Now coming back to our Raksasas and Vanaras. As Vidyadaras the Vanaras are named Vanaras or monkeys because their ancestral island is Vanara Dvipa and they have a monkey as their emblem in their flag. The explanation for the name Raksasa bears. Some authors say they are named after an early ancestor called Raksas. Others say the name is linked to a Vidya called Raksasi and an island called Raksasa Dvipa which were donated to Toya the Vahana the first king of the Raksasadidski. Now in the second tradition of Guna Bhadra however the Vanaras and Raksasas do not manifest themselves as such until they are opposite each other on the battlefield in Lanka. Then the generic Vidyadaras in Rama's camp take all the form of monkeys and the Vidyadaras in Ravana's camp take all the form of demonic Raksasas. This transformation of the Vanaras and Raksasas into humans is generally recognized as a tendency by the Jain authors to rationalize the story of Vanmiki. While this tendency is certainly very much present rationalizing incredible elements of the non-Jain versions was not the only strategy employed by the Jain authors as we shall see shortly. Now back to our texts. Contrary to for instance the story of Krishna there is no Jain version of the Ramayana in the Agama though there are some references to the Ramayana but those tend to be in the context of Mithyatva or false doctrine. Nevertheless according to tradition it is assumed that the stories were a part of the Drishtivada a part of the canon which was lost at the fairly early date. They are moreover part of the corpse of texts called Pratamanu Yoga a class of post-canonical compositions dealing with legends of the Dirtankaras kings etc. Both Svetambaras and Digambaras have such a post-canonical corpse. Given the fact that there is agreement among all Jain authors regarding Rama, Lakshmana and Ravana's identity as Shalaka Purushas and the Vanaras and Raksasas as Vidyadaras it seems that there was a consensus on a Jain Rama story in a phase predating the earliest available texts. The oldest full version of a Jain Ramayana is the Palmacharya or Padmacharita of Bimalasubri. It is an epic poem consisting of 118 chapters composed in Maharashtri prakrit mostly in the Arya meat. The reference to Rama as Padma in the title is explained as to avoid confusion with Balarama the night Baladuva. In the text Padma is also often called Rama or his well-known epithets such as Dragava, Dasarati etc. From the text the sector of the author is not 100% clear but most likely he was a Svetambaramank. His monastic lineage is named to be the Nailavamsa and he is thought to have lived around Mathura at the time when the strict division between the two sects was not yet consolidated perhaps the third or fourth century. A lot is unclear about his date and time. Chandra believes the Palmacharya to date from the century and that the Vasudeva Hindi predates it. The structure of the text is roughly as follows. So first the narrative setting because we are dealing with the Jain Purana the text is embedded in the authoritative and sacred Jain Puranic setting of the Samavasarana or sacred preaching of Mahavira in Rajagriha where King Srinika is present. The story of Rama is told at the request of Srinika. The narrative then begins with the biography of Rishabha the founder of the Ikshwaku dynasty and includes the story of Bharata the first Chakravartin and the spite with Bhagwali. Then we learn about the history of the Rakesa and Vanara dynasties. Here several chapters are devoted to the depiction of the greatness of the Prativa Vasudeva Ravana and Arda Chakravartin and his conquest of half the world his big Vijaya. This is followed by the story of the birth and life of Hanuman son of Pavananjaya allied to Ravana and his mother Anjana Sundali. Then after a short break narrating the life of Muni Suvrata the 20th Jina we come to the Ramayana proper with the description of Ayodhya King Durrata and his queens the birth of their sons and subsequent the subsequent marriage of Rama to Sita. The intrigues of Kaikei lead to Rama's banishment to the forest and during their stay in the forest Sita is abducted by Ravana. Rama finds allies in Sugriva and the other Vanaras including Hanuman all of whom were actually close to Rama. Hanuman goes to Lanka where he finds Sita. Upon Hanuman's return Rama and the Vanaras prepare to attack Ravana and Lanka. After a long battle with multiple jewels eventually Lakshmana kills Ravana with the latter's own Chakra Sutashna. Lakshmana now becomes the new owner of the Chakra and will thus become the new Arda Chakravartin. In due course the threesome return to Ayodhya where Lakshmana and Rama become Arda Chakravartins and in time Sita is banished to the forest. Luckily she is found and brought