02.MAHENDRAVARMAN AND JAINISM

MAHENDRAVARMAN AND JAINISM
Tondaimandalam roughly corresponding to the northern parts of modern Tamilnadu and the Southern parts of Andhra, witnessed the rule of the Pallavas from about the 6lh century A.D. down to the end of the 9th century A.D. Kanchipuram, the temple city of the south, served as their seat of power. The rulers of the Pallava dynasty were mainly followers of brahmanical religion and, at the same time, were liberal towards the other creeds. Mahendravarman I was one among them who had taken up the reigns of the Government in c.600 A.D. and continued to rule till 630. A.D. He is said to be a Jaina in the early part of his career and later converted into a Saivite.

Although opinions are divergent among scholars on this issue, most of them accept that Mahendra was originally a Saivite, then became an adherent of the Jaina faith and got reconverted to Saivism by Tirunavukkarasar at a later stage. This conclusion is arrived at mainly based on the life sketches of saint Tirunavukkarsar alias Appar picturised in the hagiological work, Periyapuranam of the 12th century A.D.

Tirunavukkarasar, according to the Periyapuranam, was a contemporary of the Pallava king Mahendravarman. Though born in an orthodox Saiva family, he was attracted towards Jainism in his early life. He, after mastering the Jaina sastras, became a reputed monk under the name Dharmasena and headed the monstery at Timpadiripuliyur near Cuddalore. His sister, Tilakavati, being an ardent devotee of Siva, implored god’s help, whereupon Siva caused him to be a victim of an incurable abdomenal disorder. When all the efforts of the Jaina monks failed to save him, Siva is said to have miraculously cured him of his disease, therefore, he embraced Saivism. The news of his defection upset the Jaina recluses who framed many a false charge against him to poison the mind of the Pallava king. Consequently, Appar was subjected to different types of torture which however, by the grace of lord Siva, he could overcome easily. Finally, the king was himself convinced of the greatness of Saivism and became a devotee of Siva. As its sequal, the king is said to have destroyed the Jaina monstery at Timppadirippuliyur and out of its ruins built a Siva temple, Gunadharaisvaram naming it after him.

The hymns of Tirunavkkarasar in Tevaram collections contain references to his activities in the Jaina monastery at Timppadirippuliyur, his ailment due to acute abdomenal pain and its alleviation by the grace of god Siva. It was under the influence of the same saint, Mahendra got reconverted to Saivism. With his re-conversion, Jainism suffered a setback and lacked royal support. Appar’s activities were then directed against the adherents of Jainism who are denounced in his hymns of Tevaram. Their re-conversion coincided with the bhakti movement leading to brahmanical revival in the Tamil Country and ultimately resulted in a temporary decline of Jainism in the southern part of the peninsula.

A peep into the archaeological sources and an analysis of the Sanskrit farce, Mattavilasaprahasana, would throw welcome light on Mahendra’s association with Jainism and his conversion to Saivism, probably at the close of his reign. The Mattavilasa is a satirical play composed by king Mahendra himself. It humorously ridicules the decadent nature of the Kapalika and Pasupatha sects of Saivism and even Buddhism. But the king had not condemned the votaries of the Jaina way of attaining salvation (by following the principle of Ahimsa, abstaining from eating of meat, drinking 19 of liquor etc., as against that of the Kapalikas) is alluded to, thus, indirectly revealing the king’s lenience towards Jainism.Mahendra is said to be the pioneer in introducing rock-cut architecture in northern Tamilnadu. He excavated a number of rock-cut temples at places like Mandagapattu, Mahendravadi, Mamandur, Mahabalipuram, Pallavaram, Kuranganilmuttam, Dalavanur, Siyamangalam, Vilappakkam, Aragandanallur and Trichy. The earliest among them at Mandagapattu was caused to be made for the Hindu Trinity, Brahma, Isvara and Visnu. The cave temples at Mahendravadi, Pallavaram, Mahabalipuram and Kuranganilmuttam were also dedicated to the gods of the Hindu pantheon. The remaining examples found at Mamandur, Dalavanur, Siyamangalam, anchapandavamalai and Trichy are also of Hindu persuasion, but have Jaina association. These were excavated in the latter part of Mahendra’s reign. The architectural fineness and the sculptural refinement achieved in the images of these temples (except Mamandur and Pancha Pandavamalai) would bear testimony to the later phase of Mahendran style of art. The choice of the location of these temples deserve special mention as they are found in close proximity to Jaina caverns, once inhabited by monks of the same order.

