Aavo Ne Aatlo Aghat Kem

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Aavo ne Aatlo Aghat Kem" (Why Such a Shock?), by Sukhlal Sanghavi, in English:

The author, Sukhlal Sanghavi, begins by describing the profound shock and grief he experienced upon learning of Dr. Meghani's tragic demise, a shock that lingered despite the passage of time and attempts to focus on other activities. He questions why he felt such deep sadness and impact, as Dr. Meghani was neither a close relative nor someone with whom he shared a direct personal interest.

His initial thought is that the shock stems from the violent and "thugger-like" manner of Dr. Meghani's death. He contrasts this with deaths due to illness or other common causes, suggesting that such a violent end amplified his grief. He connects this to a broader sentiment against the lawlessness that he perceives as attempting to plunge the newly independent India into darkness, despite India having achieved freedom through peaceful means, unlike other nations still striving for it.

However, he quickly dismisses this as the sole reason. He reflects on the numerous men and women who have fallen victim to similar acts of violence throughout history without eliciting such a profound reaction from him. He recalls the vivid descriptions from friends who witnessed the brutal acts of violence in places like Calcutta, Neakhli, Bihar, and Garhmukteshwar. While these accounts had evoked disapproval and a sense of fatalism regarding violent actions, the current grief over Dr. Meghani's death felt significantly more intense. This prompts him to seek a deeper understanding of the root cause of his intensified sorrow.

The author concludes that the primary reason for his intense grief is the fresh remembrance of Dr. Meghani's virtues and character, which he had only briefly encountered. Therefore, he decides to share his personal experiences and acquaintance with Dr. Meghani as a tribute.

He recounts meeting Dr. Meghani unexpectedly in Mumbai after returning from the Karachi Congress in 1931. He stayed at Dr. Meghani's modest residence, which he found conducive to his reading and contemplation. During this time, Dr. Meghani, who lived with his younger brother, Prabhu Das, extended a warm invitation for Sanghavi to share their food, emphasizing that any available food was welcome. Dr. Meghani's days were occupied with his professional duties and tending to patients. They would often spend evenings together, during which Sanghavi would encourage Dr. Meghani to share his experiences. He was deeply moved by Dr. Meghani's accounts of the suffering world, which were both novel and deeply poignant.

Sanghavi learned that Dr. Meghani's engagement with the plight of the downtrodden, the oppressed, and the poor was not merely superficial or limited to writing. He possessed a profound depth of empathy and actively sought to alleviate their suffering in whatever way he could. Dr. Meghani would visit areas inhabited by prostitutes and impoverished laborers, not just for his professional duties, but to investigate the root causes of their distress.

He shares Dr. Meghani's accounts of the deplorable conditions in the red-light districts, the young girls trapped in such lives, their squalid living spaces, their meager sustenance, and the forced indecency they endured. He was particularly struck by the deep yearning of these women to escape their circumstances and the lack of support or helping hands they received. These stories would often bring tears to Dr. Meghani's eyes, a testament to his compassion.

Dr. Meghani was also involved in inspecting goods in merchants' shops to check for adulteration. Upon witnessing the life-threatening adulteration of goods, Sanghavi marveled at the resilience of the populace. While merchants' attempts to escape penalties through bribery were understandable, Dr. Meghani was immune to such temptations. He used his authority to reform the practices of the merchants.

Dr. Meghani's deep sensitivity to the suffering of women inspired him to work towards the upliftment of widows. During Sanghavi's stay, Dr. Meghani had arranged for three impoverished child widows to lead dignified lives. These child widows, who were Jain, had their wealth and property jeopardized by their close relatives, leaving them destitute and facing only death as a recourse. Dr. Meghani's intervention in their lives deeply impressed Sanghavi, who even attended a remarriage ceremony in Hirabag organized at Dr. Meghani's behest.