to the city of Pundaripapura where she gives birth to twin boys. After the twins encounter Rama and Lakshmana in battle they are united with them whereupon Sugriva convinces Rama to take Sita back after a fire ordeal which she passes. Instead of joining Rama Sita renounces the world to become an Arda. This is followed by the lengthy account of the previous lives of the main characters thereafter pass away one by one. Like Ravana Lakshmana goes to hell whereas Rama ends up renouncing the world and attaining omniscience and liberation. So now back to the scheme of Kulkarni the second text in the tradition of Imalasuri the Palma Purana is a Sanskrit version of basically the same narrative. It was composed in 678 by the Digambara Ravishena. This particular text is ranked as very authoritative among the secondary canon of the Digambaras. Aside from the Palma Chariu and the Rama Charitra also mentioned here all the other works mentioned in this list are compositions which deal with broader subjects and which happen to include a Jain Rama narrative. This also holds true for the second tradition of Kuna Bhadra. Particularly noteworthy or of course Ima Chandra's account in his Trishahti Shalaka Purusha Charitra dating from the 12th century and the Uttrapurana Kuna Bhadra dating from the 9th. Kulkarni lists some additional Jain Ramayana compositions and added to those mentioned by Kamil Bulka and by Banerjee a total of 57 individual Jain Rama Katha compositions were identified. Of course there may be more. But we have looked at the text and discussed some of their very general characteristics. It is time to take a brief look at scholarly engagement with these texts and what some of the observations of these scholars are. I should note that my overview is by no means exhaustive but it should provide you with at least an idea of what has been studied and from what perspective. The earliest reference I found to an edition of a Jain Ramayana is written in its mention of the edition of Book 7 of Ima Chandra's Trishahti Shalaka Purusha Charitra as Ima Chandra's Ramacharita or Jain Ramayana from Pune in 1890. It is possible or at least Wipolitz assumes this that this edition was used by Dinesh Chandra Singh for his book the Bengali Ramayanas which is a publication based on lectures held in 1916. In this study Singh argues that there would have been originally two separate Ramayana narratives. A northern Aryan one dealing with Rama and his banishment without any mention of Ravana or Vangalas and a southern Dravidian narrative focusing on Ravana, the Rakshasas and the Vangalas. In the Jain Ramayanas represented by the version of Ima Chandra, Singh sees remnants of this original southern narrative because of the way in which Ravana, the Rakshasas and the Vangalas are depicted. Moreover Ima Chandra like Vivalasuri and Ravishlina begins his account of the Rama story with the description of the Vangalas and the Rakshasas and describes them at great length. In the Vamike Ramayana, the birth and rise of Ravana and Hanuman are only found in the last book the Interakbanma. Two years prior to Singh's lectures in 1914, a first edition of the Poamachayam of Vimalasuri was published from Bhavnagar, edited by Hermania Kubi. This edition was later revised by Muni Punevic Jayaji and published along with the Hindi translation in the Procret Text Society series. In a few separate articles, Yakubi discusses the date, language, etc. of Vimitsuri. Aside from his work on Jainism, Hermania Kubi was also a very renowned scholar of the Vamike Ramayana, authoring several articles on the issue as well as the seminal book Das Ramayana from 1893. Das Ramayana is a philological study discussing in particular the different layers, presensions and growth of the epic. It contains some stray references to Jainism, in the influence it may have had on the development of the Vamike Ramayana, but in his book Yakubi does not engage with the Jain versions of the story. In his Geschichte der indischen Literature Winter, it's so from 1909 to 1922, it holds several pages to describe and paraphrase in Vimalasuri's Poamachayam. In a footnote he informs us that he obtained all this detailed information from the abridged translation that his friend Ernst Leumann had prepared of chapters 1 to 31, and indeed the catalogue of Leumann's unpublished papers refers to an abridged translation up to chapter 33, as well as a glossary and several papers on its grammar, meter and the author. Leumann seems to have used Yakubi's edition along with another manuscript of his work. Ernst Leumann's student Nikolaus Mironov in 1903 in a study of the Dharmapariksha, a Jain narrative in which two Viadras ridicule other faiths, especially the Brahmins, and their incredible stories in the Puranas and