पुष्पदंत और सुरदास (वात्सल्य)
By डं ० प्रेमसागर जेन
Summary
The text examines the treatment of the *vatsalya* (parental affection) rasa in Hindi literature, comparing the works of the poet Surdas with those of Jain poets, particularly Pushpadant. It argues that while Surdas is celebrated for his depiction of Krishna's childhood, Jain Hindi literature possesses its own distinct and independent tradition of *vatsalya* poetry, which was not influenced by Surdas. The author contends that Jain poets like Pushpadant, Bhudhardas, and Jagaram developed a unique approach, focusing on the prenatal period and birth celebrations (*garbhotsav* and *janmotsav*), elements absent in Surdas's *Sur Sagar*. The text provides examples from Jain works like *Pashvapurana* and *Nayakumarachariu* to illustrate this tradition, including detailed descriptions of a mother's dreams during pregnancy and elaborate birth festivities. It contrasts this with Surdas's method, which begins Krishna's story immediately after his birth. The author refutes claims by scholars like Jagannath Sharma and Ram Singh Tomar that Hindi poetry was broadly influenced by Jain Apabhramsha works, using a comparison of a single verse from Pushpadant's *Mahapurana* and a *Sur Sagar* verse to demonstrate that such isolated similarities do not prove influence. The fundamental difference is attributed to the poets' divergent devotional philosophies: Jain poets practiced a spiritually grounded, rational devotion (*adhyatma-mula bhakti*), while Surdas was a devotee of pure emotional devotion (*kori bhakti*). This distinction explains why Jain poetry, while emotionally resonant, maintains a sense of restraint and logical consistency, whereas Surdas's work is characterized by an overwhelming, intoxicating emotional fervor. The text concludes that Jain Hindi *vatsalya* poetry is a unique and valuable contribution, independent of Surdas's influence.
Conclusion
The analysis demonstrates that while both Jain Hindi poets and Surdas explored vātsalya rasa (parental affection), their approaches were fundamentally distinct. Jain poets like Puṣpadanta were bound by the narrative demands of mahākāvya and a tradition of spiritually grounded, rational devotion, which tempered emotional excess. In contrast, Surdas, unconstrained by epic structure, could delve into the raw, unbridled emotional landscape of Krishna’s childhood. The document concludes that claims of Surdas’s direct influence on Jain Hindi poetry are unfounded; rather, Jain poets drew from their own rich tradition of Apabhraṃśa and Prakrit literature. The key implication is that similar themes can arise independently from different philosophical and literary contexts. The outcome is a clearer understanding of the unique, emotionally immersive quality of Surdas’s work, which stands apart from the more restrained, tradition-bound, yet equally valuable, vātsalya depictions in Jain literature.