Sanghavi describes Dr. Meghani's approach to reform as revolutionary and fundamental. Although Dr. Meghani was a Sthānakvāsī Jain, he also took an interest in Sthānakvāsī Jain conferences. He once expressed concern about the excessive office expenses and limited output of a particular publication, noting that the primary contributor was often one individual. Sanghavi suggested a more decentralized approach, involving educated individuals from conference scholarships to publish the journal, thereby reducing overheads. Dr. Meghani appreciated this idea and asked Sanghavi to persuade his colleagues. Sanghavi observed Dr. Meghani's intolerance for any wastage of social resources.

He recalls Dr. Meghani's reluctance to share his personal experiences during public lectures on religious topics, preferring to express his work through writing and direct action. This conviction and revolutionary spirit further drew Sanghavi to him.

The author recounts attending an education conference in Ajmer in 1933, organized alongside a Sthānakvāsī Sadhu Sammelan. He witnessed a significant gathering of Sthānakvāsī monks and nuns, with a large Jain population present. He notes the presence of esteemed and learned elder monks and ascetics of the Sthānakvāsī tradition, with Pujya Jawahar Lalji being held in high regard. Despite Pujya Jawahar Lalji's influence and a large following, Dr. Meghani found himself in a confrontation with him. The rift between Pujya Jawahar Lalji and Muni Chauthamalji, despite belonging to the same tradition, was as vast and bitter as that between Hindus and Muslims. Muni Mishrilalji had undertaken a fast, vowing not to eat until the dispute was resolved. This caused significant public concern. Pujya Jawahar Lalji remained unyielding, seemingly indifferent to the potential death of the fasting Muni, as he was unwilling to reconcile with Muni Chauthamalji. Many of his followers failed to persuade him. The incident deeply affected even the devoted Durlabhji Zaveri, who fainted in Pujya Jawahar Lalji's presence.

In this heated situation, Dr. Meghani lost his composure. Witnessing the strong stance taken by Dr. Meghani, who was considered a leader and respected member of the Sthānakvāsī community, earned him the admiration of all present. Without any fear of spiritual authority or public opinion, Dr. Meghani boldly stated to Pujya Jawahar Lalji that if he refused to reconcile, the lay followers (shravakas) would imprison all the monks in the same building and seal the doors until they reached an internal resolution. Dr. Meghani's and others' threat, though drastic, achieved an immediate, albeit temporary, resolution. Sanghavi highlights Dr. Meghani's fearlessness, noting that few householders or lay followers possess the courage to confront a monk or spiritual leader so directly and fearlessly in such critical moments.

Dr. Meghani's writings, particularly his stories, were published in "Pramuddh Jain." His mastery of storytelling was well-known to his readers. Sanghavi last met him in Mumbai until the end of March 1946, and their discussions revolved around social experiences and his writings.

Finally, Sanghavi emphasizes Dr. Meghani's extraordinary generosity and candor. Dr. Meghani had written an article for "Pramuddh Jain." Parmanandbhai, acting as an editor, approved the article but suggested removing the introductory part if it lacked historical substantiation. Dr. Meghani, having invested considerable effort, naturally wished to retain the section. The decision was deferred for Sanghavi's opinion. Dr. Meghani, accompanied by a friend, read the article to Sanghavi. Sanghavi acknowledged the overall quality of the article, particularly its insightful and relevant observations about the present and future, but found the historical preface less precise. Upon learning from Sanghavi that the information was factually correct, Dr. Meghani felt validated. However, Parmanandbhai remained unconvinced. During a subsequent meeting, a spirited debate ensued regarding the inclusion or exclusion of the historical section. Dr. Meghani argued that factual information should be retained even without a clear historical basis. Parmanandbhai's counter-argument was that writing without thorough study of the relevant historical evidence was dishonest. His stronger point was the urge of writers to publish everything they write, regardless of its quality. Hearing this, Dr. Meghani humbly agreed to remove the section, admitting that he had not conducted thorough historical research and had written based on general reading and imagination. This sincerity deeply impressed Sanghavi. Dr. Meghani often told Sanghavi that he wrote to learn and that having a discerning critic like Parmanandbhai was crucial to avoid publishing unpolished work. Sanghavi concluded by admitting that his own weakness was the inability to provide a definitive and critical opinion on an article after the first reading.