epics, after which they present the Jain true story. Mironov mentions that he has compared the elements of the Jain version of the Ramayana with a manuscript of Ravishena's Padmapurana. This manuscript was part of a collection of the Gammara texts procured by Leumann for the Universitets of London's Bibliotheque of Strasbourg, as described in an article from 1897. The decades following this early period, Jain Ramayanas were edited in India, often accompanied by Hindi translation. For instance, Ravishena's Padmapurana in the 50s, the Palmacheriyu of Swayanghu between 53 and 1960, the Uttarapurana in 54, Pishpadanta's Mahapuradu between 1937 and 1941, and of course, Helen Nonsen's translation of Book 7 of Himachandra's work in 1954, that was too in that seal. Studies of the texts were made and noteworthy here is an early article of 1934 by Narasimha Char in an historical book of him, and the studies of Kulkarki and Chandra whom I already referred to. The Jain Ramayanas were also included in broader studies of the Ramayana tradition, such as that of Kamil Bulkar, his Ramkatha of Padmurka, 1950, and also in John Rockington's Righteous Rama from 1984, and in Paula Richmond's edited volume, Many Ramayanas from 1958. In addition, general reference books on Jainism, like those of Koldak, this Padmanap Jaini, just to also deal with the Jain Ramayanas. Lastly, two articles by John Court and Padmanap Jaini on the Jain Puranas published together edited volume Purana Preni in 1993, like it on the Jain Ramayanas from within the Jain Puranic genre. These different scholars have each dealt with these texts in their own way. Regarding their origin, they're finding the origin of the Jain Ramayanas two views have been proposed. Some state that these were entirely the compositions created deliberately by Jain authors to count it by the 15th of the Brahminical script, Rama. Others hold that there may very likely have been Rama stories or legends current among Jains prior to the rise of Rama from that temporary hero to a type of visually that these new compositions were reactions against the appropriation of the Padmanap Jaini. There may have been the case most scholars concur that Jain mayanas were at least to a degree composed to confront tech of real traditions, such as that represented by the Valmiki Ramayana, that the narrative was adapted to Jain setting, with the main character Rama portrayed as non-violent. I will now discuss these long characteristics in more detail. The confrontational character of the Jain Ramayana stories is exemplified in passages explicitly rejecting the non-Jain versions. At least four compositions include such rejections. I will take Ravishina's Qadma Purana, like Vimalasuri, Ravishina competes his work with the description of narrative setting. In Raja Giriya, King Shrinika is attending the sacred preaching of Makriya. After a day of sermons on the Dharma Shrinika, it is he who protects all the teachings. As soon as he awakes, his mind turns to his personal doubts on what he has written about Ramayana. I read the text, and he thought of the Dharma as it was accordingly explained by Vira, particularly regarding the existence of Chakravartas and other heroes. Then his mind went to the biography of Bhava. Some doubts arose concerning the Rakshasas and the monkeys. How is it that in popular scripture one hears of the Rakshasas, Ravana and the others, who according to the teachings of the great Jain were expressed a good creed, wise and their spirits illumined better than the others, eating and drinking fat, eat, etc. Ravana's mighty brother Kumbhakarna allegedly slept continuously for six months, come by terrible slumber, even when rutting elephants trampled him for when his ears were filled with contents full of hot oil, even when a deafening sound of drums and chip baited. It is said he did not wake up before the time of six months had passed. And when that big belly, unstoppable Rakshasas, woke up, he ate what he saw before him, elephants ate him. When he had satisfied himself, apples and pots fell asleep again, devoid of any further mantras. Alas foolish bad poets narrating the bad scriptures have brought infamy on the Tvidyadra prince. Supposedly Ravana overthrew the king of the gods with fatal arrows discharged from his ear. Where is that king of the gods? And is this wretched man who had the mere thought that Indra used to eat with ashes? He who possesses the elephant Ayravata and the great thunderbolt as his weapon? Who can support the earth with mutiny and oceans with ease? How could that king of the inhabitants of the heavens be ruined by a mere human of little Tvidyad power? The king of the Rakshasas allegedly took him prisoner and he lived forever well straightly like an adoption. This is as ridiculous as