Mamandur is a hamlet in Tiruvannamali district, lying at a distance of about 20 km. from Kanchipuram. The local hill contains a cave shelter which was made suitable for the occupation of Jaina monks at the instance of a chieftain Kaniman in the 3rd - 4th century A.D. The adjoining hillock was selected by king Mahendra for cutting temples dedicated to the Hindu faith. Siyamangalam in the same district was an early centre of Jainism with natural caverns inhabited by monks. It continued to be a flourishing centre of pilgrimage even in the 9th and 10th centuries A.D. and recluses of the Nandisangha had their abode here. A little away from these caves is another hillock, part of which was modeled into a beautiful temple of Siva by Mahendrav arman. Panchapandavamalai in the Walajapet taluk has a chain of hillocks, the western end of which contains a natural cavern with figures of a yakshi and a saint. Though these images were carved in 781 A.D. the cavern seems to be a Jaina resort long before. A little away from the cave is an unfinished rock-cut temple of Mahendran style which was abandoned owing to the failure of the pillars, making further work unsafe. Subsequently, it came under the possession of the Jains who at that time carved a bas relief of a Tirthankara in a shallow niche on the projecting ledge of the rock-cut temple. Thus, the place has a Jaina cavern and rock-cut edifice of the Mahendra style.

Dalavanur in Gingee taluk of Viluppuram district has a Saiva rock-cut temple, Satrumallesvaram, on the southern scrap of the huge rock running east to west. Above this temple of Mahendra, at a height of about 80 feet from the ground level, is a natural cave with two stone beds meant for the Jaina monks, formed by an overhanging rock.

There are two fine rock-cut temples, one near the base and the other higher up on the hill, in the town, Tiruchirappalli. The upper one known as Lalitankurapallavesvaragriham was excavated by king Mahendravarman. In close proximity to this is a natural cavern, which once served as a Jaina resort. The cavern is formed by an over-hanging boulder on the top of the hill and contains stone beds with Brahmi records assignable to 3rd - 4th century A.D. Besides, a fragmentary inscription mentions the name “Chira” denoting that the name of the place was Chirappalli, the suffix emphasizing its Jaina association. It continued to be a center of Jainas in the 7th century A.D. also as is attested to by several label inscriptions.

The above mentioned places bear evidence of Jainism as well as Saivism. The Jaina resorts in these places, except Pancha Pandavamalai are certainly earlier than the Saiva rock-cut temples of Mahendravarman. This would go to prove that the king deliberately selected such Jaina hill-resorts to scoop-out rock-cut edifices of Saiva order and make them centres of Hindu worship. Obviously, such a change could have taken place after Mahendra’s 21 re-conversion to Saivism. K.R.Srinivasan has rightly pointed out that “the choice of the location of the rock-cut temples by Mahendra was apparently more prompted by intent and less by chance”, but he does not agree that it was due to Mahendra’s conversion from Jainism to Saivism. The famous Trichy rock-cut temple inscription of the same king also bears evidence of his change in religious faith. A portion of the lithic record reads as follows.

“Gunabhara namani raj any anena lingene lingini gnanam prathatan chiraya loke vipaksha vrittehparavirttam” This passage has been translated by E.Hultzsch, in the following manner. “While the king called Gunabhara is a worshipper of the linga, let the knowledge which has turned back from hostile conduct be spared for a long time in the world by this linga.” It is evident from this inscription that Gunabhara (Mahendra) was sometime a follower of “hostile conduct” (here it implies Jainism) and later became a worshipper of linga i.e., a Saivite. Thus, the Trichy epigraph substantiates the Periyapuranam account regarding the king’s conversion from Jainism to Saivism.

Scholars like K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, C. Minakshi and others agree in common about the change of Mahendra’s religion. But they do not accept the story regarding persecution of Appar by Mahendravarman.<ref.Minakshi, C. op.cit., p.206; Nilakanta Sastri, K.A. op.cit., p.424. K.R.Srinivasan, on the other hand, opposes them saying that the assumption of the study of Mahendra’s conversion from Jainism to Saivism is made in the light of a much later tradition as found in Periyapuranam and the uncertain identification of Gunadhara of that tradition with Gunabhara Mahendra.<ref.Srinivasan, K.R. op.cit., p.89 Had he been a convert from hostile conduct (Jainism), he would not have dedicated his early excavations to Trimurti as at Mandagapattu or subsequently to Visnu he did at Mahendravadi. It would be apt to assume that he was a tolerant follower of brahmanical religion and under the influence of bhakti movement spear-headed by the Saiva Nayanmars, he became an ardent 22 devotee of Siva in the later part of his life when his cave temples were dedicated to Siva in preference to other deities.

To sum up, the Periyapuranam version of Mahendra’s religious conversion finds archaeological corroboration. The king had intentionally chosen to excavate Saiva cave temples in places like Mamandur, Dalavanur, Siyamangalam and Trichy, which were already throbbing with Jaina activities. This could have been done by him after embracing Saivism. His Trichy lithic record does bear unmistakable evidence for his conversion from Jainism to Saivism. His title Gunadhara occurring in Periyapuranam is only a variant of Gunabhara found in his scriptal vestige. However, his policy of Jaina persecution mentioned in Periyapuranam, cannot be substantiated by other evidences at the present state of our knowledge.