आचार्य अमितगति और हरिषेण की धर्मपरीक्षा एक तुलनात्मक अध्ययन
Summary
This PDF presents a comparative study of two Jain texts titled *Dharma Pariksha*, one by Harishena and the other by Acharya Amitagati. The author, Dr. Magchand Jan 'Maskar', examines the works of these two contemporary poets from the 11th century. Harishena, a resident of Chitrakoot (Chittor) in Mewar, composed his *Dhammapariksha* in Apabhramsha style in Vikram Samvat 1044. Amitagati, from Malwa, completed his *Dharmapariksha* in Sanskrit 26 years later, in Vikram Samvat 1070. Both texts share the purpose of refuting false beliefs (mithyatva) through satirical stories, continuing the tradition of *Dhurtakhyana*. The study compares their structure, style, and content. Harishena’s work is more descriptive, with 11 sandhis and 238 kadavakas, while Amitagati’s is more concise and rhetorically refined, divided into 20 chapters. A detailed table maps the corresponding sections of both texts, showing that Amitagati likely used Harishena’s work as a base, expanding and embellishing it with his own poetic skill, completing his version in just two months. Key differences include Amitagati’s greater emphasis on Jain doctrine, ethics, and nature descriptions, while Harishena provides more detail on topics like the nature of the world and the Ramayana. The study also notes that Harishena’s sandhi division is more logical than Amitagati’s chapter breaks. Despite these differences, the analysis confirms that Amitagati’s *Dharmapariksha* is fundamentally derived from Harishena’s *Dhammapariksha*, with Amitagati creatively adapting the source material.
AI-assisted summary, not yet checked. Consult the original PDF before citing.
Conclusion
The comparative analysis of Amitagati and Harishena's Dharmapariksha reveals that while both texts share a common purpose of critiquing false beliefs through satirical narratives, Amitagati's work is more refined and expansive, drawing directly from Harishena's earlier composition. Amitagati's superior poetic skill and use of alankarashastra allowed him to elaborate on themes, while Harishena's version remains more descriptive and structurally logical in its sandhi divisions. The study underscores how Jain didactic literature evolved through intertextual borrowing and creative adaptation, with later authors enhancing earlier frameworks. This tradition of critical storytelling served to reinforce Jain philosophical positions, particularly the rejection of puranic mythologies and the promotion of rational inquiry. The outcome is a richer, more sophisticated literary corpus that effectively uses humor and allegory to challenge orthodoxy, demonstrating the dynamic nature of medieval Jain intellectual and literary culture.