the killing of a lion by deer, grinding of rocks with sesame seeds, the killing of a snake by a worm, the slaughtering of an enormous elephant by a dog. Rama, who had taken Vaut, allegedly killed a golden deer and said he was an older brother who was like Vaut to be cuckooed. All this is untrustworthy and unsubstantiated in any ways. Tomorrow I will ask the reverend Gautama the king. Denged Pinnika calls to Gautama the following day and addresses him. Lord, I wish to hear the story of Panna as the followers of bad ideology have falsely gained ground from it. Was he a Rakshasa, that would kill Gaut, or was he a man possessing Tvidyads? How could he have been overthrown by animals, simple cookies? How could he be an eater of huge human bodies? Or how could Lord Rama have killed Bali through such flawed behavior? Or how could Ravana have gone through the abode of the gods, destroyed the wonderful garden, and took the Lord of the Odzin prison? How could that younger brother of his, who was killed in all the theoretical subjects for six months while his body remained free from disease? How could monkeys constrain consumption by them, but in heavy mountains, that even the gods would not have accomplished? And then Indra Bhuti Gautama commences his narration. The first thing which Ravishina addresses here is the characterization of the Rakshasa as mean-breaking creatures. In particular, he mentions the depiction of Kumbhakarna, and he prefers how this character of the Appla Prince wronged in such a way by these other poets. The author is not specific here, but we may assume that the creatures such as the Kumbhakarna described in the Valmiki Ramayana could simply not eat this, let alone be the brother of Mahiti King. The portrayal of Ravana can be rejected following the same argumentation, though the Kumbhakarna is difficult to run with his nature as a Brahmin in Valmiki. However, Ravishina does not mention this here. The argumentation continues in the second passage. Here it is moreover a question that Rakshasa can wicket but very powerful beings, and in particular Ravana, whom we great care to describe as possessing superior physical qualities were defeated by beer monkeys. More than irrational, it is inconsistent in the Valmiki Ramayana. The following argument that is also repeated in the second passage continues with this notion of a false portrayal of Ravana. This time in connection with his capturing Indra, the king of the gods, as described in the Uttarakhanda of Ramayana. For Ravishina, this suggestion defies comments, and it is as ridiculous as deer killing a lion, such as Seekra, Rok etc. The Jain texts have a parallel episode for this story. Ravana defeats a rival Vidyadara king named Indra. This Indra was given this name because his mother, during her pregnancy, craved the splendor of the celestial Buddha. But this terrestrial Indra's viceroy and generals all called him the god. The dynasty came to be known as the super power of the gods, and this later gave rise to the false legend of Ravana in Indra, the lord of the gods. The next rejection concerns the popular episode of the golden deer. In Valmiki's Ramayana, Ravana asked the Rakesa Maricha to take on the form of a golden deer in order to lure Rama away from Sita so that Mara could ease her. Scholars have assumed that this rejection is to be understood in view of the Jains' depiction of Rama as non-violence. But we will see later that this was a rash assumption, because Rama is not always non-violent. Ravishina's verse in itself is clear about the refutee. He rejects the idea of some who reckon the attire of an ascetic, hunting and killing an animal for its hide like a hunter. So here it is again an internal inconsistency of the Ramayana that is explicitly scrutinized. Indeed, in the Valmiki Ramayana itself, tension is present between Rama's martial nature as adopted ascetic lifestyle in late interpolay pastimes. Note that in Gunabhadra's tradition, the golden deer episode is present, though there is no explicit mention of Rama killing the deer. The next rejection concerns the killing of Sugriva's brother Agha. This is a morally difficult episode in the Panik Ramayana. Rama agrees to kill the enemy of his new ally Sugriva, namely his older brother Valin. Valin had banished Sugriva from his city, Kishkindha, for sitting at home after he had presumed Valin had been killed. Sugriva had to leave behind his wife and Kishkindha. Eventually Rama, hiding behind some shrubs, faked weapon he was engaged in a duel with Sugriva. Some scholars have again too easily assumed that this episode is here rejected because the Jain author Sokulipit Rama understood of murder. However, in the parallel passage of the text, tradition of Vimalasuri, Rama similarly pursues an alliance with Sugriva and is to help him in his fight against his enemy. In this case, Sugriva's enemy is not his brother Valin. Earlier in the narrative, we had already learned that Valin had renounced the world in Sugriva. Here Sugriva's enemy is a Maya Sugriva, posture rejected suitor of Sugriva's wife. With the support of Rama, Sugriva challenges this Maya Sugriva and when he is able to identify the imposter, Rama kills him with an arrow in combat. In view of this and by reading Ravishina's words more closely, it is clear that here too the impotence of an ascetic Rama committing murder is rejected at an internal inconsistency. Moreover, the idea of fratricide is actually impudent. Sugriva asked Rama to kill a brother. How could such a person be considered a hero? The woman mentioned here may refer to Ruma Sugriva's wife, who had stayed behind in Kishkindal when Sugriva had fled. Or it may refer to Tara, Valin's wife. There are a few passages in the Ramayana hinting to Sugriva as more than brotherly feelings for his sister-in-law. For instance, in four of the five of them, it took Sugriva up to speak the animosity with Valin. Valin had gone in pursuit of a demon and followed him in. After a long time, Sugriva pursued Valin to have died and returned to the city. Now, in his narration to Valet's slip that after he had abandoned the cave, he became Kishkindal and had taken Tara as his wife. Moreover, there is a statement of 4284 which describes how Sugriva, during the monsoon, surrenders himself completely to last his wife Ruma, one back. And also Tara, who, perhaps this lasting after Tara, was an additional reason for Sugriva to want Valin out of the way. In any case, Sugriva's character is unblemished. The flawed behavior and the Sanskrit word is chidra, mentioned in the second part, is slightly a reference to which Rama killed Valin, befitting Ekshatriya. I will come back to Rama and the idea of his non-violence at the end of my talk. The second passage contains one additional rejection, namely that of monkeys building the causeway to Lanka. Again, consider it as something defying common sense. The rejections of Ravishena more or less coincide with those expressed by Rupa Stupri. In addition, Svayambhu Deva and Pushpadanta all in the form plate of the other versions of the Rama story. They both reject the idea of Ravana as Dasha Mukha, having 10 heads. The Jain narratives contain an account rationalizing how Ravana came to be called Dasha Mukha or 10 Feast. The ancestral necklace of Toyadavahana with nine gemstones representing the nine planets was kept in the treasury and protected by terrible snakes. As a toddler, Ravana one day wandered into the treasury, fearlessly took the necklace and put it around his neck, whereupon his face reflected in the gemstones. Seeing the child's complete disregard for danger, his relatives predicted he would become an exceptional ruler and gave him the epithet 10th paste, referring to his reflection in the gems. Interestingly, Svayambhu Deva includes some rejections connected to Rama's identification with Vishnu. The first is the ancient belief that the earth is carried by a tortoise, an association already present in the Brahmanas, and later developed into the Kurma Vatara. A second, more obvious refutation of Vaishnavathiality is found in the rejected idea that Rama, being Vishnu, holds the world in his belly. These ideas are both rejected, are both disposed of as illogical. Other motives define common sense here are the idea that Libhisana is the mortal and indeed Valmiki Ramayana describes how he obtains a work out if Brahma after performing austerities, and the idea that Indraksit is older than his father Ravana. This last, purportedly false story is not found in the common editions of the Valmiki Ramayana. However, the Dharmapariksha also mentions it for that reason. Here it is said that Brahmins believed that Madodari conceived after contact with the semen of her father, that Pithas remained in her womb for 7000 years, and that she only gave birth to the child Indraksit after her marriage to Ravana. The closest corresponding account I could find to this story is from Ranganathas Ramayana in Telu, which tells of an Apsaras Madhura, who was impregnated by Shiva. Parvati cursed Madhura to turn into a frog that fell down a well. After 12 years she turned into a young girl, Mandodari, a gift from Maya, who was performing penance near the well to obtain a daughter. Later she was given as a wife to Ravana. Only after her marriage, Shiva's semen inside her became active and she gave birth to Indrajit Shiva's son. The notion of the long pregnancy of Mandodari is most likely related to the upper name as the one possessing a slow mother, a less obvious one is the rejection of Rama fighting Kara and Dushana. In the Valmiki Ramayana, after Lachnala had mutilated Shurpanaka, Kara and Dushana come with their Rakshasa armies to take revenge. Seeing them approaching, Rama tells Lakshmana to stay with Sita while he goes off to battle the Rakshasa. For Swayambhu, it would have been more proper for the younger and subordinate brother, Britya, to do the fighting as he does in the Jain version. Swayambhu's last rejection is the mention of Vibhishana that Vibhishana took Mandodari as his wife after first forsaking his brother for loving another man's wife. This is indeed described in the Valmiki Ramayana. In the society represented by the older layers of the Ramayana, the practice of Niyoga, where a widow remarries her brother-in-law, is still accepted. In later stages this custom disappeared and as we know widow remarriage became extremely inauspicious. The two remaining refutations of Pushpadanta are well known in Hindu practice of Ramayana. In the Jain accounts, Ravana is a devout Jain and it is Lakshmana the Vasudeva who kills Ravana. In the case of Pushpadanta you could indeed argue that he wants to portray Ravana as non-violent. For in the Balian episode in this tradition it is Lakshmana who kills Vibhishana and Ravana. Pushpadanta explicitly mentions Valmiki and Vyasa as the sources of this disinformation. The other authors speak in more general terms of popular teaching. Aside from the Jains, many other authors and commentators also have expressed their doubts about some of the more questionable episodes of the Ramayana, such as the death of Valin, the killing of the Goal of Pundir, the mutilate Churpanaka, Rama's banishment of Sita and the killing of the Shudra Shabuka. In her book Questioning Ramayanas, Paula Richmond holds that the element of questioning has always been an intrinsic part of the Ramayana tradition and that this questioning has been the key factor in the multiplicity of the Ramayana. To deal with these difficult episodes, authors from varied backgrounds all over South Asia and far beyond composed their own versions. This questioning is moreover connected to the political messages that are intrinsic to every Rama narrative. Because the Ramayana tradition embodies normative behavior for the individual with Rama as the Marjada Purushottama and gives the standard for ideal kinship in Rama's rule, Rama Raja. In view of this, the controversial episodes in which Rama's behavior does not neatly correspond to the Dharma ideal have led to additions, commentarial explanations, reinterpretations and of course new adaptations of the story. Some Rama telling such as that of Babiki are considered more authoritative in that they have a wide audience representing elite in society and from existing social order whereas others are considered more oppositional in that they offer alternative perspectives. When applied to the Jain Ramayanas, they certainly present alternative perspectives and even explicitly reject those offered by the paramanical elites. With regard to the political message told to underline these stories, in particular the Jain's engagement with Rama Raja and the idea of Rama as Marjada Purushottama, these two are to a degree rejected and replaced by the ideals represented by the Baladeva and the Vasudeva. Just like the other Baladevas and Vasudevas, after their return to Ayodhya, Rama and Lakshmana are both consecrated as kings and each rule over half of Bharata as Ardachakra Vartanis. The symbolism of the Ardachakra Vartan is pronounced only with regard to Lakshmana, the Vasudeva. While Lakshmana sets out on his ikvijayana world conquest, he does so together with Rama. What can be seen as a rejection of the idea of Rama Raja is that in some texts, when after Rama's return, Bharata renounces the world, other kings first approach Rama to ascend the throne. Rama refuses saying Lakshmana shouldn't be taken. A few verses later, however, both Rama and Lakshmana are consecrated simultaneously as Baladeva and Vasudeva, with their first wives Sita and Vishalya as chief queens. But then, when vice-froes need to be installed in the different regions of the empire, it is Rama who takes the initiative. By contrast, in the parallel biographies of the 9th Baladeva and Vasudeva, Balarama hardly takes any initiative at all. So there are certainly echoes of the Rama-Rajya ideal. In the ensuing dikvijaya, however, Lakshmana takes it. Like all Vasudevas, Lakshmana goes to hell in his next life, whereas Rama, like all Baladevas, accept last, three nathas, the world, the three omniscience, and three. This brings us back to the perception among several scholars of the Jain Rama as non-violence. Unlike Valmiki's Ravana, the Jain Rama does not kill Rama, and he thus attains liberation, whereas Lakshmana, who kills Ravana, goes to hell. But as we have seen, this assumption does not hold. Ravana may be the less violent of the two brothers, and less dedicated to worldly pleasures than Lakshmana. Lakshmana has 16,000 wives, Rama only has 8,000 wives. He still engages in battle, and is even explicitly described as the killer of Vasudeva's enemy. Then what accounts for the stark difference in fate between the two? Is it only down to Rama renouncing the world and Lakshmana dying before he has a chance to do the same? The answer to this lies in what makes these Jain Ramayanas truly Jain, namely the story of their previous lives. And here I come back to the subject of last year's annual lecture by Professor Shilpa Fujinaga, the subject of Nidhana, or sinful resolution. About the Baladeva and Vasudeva, Tiluhya Panati says the following. So, Anidhana, Gadha, Savvi, Baladeva, Kisthva, Dhana, Gadha, Udhamgami, Savvi, Baladeva, Kisthva, Akhuda. All Baladevas have come without Nidhana. Keshavas or Vasudevas have come with it, Dhan. All Baladevas go to heaven or go up. Keshavas go to hell. The story of the previous birth of Brahma and Lakshmana is narrated by a monk towards the end of the Jain Ramayanas, following the renunciation of Sita. It is as follows. In a previous life, Sita was a merchant daughter, Gunavati, and she was to marry the merchant's son, Hanadatta, who is Rama. Her greedy mother, however, secretly betrothed her to the Shrikanta, the Kamravana. When Hanadatta's younger brother, Vasudatta, heard about this, he attacked Shrikanta and the two ended up killing each other. The two were then reborn in a long sequence of several animal rebirths, along with Gunamati's soul as a female for which they ended up killing each other, birth after birth. Hanadatta was shocked by his brother's death and accepted the boughs of a Jain layman, and after a life in heaven was reborn as the merchant's son, Padmaruch, who had recited the Pancha Namaskara mantra to die bull. That bull, who was to be later become a Sugriva, was reborn prince, who later recognized his benefactor from a previous life and bestowed great wealth upon him. After dying and spending a lot in heaven, Padmaruchi then becomes Rayanananda, who renounced the world and is then reborn in Mahindra-Kalpa, was again born on earth as Sri Chanda, who also renounces the world to become the Indra of Brahmayloka. Shrikanta, so Ravana, was eventually reborn as a Swayamhu, and Vasudatta as his Purohitta. Gunamati, Sita, was reborn as the daughter of the Purohitta, Vigabhati. Swayamhu had asked his Purohitta for Vigabhati's hand in marriage, but was refused because he had the wrong faith. Swayamhu then proceeded to rape Vigabhati and kill her father. Vigabhati swore that she would cause the death of Swayamhu in which reply. She became a nun and went to heaven. After some lower existences in Hellen as animals, Swayamhu was reborn as Prabhasa Kunda. He became a monk and one day observed the wealth of a Vidyadra king and appropriated the Nidhana to also become a Vidyadra king in the future life. The Purohitta was reborn in heaven and afterwards, as the Vidyadra Kunarvasu, who also became a monk and prior to his death appropriated the Nidhana, to marry the girl who would later become his wife Vishalya. These stories bring some perspective on the karmic burden of Rama and Lakshmana's perspective. In his previous lives, Rama's soul was characterized by benevolence and detachment, birthed as a Jain layman and with several lives ending in renunciation. Lakshmana's previous life, on the other hand, were marked by extreme violence. His penultimate life as a human ended in renunciation, tarnished by a Nidhana, bringing about bad karma in his life, Lakshmana, and leading him to Hell. Nevertheless, even violent characters like Lakshmana and Ravana can't be redeemed. When their time in Hell is up, they will coexist in many more births on earth and in heaven until Ravana will become a Tirthankara, with Sita as his Ganadhara. Lakshmana will be reborn in the Purva Videha of Pushkaradviva as a Chakravartin, who will later then become a Tirthankara. Most chain authors did not alter the killer of Sugriva's enemy to Lakshmana, except the Uttarakurana, where it is indeed Lakshmana. Perhaps the authors deliberately sought to keep the story like this to underline Rama's martial nature as a future Arachakravartin, or perhaps changing the killer of Sugriva's enemy would have made the Jain Rama too far removed from the other Rama the audience would have undoubtedly be familiar with, or perhaps against the background of the element of questioning, as adhering to the Ramayana traditions, the Jain authors too perhaps chose to represent even their own Rama as committing at least one questionable act. Thank you very much for your attention.